Life After Intro to OT

In our last session together in OT, we were asked what we came away with after a term’s worth of OT studies. Whether we like it or not, the historical validity of the Old Testament has been questioned and we have exalted scholarly studies because these have allowed us to look at the OT in a more “enlightened” way but how enlightened is a study of the bible based on source, form, and ideological criticism alone? We had been asked to remove our Christological lens and to bracket our perspective as Christians. This is supposedly for the purpose of not tainting our studies with the subjectivity of personal theologies but by doing so we fail to look at the purpose and trajectory of the entire work. The OT was written to tell us about God and our relationship with God. Without this subjective connection, the text itself would be without a purpose; more pointless than a song that no one ever hears and more useless than a play that will never be performed.

Now that we are done with Intro to OT, we are tasked to teach what we have learned when we go out to our respective ministries. Yet how do we teach it without having evaluated its purpose and the reason the text was created? I am sure that at the back of our minds, we continue to question the incongruence of many of our theological perspectives with what we have learned. Why did we even go to seminary if what we are studying is suspect? By breaking up the text into such small pieces, did we lose some of the value of the whole?
I propose that we evaluate our life’s purpose and to seek out the truth that cannot be supported by extra-biblical data or any sort of documentary hypotheses. What does our faith tell us and how do we apply any sort of learning so that we can be truthful to our faith? Without a final connection to our present and future life, the bible would have no purpose. I pray we all can still take up our Christological lenses and unbracket our faith so that we can still find purpose and meaning in what we do.

I propose, too that although the studies we have just concluded elevate our personal pride about our scholarship, we should temper our excitement over our new-found “knowledge” with the caveat that we are sent out into all the world, not just to the well-read or to the scholarly. Of what use are any of the things we just learned to someone from southeast Asia who cannot read or a boy in Africa or a person, who because of disability, can never read nor understand the nuances of the Hebrew text unless it brings the good news of salvation? These people, too are loved by God and can have faith through Jesus Christ. The vital question is: did what we learn help us reach out to the world?

While we ponder our theological task, let me quote from a Prayer for Teachers by Georgia Harkness. This prayer we so often quote in our Theological Education in the Parish class speaks to our purpose as ministers and educators, “Save them from pedantry and from any absorption in the pursuit of learning which might withdraw them from the common life of men [and women].“ As we mull over OT and its faith-shaking views, may what we learn about ourselves and our relationship with God strengthen us for the task ahead so that the world might see in us, Christ’s vital and life-changing message of love and grace.

Pentateuch Connections with NT

I know we were cautioned to take our NT glasses off while studying OT but since OT is about to end, I can’t help but find connections between OT and NT. There are many connections between the Pentateuch and the early church. For instance, 1 Cor 9:8-12; 10:11 and 2 Cor 8:14-15 quote instructional material from the Pentateuch. Romans 13:8-10 and Matt 19:16-22 quote from the Pentateuch on what love requires. Romans 4; Galatians 3, Hebrews 11 all cite from the Pentateuch on faith and faithfulness while Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Cor 15:21-22 speak of sin and sinfulness based on the story of Adam. There are many texts from the Pentateuch which echo in the New Testament such as the sacrifice of the “only son.” Of course there is also the Pascal Lamb sacrifice and its connections with Passover. I’m sure you will find many more connections. I found it strangely liberating to again make these connections and invite you all to pitch in and add to this list of connections between the Pentateuch and the New Testament.

redaction

re⋅dac⋅tion (rĭ-dāk’shən)
n.
So this scribe was carrying tons of slates he was supposed to transcribe into scrolls. He slips and everything fell on the floor. He picks everything up and continues his work.

Related Words for redaction: JEPD – Just Everything Plunked Down

Justice and the Law

Even though many of the Laws we read about mostly in Leviticus are legalistic or trivial, we must look at some of the more radical laws which are hallmarks of the faith of Israel. Of course, “Love your neighbor as yourself” is primary. There are also the laws which on Jubilee when all land is to be returned, no cost, to the original family of ownership (Lev 25);  the “Sabbath Year” when all slaves are to be released and all loans to fellow Israelites are to be forgiven (Deut. 15:1-18). This shows that because Israel suffered under Egypt, they were trying not to do what their oppressors did.  These laws seem to be impractical but from where I stand, the world would be a more just and equitable place if we all thought the same way.  These laws also reflected the kind of God and community that the people of Israel had.  What do you think of these laws?

Barren Women of the Bible

It is a wonder how Israel ever became what God promised Abraham – that his descendants would become more numerous than the stars in the heavens when the early matriarchs of Israel were, except by God’s grace, almost always all barren. Only because of God’s grace did Sarah give birth to Isaac at age ninety. Rebekah couldn’t have babies for 20 years until God gave her Esau and Jacob. Rachel was barren for a long time until God gave her Joseph. The narratives of Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachel show us that anything is possible if God is on your side. Please share stories of other women in the Bible whose lives were changed completely because God gave them, even in almost impossible circumstances, a miracle.

Israel Becomes a Nation

Exodus 19:4-6 says, “You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation.” I looked for an earlier reference of Israel as a nation and I found references to “israelites” and “Israel” but none mentioning them as a nation. Most important, it was God who said this as part of the Sinai Covenant. Does anyone know of an earlier reference to Israel being a nation?

Goliath

I read in coogan that although it is a popular belief that David killed Goliath (1 Samuel 17), 2 Samuel 21:19 attributes the killing of Goliath to Elhanan, son of Jaare-origen (Coogan, p. 193). As usual, this inconsistency is said to be shaped by DTRh. However, I found that in Chronicles 20:5, Elhanan killed Lahmi, the brother of Goliath. Any other interesting things catch your eye today?

Murder in the family

I wondered why Solomon promised Adonijah that he would spare his life and just a few verses after, he has Benaiah kill Adonijah anyway. Maybe he could not just kill Adonijah because Adonijah went to the altar for sanctuary. It was obvious that Adonijah did not know the implications of asking for Abishag to be his wife, otherwise he would not have asked for her. Bathsheba would have known it was not a good idea unless she wanted Adonijah to die. Could it be that Solomon used this situation as a pretext to kill Adonijah? According to Solomon, if Adonijah was going to take Abishag as his wife he would gain access to the throne. However, nowhere does it say that Abishag was really David’s concubine. I think Solomon had two reasons: (1) he wanted to have reason to get rid of opposition (who had already sought sanctuary); and (2) even as Abishag was now Solomon’s property (if Abishag was David’s concubine), or as king, he had the right to give and take Abishag, yet Solomon did not want any other person to lust for her. It is said that “Shunammite” and “Shulammite” are used interchangeably. Could it be that Abishag was the same Shulammite women in Song of Solomon? Kings describes Abishag as uncommonly beautiful, and so does Song of Solomon. Do you think a hidden reason why Solomon had Adinojah killed was also because he wanted Abishag only for himself? As David committed murder for lust, could it be that Solomon also had Adonijah killed because of lust? Could it be that Solomon was more like his father than we thought?

Rahab

I was trying to see what the name “Rahab” meant and found that “Rahab” in Jewish folklore was the monster of chaos who was subdued. Rahab the monster is mentioned in Psalm 89:10 as being crushed by the mighty arm of God and Isaiah 51:9 shows Rahab as being cut into pieces . It seems the prostitute in Jericho, who could have been unnamed otherwise, was named Rahab to show how God subdued the area of Canaan which was chaotic and wild also. As such, Rhab’s acknowlegment of the Israelite God’s power in 2:8-11 was a symbolic subjugation of the powers of chaos. In our discussions in class, we mentioned that there were many threads in the story of Jericho which did not make sense. If Rahab may have been a representation of chaos, we could then look at the inconsistencies in the story of Jericho as a sign that the story of Jericho may not have been meant to be a narrative of factual information but it could have also been metaphor. What do you think?

Holy War

The term “holy war” has gotten a bad rap. It has been used to justify brutality and oppression.
When we look at the accounts in Joshua, we must, however realize that the idea of “holy war” was not confined to the Israelites. Neighboring tribes and cities went into battle, dedicating it to their God. If we look at it from this point of view, we are able to see how later redactions have made Israelites look unusually cruel. People in their time justified war campaigns by calling on the names of their gods. In a sense, to the people of the area in and around Canaan, there was no distinction between a sacred or a secular war. This was just how war was practiced at the time. This also means that God did not necessarily enjoin his people to massacre other people.
From out standards, the accounts in Joshua does look unusually cruel, especially with the possibility that later redactions embelished it to epic proportions. Yet in Joshua’s time, what he did was standard. What do you think?