In Exodus 31:3 “I have filled him with divine spirit, with ability, intelligence, and knowledge in every kind of craft, to devise artistic designs.”
The first person the Bible mentions as being filled with the spirit of God is an artist. Bezalel will help make the tabernacle, that forerunner of the temple that Solomon will one day build in Jerusalem and also the first image of the coming Messiah: “The Word became flesh,” John writes, “and lived [lit. tabernacled] among us” (John 1:14).
Everything Bezalel and others fashion will spring from God’s imagination. Only this time, humanity assists in creation, putting into three-dimensional form what is, at the beginning only in God’s mind. This is a tremendous honor and the fact that Bezalel is filled with the Spirit of God to do it immediately stresses the importance God places not only on the tabernacle, but the act of creation itself.
It is a common thought that art is simply a fringe benefit of society, something that occurs when there is enough leisure time left over from the essentials to produce it. The Bible knows nothing of this sort of thinking. God’s art is right in the middle of everything, not on the margins, and is in fact what is essential to Israel’s existence and identity. Without this art there is no tabernacle and therefore no presence of God among the people of Israel.
On page after page we hear about basins and altars and lamp stands and tables – all of them beautiful as well as functional. God himself has designed and specifically appointed artist to build the place he will dwell to be composed as art. These are not human ideas they are divine. I for one will never look at art the same.
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
(Renovare’ Spiritual Formation Bible, NSRV, 1989 Harper Collins
Monday, November 23, 2009
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Israel's God is also Israel's Warrior in Exodus!!
There is a dramatic element to this story that cannot be overlooked. We are asked to see the hopelessness of the Hebrew's situation, the almost impossible struggle to change pharaoh's mind, the power of Yahweh and his total mastery of the events at the showdown at the Red Sea, the bitter disappointment and forgetfulness of Israel in the desert, and the final compelling show of divine majesty and offer of a covenant at Sinai. All of this is told from the viewpoint of Moses the leader. But is it? Although Moses is certainly the hero of the story, he never claims the credit. He always appears instead as an instrument of God.
The drama and tension of the story centers on whether God will act at this moment or not. We never doubt who runs the show, but only when he will choose to reveal his plan. At times we even despair over Moses and Aaron and the people for their hardheaded behavior, their faults and lack of insight into what is happening. In short, Israel narrates the story of the exodus to glorify God who saves!!
To us modern readers, much of the biblical story seems harsh and primitive and too violent and warlike. But in a world where the weak had little protection and fewer rights, a God who can fight for his people and defend them is the God who receives worship. The Israelite story frankly praises God as a Warrior. His military prowess is miraculous; he leads, he defeats enemies, he even marches triumphantly to his own holy mountain and receives his people's obedience and praise there. It is summed up in the victory hymn of Miriam at the Red Sea: (Exodus 15:20-21)
"Sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously; horse and rider he has thrown into the sea."
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
Saturday, November 7, 2009
The Patriarchs nail down God's true name: "The God of the Fathers"
The Joseph story expresses the major theme of the entire patriarchal history. Through the ups and downs, successes and failures, God has directed the course of events so that the promises will be fulfilled. He overcomes all obstacles, whether it is the power of kings, the threats from neighboring peoples, the curse of childlessness, the occasional lapses of an Abraham or the human craftiness of a Jacob. For the Yahwist and Elohist, as well as for the later Priestly editors, this God was the one God of Israel, Yahweh. Where the Yahwist has announced in Genesis 4:26 that people called God by his proper name "Yahweh" from the beginning, both the Elohist and Priestly writers reserve the revelation of that sacred name until Moses' meeting with God on Mount Sinai at the burning bush in Exodus 3:14. Before that point in the Bible, they always call God by the general word "Elohim" which means simply "God". Lawrence Boadt in his book entitled Reading of the Old Testament claims that in this they are probably closer to the historical reality that is J's use of the name so early. Exodus 3 clearly implies that Moses was the one who first brought about the use of the name "Yahweh" for Israel’s God. (Boadt, L., (1984) Reading the Old Testament, Paulist Press, New York)
Some of the earlier names used by different tribes and leaders can still be discovered in the older parts of the Genesis traditions. Thus Abraham addresses God as El-Elyon, "God most high," Lester has pointed this out to us in class and it can be found in Genesis 14:19-20, while Jacob prays to God under the name "The fear of his father Isaac" in Genesis 31:53. Lester also brought up in class God as El Shaddai, "God the Almighty" and we find this in Genesis 35:11 where God is actually identifying himself as El Shaddai. This again occurs in Genesis 49:25 in the blessing of Joseph. Interestingly enough a name I had never heard before appears in the verse just before in Genesis 49:24 "Mighty One of Jacob."
Like the different writers of E, J, P, and D in the narratives we are studying, the different patriarchal traditions know of different ancient names for the deity, but by far the most common designation is the term "God of your father(s)." This comes up often Genesis 26:24, 31:53, 46:1-3, and 49:25. This phrase is striking, especially since it is the term by which God makes himself known to Moses at first in the burning bush (Exodus 3:6): "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob."
So maybe as we move forward we as students can finally settle on a name that will not be confused and changed in the ever changing narratives whether it was penned by E, J, P, or D or at what point in the timeline which becomes a great point of at least for me a source of great confusion.
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
(Boadt, L., (1984) Reading the Old Testament, Paulist Press, New York)
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Lest we forget: 1&2 Kings is the Word of God!
The call to heed the covenant of Moses burns through the pages of 1&2 Kings. Two major concerns of this covenant stand out, the first of which is the worship of other gods. Bedrock to Israel's faith is the assertion that "The Lord is our God, the Lord alone" (Deuteronomy 6:4). And yet the kings and people of 1&2 Kings worship the gods of their neighbors. They also practice idolatry in other ways, placing their trust in the "gods" of treasuries, armies, and alliances.
Injustice is the second concern. The law teaches that all must receive equal justice (e.g. Deuteronomy 16:18-20) and that the weak and undefended must be protected (Deuteronomy 15:1-18; 24:10-22). As Coogan points out in reflecting the old ways of Israel before the kings, when tribal life was based on more on a equal rights for all mentality, the law also teaches that kings must not elevate themselves above others (Deuteronomy 17:14-20). And yet the kings of 1&2 Kings amass great power and wealth, enslave their own people, steal their land, and spill innocent blood. It is no wonder the DTHR writers put their own spins on the happenings written at a later date based on tradition and history.
Although the prophets and DTHR writers of these biblical texts wrestle with the tension between the unconditional Davidic covenant and the conditional Mosaic covenant, they come down time and time again on the side of God's judgment. But even here they have no simple answers. They testify thank goodness, that divine judgment is never rigid. God sees signs of human repentance and human suffering and responds with compassion, second chances, and delayed judgment. They also testify to the difficulty of discerning and implementing God's desires and will in a nations public life. In this story, political policy, self interest, and moral certainty shape and reshape one another in ways that are sometimes ugly and morally open up to the unstable varying and ever-changing view points of DTHR writers.
Nonetheless, 1&2 Kings as a whole announce that loyalty to God and obedience to the law must not be compromised. Standing in Babylon, remembering a history of compromise, the writers of 1&2 Kings point to the exile as the inescapable testimony to God's judgment on Israel.
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
(Foster, J., Willard, D., Brueggemann, W., Peterson, E., The Renovare Spiritual Formation Bible Reflections)
Monday, October 26, 2009
Ahab: Addicted to Sin?
Scriptures account of Ahab begins: “Ahab son of Omri did evil in the sight of the Lord more than all before him” (1 Kings 16:30). Now why in the world would the Deuteronomistic Historians pick on poor old Ahab? After all, in our readings this week we go through chapter by chapter depicting king after king, leader after leader and they all did evil in the sight of the Lord. Even those who followed the ways of the Lord in certain things fell short in others. So why did Ahab stick out as the worst sinner of all and the Deuteronomistic Historian writers take a greater effort in explaining his pilgrimage in ancient Israel’s dynasty over the others?
We must turn to Coogan and try to discover why this may be so and I am also sure Lester will give us further insight on Ahab in his lecture. Coogan states first off that the Deuteronomistic Historians were actually writing in Judah after the fall of the northern kingdom, and their presentation of that northern kingdom is almost entirely negative. Coogan also states that the history of the divided monarchies is highly selective and poor old Ahab seems the chosen one to talk about. So while the reigns of some kings are treated only perfunctorily, while considerable space is devoted to material that coincided with the ideological perspective (which I brought up last week but had not dug deep enough to explain myself when questioned by Lester as to what I meant) of the Deuteronomistic Historians (Coogan text, pg. 287). More on this ideological topic to follow.
Coogan also brings up the point that in organizing their narrative the Deuteronomistic Historians used a dominant theme: The obligation of Israel to observe the requirements of the teachings of Moses, especially the worship of Yahweh alone. So as with Ahab one of the worst offenders according to the Deuteronomistic Historian writers the result was divinely imposed punishments so the Deuteronomistic Historians interpretation of the internal and external events of Ahab was an important factor to share about the history of the kings of Israel and Judah (Coogan text, pg. 288).
Back to this ideological review of what the Deuteronomistic Historians are doing here is somewhat easy to follow because as Coogan states that closely related to the negative assessment of the northern kingdom are repeated positive statements about the Davidic dynasty in Jerusalem. The divine promise of an enduring dynasty (2 Samuel 7:11-16) will be kept, “for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, which I have chosen” (1 Kings 11:13; 11:36; 15:4; 2Kings 8:19; 19:34). So we can plainly follow according to Coogan that the Deuteronomistic Historians are ideologically writing a biased story in which they have revised older prophetic legends (Elijah & Elisha) to express their negative view of the northern kingdom of Israel (Ahab) and their essentially positive view of the southern kingdom of Judah.
Another purpose that the Deuteronomistic Historians were inspired to elongate their text on Ahab was as Coogan points out and interestingly enough coincides as I stated earlier in the blog the purpose of fulfilling the promises of Moses through the folkloristic traditions in the case of the Elijah narratives. The historians develop a theme that Elijah is in fact the new Moses and of course Ahab has rather important encounters with Elijah that the Deuteronomistic Historians seem to focus on even more than his kingship. These ordeals begin with the drought threatened by Elijah and continue with episode of the vineyard of Naboth. In this ordeal as Coogan states the abuse of royal power by Jezebel to gain control of a privately owned property desired by her husband, King Ahab, was, for the Deuteronomistic Historians, a telling example of the problems with the monarchy. Among the “ways of the king” against which the prophet Samuel had warned the people when they requested a king is that “he will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards” (Coogan text, pg. 305).
So why did the compiler of 1-2 kings judge Ahab so Harsh? After all in all of my research the reality is that Ahab probably did not abandon the worship of Yahweh; but he permitted Jezebel his wife to patronize the cult of Baal of Tyre. He did not commit the crime of Naboth’s murder, but was willing to accept its profits. He seems to have been religiously indifferent; to him Elijah was the “troubler of Israel” (1 Kings 18:17), because he made an issue of whether Israel should worship Baal or Yahweh.
In conclusion, as my title states was Ahab worst than any other king in Israel? May be or may be not, but he truly seemed to be “addicted to sin” and his story is very familiar in the history of the Divided Monarchy. Ahab was a powerful ruler who continues the evil practices instituted before him, marries one who encourages further evil, and has significant opportunity to repent and turn to God, but continues in disobedience, bring much suffering to his nation and his own untimely death. The story is all too common, yet the specifics are anything but common. Despite all he saw God doing, Ahab remained bent toward sin One of the Scriptures most amazing displays of power God ever gave was Elijah’s triumph over the priests of Baal (1 Kings 20-40) the story of the fire from heaven of which all the people fell on their faces before God yet Ahab seems to have remained unmoved, and the event only invoked the anger of his wife, Jezebel, who was zealously committed to Baal. Ahab was at the very least if not the worst of sinners before the Lord as the Deuteronomistic Historians chose to write about he truly was addicted to sin!
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
We must turn to Coogan and try to discover why this may be so and I am also sure Lester will give us further insight on Ahab in his lecture. Coogan states first off that the Deuteronomistic Historians were actually writing in Judah after the fall of the northern kingdom, and their presentation of that northern kingdom is almost entirely negative. Coogan also states that the history of the divided monarchies is highly selective and poor old Ahab seems the chosen one to talk about. So while the reigns of some kings are treated only perfunctorily, while considerable space is devoted to material that coincided with the ideological perspective (which I brought up last week but had not dug deep enough to explain myself when questioned by Lester as to what I meant) of the Deuteronomistic Historians (Coogan text, pg. 287). More on this ideological topic to follow.
Coogan also brings up the point that in organizing their narrative the Deuteronomistic Historians used a dominant theme: The obligation of Israel to observe the requirements of the teachings of Moses, especially the worship of Yahweh alone. So as with Ahab one of the worst offenders according to the Deuteronomistic Historian writers the result was divinely imposed punishments so the Deuteronomistic Historians interpretation of the internal and external events of Ahab was an important factor to share about the history of the kings of Israel and Judah (Coogan text, pg. 288).
Back to this ideological review of what the Deuteronomistic Historians are doing here is somewhat easy to follow because as Coogan states that closely related to the negative assessment of the northern kingdom are repeated positive statements about the Davidic dynasty in Jerusalem. The divine promise of an enduring dynasty (2 Samuel 7:11-16) will be kept, “for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, which I have chosen” (1 Kings 11:13; 11:36; 15:4; 2Kings 8:19; 19:34). So we can plainly follow according to Coogan that the Deuteronomistic Historians are ideologically writing a biased story in which they have revised older prophetic legends (Elijah & Elisha) to express their negative view of the northern kingdom of Israel (Ahab) and their essentially positive view of the southern kingdom of Judah.
Another purpose that the Deuteronomistic Historians were inspired to elongate their text on Ahab was as Coogan points out and interestingly enough coincides as I stated earlier in the blog the purpose of fulfilling the promises of Moses through the folkloristic traditions in the case of the Elijah narratives. The historians develop a theme that Elijah is in fact the new Moses and of course Ahab has rather important encounters with Elijah that the Deuteronomistic Historians seem to focus on even more than his kingship. These ordeals begin with the drought threatened by Elijah and continue with episode of the vineyard of Naboth. In this ordeal as Coogan states the abuse of royal power by Jezebel to gain control of a privately owned property desired by her husband, King Ahab, was, for the Deuteronomistic Historians, a telling example of the problems with the monarchy. Among the “ways of the king” against which the prophet Samuel had warned the people when they requested a king is that “he will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards” (Coogan text, pg. 305).
So why did the compiler of 1-2 kings judge Ahab so Harsh? After all in all of my research the reality is that Ahab probably did not abandon the worship of Yahweh; but he permitted Jezebel his wife to patronize the cult of Baal of Tyre. He did not commit the crime of Naboth’s murder, but was willing to accept its profits. He seems to have been religiously indifferent; to him Elijah was the “troubler of Israel” (1 Kings 18:17), because he made an issue of whether Israel should worship Baal or Yahweh.
In conclusion, as my title states was Ahab worst than any other king in Israel? May be or may be not, but he truly seemed to be “addicted to sin” and his story is very familiar in the history of the Divided Monarchy. Ahab was a powerful ruler who continues the evil practices instituted before him, marries one who encourages further evil, and has significant opportunity to repent and turn to God, but continues in disobedience, bring much suffering to his nation and his own untimely death. The story is all too common, yet the specifics are anything but common. Despite all he saw God doing, Ahab remained bent toward sin One of the Scriptures most amazing displays of power God ever gave was Elijah’s triumph over the priests of Baal (1 Kings 20-40) the story of the fire from heaven of which all the people fell on their faces before God yet Ahab seems to have remained unmoved, and the event only invoked the anger of his wife, Jezebel, who was zealously committed to Baal. Ahab was at the very least if not the worst of sinners before the Lord as the Deuteronomistic Historians chose to write about he truly was addicted to sin!
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Grab a shovel and let's dig together!!
O.K. class I am the first to admit that the information dissected by Lester and Coogan go a step beyond the (hermeneutics and exegesis) of what I am used to in my previous Scripture studies to this point. I truly find myself trying to dig for a buried treasure in a very deep sand pit. The sands of my human experience and the knowing of “the rest of the story” fills back in every shovel full I grab! This for me is a very real and frustrating problem, it is not intentional but as I look at my blogs (which serve as course writings for this course) Dr. Lester is right I always divert to as he says what would make a good homily. I have sincerely tried to fight this temptation, as I know others of you have also by our conversations. So we must challenge each other here to dig a little deeper in these materials together so we can find the treasure not only faster but more of it.
Besides the very obvious human fact that I graduated in my theology B.A. with a 3.9 G.P.A. and my over whelming fear to receive a sub par grade in my first masters level class abhors me. Even more important than that is the reality that when I become stretched to the point of fear and the unknown I become very aware of the fact that God has a treasure waiting for me on the other side of the fear and doubt and sometimes my own laziness to do the extra hard digging in the sand that keeps filling in the hole that hides the true treasure.
I see it in Dr. Lester’s eyes and tone as we as a class meander through several weeks of this class falling prey to what we know and are familiar with and yes probably most comfortable with! Yes, we know that all of Scripture leads to the truth, which is found in Christ Jesus. But Dr. Lester’s passion and Coogan’s determination to help us dig a little harder and a little faster and if we proceed to this together we will reach the treasure that lies deeply hidden within the soft sands of our comfort levels. It is good that our comfort levels are rooted in Christ and the “Rest of the Story” this is truly why we were created to find such truth. That being said if God brought us here to this moment and this class then God has a hidden treasure of which Lester and Coogan want us to find so that we will truly become the ministers of God’s people that we were created to become. After all we all know no cross, no crown!
So let us all take something each week and dig beyond the soft sands of our realities to unveil the historical and literal function and purpose of the Hebrew Scriptures. We can do this by each taking one of the things presented to us in this course and dig beyond the surface. As with anything we can dig much deeper and farther if we accomplish this together through the use of our course tools such as blogging, class discussion etc.
I will now take the first spade full and attempt to uncover the true treasure of what Dr. Lester so passionately wants us to discover not for himself, but for ourselves and our future ministries. So here it goes: A separate blog will follow attempting to dig beyond the surface of this week’s assignment. Wish me luck and good luck to you all; remember anything worthwhile is usually hard to do!
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
Besides the very obvious human fact that I graduated in my theology B.A. with a 3.9 G.P.A. and my over whelming fear to receive a sub par grade in my first masters level class abhors me. Even more important than that is the reality that when I become stretched to the point of fear and the unknown I become very aware of the fact that God has a treasure waiting for me on the other side of the fear and doubt and sometimes my own laziness to do the extra hard digging in the sand that keeps filling in the hole that hides the true treasure.
I see it in Dr. Lester’s eyes and tone as we as a class meander through several weeks of this class falling prey to what we know and are familiar with and yes probably most comfortable with! Yes, we know that all of Scripture leads to the truth, which is found in Christ Jesus. But Dr. Lester’s passion and Coogan’s determination to help us dig a little harder and a little faster and if we proceed to this together we will reach the treasure that lies deeply hidden within the soft sands of our comfort levels. It is good that our comfort levels are rooted in Christ and the “Rest of the Story” this is truly why we were created to find such truth. That being said if God brought us here to this moment and this class then God has a hidden treasure of which Lester and Coogan want us to find so that we will truly become the ministers of God’s people that we were created to become. After all we all know no cross, no crown!
So let us all take something each week and dig beyond the soft sands of our realities to unveil the historical and literal function and purpose of the Hebrew Scriptures. We can do this by each taking one of the things presented to us in this course and dig beyond the surface. As with anything we can dig much deeper and farther if we accomplish this together through the use of our course tools such as blogging, class discussion etc.
I will now take the first spade full and attempt to uncover the true treasure of what Dr. Lester so passionately wants us to discover not for himself, but for ourselves and our future ministries. So here it goes: A separate blog will follow attempting to dig beyond the surface of this week’s assignment. Wish me luck and good luck to you all; remember anything worthwhile is usually hard to do!
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Solomon Wisdom That Waned
Pelachan,
The prayer for wisdom made all the difference in Solomon’s life. It is very interesting how such wisdom reaches all the ends of the earth. However, as with all things in the temporal world, Solomon’s single-minded focus on God and his spiritual leadership of the nations began to wane as he became increasingly engaged with the various building projects, his wealth, his notoriety, and his relationships with hundreds of foreign wives. His success became too much for him, and Solomon’s passions overwhelmed his commitments to the one true God. Any love he first had for God was nearly smothered by all of his competing earthly temporal loves.
So in the end we too must be reminded as we share the stories of wisdom throughout the centuries, no matter the culture, that we must remain faithful to God and his commandments because human wisdom no matter how great is temporal. There is a saying that I live by and it is this: “true spiritual wisdom can never be obtained through intellect but only by obedience!”
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
The prayer for wisdom made all the difference in Solomon’s life. It is very interesting how such wisdom reaches all the ends of the earth. However, as with all things in the temporal world, Solomon’s single-minded focus on God and his spiritual leadership of the nations began to wane as he became increasingly engaged with the various building projects, his wealth, his notoriety, and his relationships with hundreds of foreign wives. His success became too much for him, and Solomon’s passions overwhelmed his commitments to the one true God. Any love he first had for God was nearly smothered by all of his competing earthly temporal loves.
So in the end we too must be reminded as we share the stories of wisdom throughout the centuries, no matter the culture, that we must remain faithful to God and his commandments because human wisdom no matter how great is temporal. There is a saying that I live by and it is this: “true spiritual wisdom can never be obtained through intellect but only by obedience!”
God Bless,
Deacon Jim
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)