ninesixteen

Recently we have been reading through the minor prophets. While Christians tend to treat these as individual books, I have recently been taught to see them as both individual books and as a single book (The Book of The Twelve). One of the most interesting things we saw in this study was the transgression in thought. First, we noticed that each prophet transgresses in thought from a Sin Charge (Amos, for example, does so in chapters 1 and 2) to a Just Punishment (Amos 3-8a) and finally a Hope of Restoration (Amos 8b-9). However, the greater transgression we noticed was that the Book of Twelve as a whole follows this same pattern. The first few books (Hosea and Joel) deal with a sin charge, the middle group turns its focus to a just punishment (Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah) and the last few turn their focus toward a hope of restoration (Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi). This change in tone was found to be so important in the early church that when the canonization (brought into a collection) of the New Testament called for the structure of the Old to be formed, Christians moved The Book of The Twelve from its place in the Hebrew Bible and placed it at the end of the Old Testament. This shift was because the Patristic fathers (early Church Fathers beginning with the disciples of the disciples and ending at some point around the 500’s) could not deny that this message of hope and restoration is a proclamation of the coming of the Christ.

My purpose for this discussion is that as I watched the tone of voice change, I could not dismiss that the life of every Christian is found in The Book of The Twelve. I know there was a time in which I was blind to my own sins and by the grace of God, He sent a message to my heart and when I heard this, I was forced to recognize the coming of a just punishment. Still, like the prophets, I now live in a state of hope and restoration. My question to anyone who finds this is simple: are you willing to wrestle with the claims of the prophets and ask has God revealed sin in your life, and if so, are you now living in a time of coming punishment or the hope and restoration found in Christ Jesus?

Jeremiah 30 and 31 is often seen as the calling of Israel to a new Covenant of hope. Jeremiah is unlike prophets in that he is proclaiming the message of God from the captivity that Isaiah forewarned over 100 years earlier. With this in mind I can not help but see that as Jeremiah calls to a future of hope he is looking at the past. In chapter 30 verse four Jeremiah writes that their cries of fear are heard, which immediately brings to mind the silence that God faced the Israelites in Isaiah 1. Now God’s wrath is burning against His people but now God has heard them and Jeremiah has been called. Then as Jeremiah works through the difficult task of displaying both God’s wrath and His deliverance he stops in verse 22 to go all the way back to Abraham. God called Abraham out and both became his God and made him the father of a people. Now Jeremiah calls us back to remember the covenant, when it was first laid down, between Abraham and God.

In chapter 31 Jeremiah’s remembrance of the past is much more direct. He points out “the lord appeared to us in the past…you will again…” and most interesting is the whore Israel again will be reestablished a virgin in verse 4 and again emphasized in verse 21. Upon awaking Jeremiah is again spoken to by the Lord. In this conversation God reminds the captive Israelites of his mercy in Eden when He revisits the Old Law in verse 30; telling them that all will die for  his own sin. Yet immediately after pointing to the Law God moves to the completion of the covenant in Christ. “I will put my law in their minds and write in on their hearts. I will be their God and they will be my people.” (33)

For the third time we have heard this phrase, “I will be their God and they will be my people.” First we heard it when Jeremiah reminded the Israelites that He has been their God since Abraham was first called out. The second time is God says this, is when Jeremiah begins to tie the past with the present in chapter 31 verse 1. And finally God says this in His words of hope for the future. In chapter 30 and 31 God speaks great hope to his people by revealing His timeless commitment to His people and His sovereign control.

While the book of Isaiah is a rollercoaster of hope and condemnation I would like to focus on the first chapter of Isaiah, which I found to be one of the most frightening text in the bible. Jerusalem, the apex of Israel civilization and the home of the very temple where God dwelt is portrayed no longer as a righteous woman but as a hoar who is full of rot and death. The city of God is no longer the holy house of YHWH but a den of liars and thieves and now God warns the people that His fist is raised against them and His wrath is about to come down. However it is not the destruction of Jerusalem and the vengeful wrath of God that frightens me but the silence that comes before.
Prior to His message of Destruction God tells Israel, “What makes you think I want all yoru sacrifices…I am sick of your burnt offerings…I get no pleasure…Stop bringing me your meaningless gifts the incense and your offerings disgusts me!” Their hollow practices have pushed God to a point of silence. “When you lift up you hands in prayer I will not look. Though you offer many prayers, I will not listen, for you hands are covered with the blood of innocent victims. The scariest part of Isaiah is the Idea that our sins could carry the weight, not of our correction, but of our isolation. That God in His Justice would eventually leave us to the full consequences of our sins. Isaiah may be remembered by it’s prophecies, imagery, and final message of hope, but the opening chapter clearly outlines the consequences of a life that in sin fully rejects the Glory and Goodness of God.

I have often heard that, while Solomon is called the wisest of all men he makes some dumb moves. Ecclesiastes is often seen as a pessimistic ranting that challenges the joy found in God’s creation, however After reading the five scrolls I believe that Ecclesiastes does no such thing. But rather it seeks to show the worthlessness of creation with out a creator.

The opening of Ecclesiastes starts with the words of the teacher, “everything is meaningless,” and the first thing he list is our hard work. I could not help but think of Genesis 1 when man is told to cultivate the world. Yet Solomon speaks of it’s meaninglessness. Ecclesiastes sounds less like proverbs and more like the ramblings of a grandfather as he reclines in his favorite chair all while sharing the wisdom of his life, running off on random tangents, and slipping in and out of sleep. As Solomon shares his wisdom he eventually lands on his final conclusion, “to fear God and obey his commandments.” When I read Solomon I can not help but think that all our desires, works, and goals are worthless with out community with the Creator.

He was a man who had everything at his fingertips, a thousand women, a kingdom, parties that lasted weeks, and who undertook projects larger than most men can imagine and after giving in to all his lust and desires he found that their was no greater joy, hope, and meaning than to know God and live for Him. I believe that Ecclesiastes is not evidence of Solomon’s inability to see the joys of creation but rather a book that displays the wisdom of Solomon and points to God as supreme.

I belive this is shown best with one example.  Over and over Solomon draws a cyclic diagram. We work, we die, our children work, our children die… and he uses the phrase “under the sun.”  Over and over the Idea of a day or the dawning and setting of the sun is seen as negative and portrays our short and meaningless life, however  in verse 7 of chapter 11 Solomon says the “light is sweet; how pleasant to see a new day dawning.” Why does he call the dawning of the day pleasant and sweet. I believe that is because Solomon has found the meaning of the day and the meaning of life, to fear God and obey his commands For this is everyones duty.

After the opening chapters where Satan and God discuss Job’s faithfulness and God allows the trials of Job to commence, we are briskly guided through the destruction of Job’s family and wealth, until we land at the arrival of Job’s friends. There we, as readers, are allowed an in-depth account of the “trial” of YHWH. As the book of Job unfolds However, I found the narrative looking more and more like a powwow and less and less like a courtroom.
While the footnotes alerted me that Job was using a courtroom lingo, I could not help but see the group gathered up around a fire sitting back and having a harsh heart to heart. Job’s friends are not ruthless and harsh men who seem to lavish unending slander and accusations on Job (as the persecution would in a court room), rather they appear to be men who love and cherish their relationship with Job, who in this midst of Job’s suffering attempted to follow the logic of their theology and find the causal sin. They could not accept that their theology did not rightfully account for Job’s unmerited suffering and thus began to engage Job in one of those uneasy “we need to talk” discussions.
We are told that their campfire powwow began after seven days of that awkward silence which precedes some of the most difficult conversations one can have. Finally, Job voices his frustration and reaches out for the comfort of his friends. Instead, he is met with a calling to admit sin and repent. While the dialogue centers on Job as he examines and protests the puzzle of human suffering the most shocking part of the text is found in chapter 16 when he describes God as a lion tearing into his prey. “God assails me and tears me in his anger and gnashes his teeth at me; my opponent fastens on me his piercing eyes…He seized me by the neck and crushed me…again and again he bursts upon me; he rushes at me like a warrior.” (vs 9-14)
This depiction of God as a merciless lion seeking to devour its prey is a startling text. After meditating on Job’s words I was reminded of C.S. Lewis’ The Horse and It’s Boy. In the book a beast chases the two main characters during the night, stalks them when weary, and mauls one of them. This terrifying beast continues to hunt the horse and his boy as they flee for Narnia till the end of the book, when they have a final encounter. In their last encounter the horse has fled toward Narnia and the boy finds himself standing face to face with the Lion. Aslan, reveals Himself as the beast in the night and explains to the boy that while he chased the horse and the boy he did all this, out of love, in order to push the two travelers onward and to steer them from danger.
While the depiction of God in Job 16 was not meant to reveal God’s goodness and grace but rather his fierce wrath One can not help but notice the similarities in structure. Both the boy and Job are preyed on by the lion and just as the boy drops his charge against the beast at the end of The Horse and His Boy, so does Job when God speaks to him.
On one last note, I found it very interesting that when God commanded Job’s friends to repent and offer sacrifice it says that God “received” Job, and that when Job prayed his friends where forgiven, rather than when they had committed the sacrifices.

My reflection over psalms stems from both my time reading the book as a whole and my time spent reading a stand alone spalm as part of a devotional.  Coming from a reading that interprets the psalms as private and public worship songs of praise there is a strange change in several of the psalms. Often times the psalmist is talking to God (or to people) and in the midst of his song of praise he simply begins addressing  the people (or maybe himself, or God in some cases).  For example in Psalm 23 the pslamist starts off, “the lord is…He leads…He guides” however in verse four he switches to “you are with me…. You prepare a table” and finally in a third remark he aparently talks to himself when he says, “surely goodeness… will follow me…”

It happens again in Psalm 60 were the psalmist addresses the Lord as “you” then in verse six seems to adress a crowd with, “God has…” Yyet at the same time many more psalms make it clear  that the psalmist writes as one voice to one audience, be it God as in psalm 100 or other people as in 147-150.

In Pslams 99 there is a change of audience that I believe helps us to begin this  phenomenon . in the first part of the psalm the author calls for the praise of the Lord because of His great works and a moment to remember past leaders such as Moses, Aaron, and Samuel, then for one verse the author stops and turns to God, “You ansered them…” before returning back to the people, “exalt the Lord.” This must have been done with intent, so I ask, why what is the implication of this, do the psalms as folk songs work as songs of community praise that helps to talk to God and to fellow man? Where these used as a kind of modern day Hymn?

After reading the books of Ezra and Nehemiah together I was astonished by how well the two worked together. The two books together almost as pieces of a puzzle, granting us a larger and more acurate picture than a single piece would alone. After seeing how Chronicles and Samuel butted heads on not just details but the large events in History It was refreshing to see Ezra and Nehemiah complement each other. However I do have some basic questions. After reading as a together as two accounts of the same struggle for the Jew, I first wonder why Nehemiah arrives 13 years after Ezra has been working on the temple and suddenly everyone agrees they need a wall to guard their city. It has been 13 years why does the need just now arise? However my largest question may be easier to answer. Who was Nehemiah, what were his duties as a cupbearer. The name implies a form of servant-ship to the king, however the respect shown to Nehemiah from the king and his place of authority with his fellow Jews reveals that his position as cup bearer as a very prestigious position.

With my question aside I wanted to further comment on how Ezra and Nehemiah function together. In Ezra the protestors to the temple are writing the king and begging him to stop, revealing a political threat to the temples completion without a physical threat to the people. However in Nehemiah the opponents of the wall do not ask the king to make a royal decree ceasing the building of the wall, this time they planned on invading Jerusalem and physically tearing it down. Together the two responses of the opponents give the reader a more complete understanding of the struggles of the Jews. Furthermore, While Ezra is temple focused skipping years at a time as construction was delayed; Nehemiah however is more focused on the rebuilding of Jerusalem as a whole. Because of this difference the reader can now read between the lines of Ezra. When work on the temple ceases it is the task of rebuilding the wall that is taken up. Then once they can afford it the temple is re-undertaken until it is finally completed long after its undertaking began.

I have a few thoughts and questions after reading through Chronicles. However my first question comes from Class on Thrusday. I have often been told that the story of David in I and II Samuel is to perfect, David is portrayed with great emphasis on his good qualities while his bad are quickly glossed over while Chronicles gives a much more real and therefore authentic telling of David’s kingship. however in class onThursday we were given a quote from John collins in which he claims, “Chronicles desribes the history as the author thought it should have been.” (intro to the Hebrew Bible, 459) My question then is this: If Scholars believe chronicles to be written over a hundred years after Samuel and admit that it’s telling of history is Temple focused, why do we lend it more historical credeance than Samuel, which was written earlier and is focused on the kings of the Hebrew nation?