Tuesday, May 31, 2011
On Prophets...
The most important thing to remember about prophets...is that they are visionaries. I am no prophet. However, I do have vision problems right now that are keeping me from blogging adequately. I will return with a post on the book of Isaiah as soon as possible. Thank you in advance for your understanding.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Feminism, Song of Solomon, and Breakfast at Tiffany's
The New York Times published a fun little quiz about the bible and sex in the May 22 Sunday Edition. Op-ed columnist Nicholas D. Kristof does a good job of showing how human interpretation of the bible colors our understanding of the actual text. [Follow up: read an explanation and reader responses.]
Question number four is of particular interest for this week's reading: the "Song of Solomon" or "Song of Songs." This short biblical book details in rich poetry the relationship between two young lovers. Anyway, that is the surface reading (and very possible the Song's original intention).
By some strange confluence of literature and teachers, many English majors are able to read sex in anything (and if not, some are more than happy to inject it themselves). I had a fantastic English professor in college who was very much into feminism interpretation but very conscious of Freudian psychology. It made for intriguing courses about the role of women in male-dominated societies. Song of Solomon is remarkable for the equality of the two lovers. This is not the sort of unequal relationship we see in the sex-libertine Restoration comedies, but rather the parity of two young lovers more typical of Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, for instance. But even millennia before Freud, the sexual imagery seems undeniable.
The praises the two lavish on one another seem to demonstrate complete equality. The society they live in, however, is not so accommodating. The girl is even beaten and stripped for wandering the city at night. Perhaps they thought she was a prostitute, but in any case this is a strong example of misogyny within the culture. The girl, prostitute or not, did nothing to deserve her injury and humiliation. It is worth noting that the boy does not suffer the same test of love. The girl faces much stronger oppression, and must remain within certain physical and social constraints.
The girl, soon to be a young woman, is warded over by her two brothers, who guard her womanhood (read: virginity) jealously:
I don't think we can blame the guy - he is acting informed by the culture around him. And as far as misogynistic statements go, this is pretty tame, as they will be each other's eventually. If you would like to argue against the institution of marriage, you might have a case for misogyny. I am taking this instance of marriage for granted, because, well, it makes my argument a lot neater. Here is something to consider, though:
Paul Varjak (Fred): "I love you. You belong to me."
Question number four is of particular interest for this week's reading: the "Song of Solomon" or "Song of Songs." This short biblical book details in rich poetry the relationship between two young lovers. Anyway, that is the surface reading (and very possible the Song's original intention).
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth!This love song, however, does not square well with religious hierarchy of many denominations. Why would an erotic poem - one that does not even mention God - be featured among scripture? In his introduction to the poem in a the Harper Collins Study Bible, Michael V. Fox explains that the Song is traditionally interpreted as describing the relationship between God and his followers. For Jews, this mean's God's love for Israel. For Christians, this means God's love for the Church. These explanations affirm God's love, but do so at great peril. The language, as we see above, is sexually-charged. It is no wonder that Song is attributed to Solomon, who was known for his great wisdom and love of women!
For your love is better than wine,
your anointing oils are fragrant,
your name is perfume poured out;
therefore the maidens love you.
Draw me after you, let us make haste.
The king has brought me into his chambers.
We will exult and rejoice in you;
we will extol your love more than wine;
rightly do they love you.
(Song of Solomon 1.2-4)
By some strange confluence of literature and teachers, many English majors are able to read sex in anything (and if not, some are more than happy to inject it themselves). I had a fantastic English professor in college who was very much into feminism interpretation but very conscious of Freudian psychology. It made for intriguing courses about the role of women in male-dominated societies. Song of Solomon is remarkable for the equality of the two lovers. This is not the sort of unequal relationship we see in the sex-libertine Restoration comedies, but rather the parity of two young lovers more typical of Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, for instance. But even millennia before Freud, the sexual imagery seems undeniable.
The praises the two lavish on one another seem to demonstrate complete equality. The society they live in, however, is not so accommodating. The girl is even beaten and stripped for wandering the city at night. Perhaps they thought she was a prostitute, but in any case this is a strong example of misogyny within the culture. The girl, prostitute or not, did nothing to deserve her injury and humiliation. It is worth noting that the boy does not suffer the same test of love. The girl faces much stronger oppression, and must remain within certain physical and social constraints.
The girl, soon to be a young woman, is warded over by her two brothers, who guard her womanhood (read: virginity) jealously:
My mother's sons were angry with me;Patriarchal rule ensures that she only marries a man that is approved by the men of her family. This sentiment is typical of the times (and many times later!), but not echoed in her lover. Still, the sentiment is restated at the end of the Song, fencing the girl in a textual corral from which she cannot escape. The two brothers, at the end of the song:
they made me keeper of the vineyards,
but my own vineyard I have not kept!
(Song of Solomon 1.6)
We have a little sister,Even non English-majors should be able to identify what is symbolized by the wall versus the door. But by this point, with all the loving-tenderness that passes between the lovers, the girl-woman is ready to respond to her brothers, and finds herself ready for marriage:
and she has no breasts.
What shall we do for our sister,
on the day when she is spoken for?
If she is a wall,
we will build upon her a battlement of silver;
but if she is a door,
we will enclose her with boards of cedar.
(Song of Solomon 8.8-9)
I was a wall,The girl-woman is prepared for marriage, as is the boy-man:
and my breasts were like towers;
then I was in his eyes
as one who brings peace.
Solomon had a vineyard at Baal-hamon;The boy takes up the girl's image of the vineyard and...wait. It's his? As in he owns it?
he entrusted the vineyard to keepers;
each one was to bring for its fruit a thousand pieces of silver.
My vineyard, my very own, is for myself;
you, O Solomon, may have the thousand,
and the keepers of the fruit two hundred!
(Song of Solomon 8.10-12)
I don't think we can blame the guy - he is acting informed by the culture around him. And as far as misogynistic statements go, this is pretty tame, as they will be each other's eventually. If you would like to argue against the institution of marriage, you might have a case for misogyny. I am taking this instance of marriage for granted, because, well, it makes my argument a lot neater. Here is something to consider, though:
Paul Varjak (Fred): "I love you. You belong to me."
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Charting the End of Days
Harold Camping has a blueprint for humanity. Those billboards reading “Judgment Day May 21” are the brainchild of the 89-year-old, who hosts a daily internationally-syndicated radio show, “Family Radio.” Judgment Day arrives Saturday with the rapture of God’s faithful. At six o’clock p.m. Standard Time, an earthquake will occur at the International Date Line, and will spread over the whole world. For the next five months, quakes and fires and suffering will rack what remains of humanity. The fantastic machinery of the cosmos will enter a new era as the “salvation program” ends and the “judgment program” begins. The final stroke comes on October 21, with the end of the world.
That is the blueprint for the End of Days.
Camping’s reasoning comes about from cherry-picked passages stitched together into biblical mathematics, substituting verses the way mathematicians substitute variables. (See the run-down on his website)
Camping’s history as an engineer no doubt helped him in charting the apocalypse. D.T. Brown’s interview at Killing the Buddha quotes him as saying:
Micheael Shermer in the Wall Street Journal writes about “The Enduring Appeal of the Apocalypse,” suggesting that eschatology helps us to cope with a world we do not completely understand:
I remember the first time I was given a handout of the “Chart of Ages” by the Chicago Bible Students. A series of colored arcs intersect and overlap in a number of ages and dispensations. The timeline resembled a dome temple, and within it were pyramids and fragments of pyramids, all explaining events from the bible and those still to come in human history. What I held was a blueprint of all time, starting with the creation of the world and “ending” with a period of eternal perfection. At the time, I did not know what a “dispensation” was. That knowledge came later, with scholarly study.
The chart owed a lot to the evangelist John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), who popularized the idea of the rapture as well as dispensationalism. Darby’s dispensations organized history very neatly, making clear the evolution of God’s relationship with humankind through the past and as it extends into eternity. Though he takes Martin Luther’s idea of sola scriptura to an extreme, surely Camping draws something from Darby in the way he maps out the end times.
In fact, though, there is a man even further back that informs both of them. Joachim of Fiore (1135-1202) was a medieval theologian whose ornate diagrams (figurae) traced history from the beginning of the world through three distinct ages. Through these elaborate charts of interlocked rings and seven-headed dragons, the man attempted to chart God’s plan from creation to the eternal kingdom. Joachim saw order in biblical numbers, and relied on the trinity for his idea about the history of the world. The Age of the Father was explicated in the Hebrew Scriptures, and was typified by God’s revealed law. The Age of the Son was explicated in the Gospels, and was typified by the “good news” brought by Jesus Christ. The Age of the Spirit was foreshadowed by Revelation and other apocalyptic literature. Joachim believed the Age of the Son was coming to an end, and the Age of the Spirit was to begin at some point between 1200 and 1260. That span came and went, with a fair amount of terror and repentance, but the Age of the Spirit was never ushered in.
Camping has applied his own eras to history. The “Age of the Church” ended in 1988, nearly coinciding with his failed attempt at forming a congregation. The “Age of Salvation” will end with the rapture, and the age of judgment will begin Saturday.
These three men have in common something that we are very familiar with today: a desire to classify the world. I recall being frustrated as a child that my history book charted the history of specific areas, rather than plotting all history on a gigantic timeline. There it would be much easier to see cause and effect – and I realize now – even perceived effects without true causes. Camping is not searching for Gog or Magog or the Four Horseman, but he shares a similar desire with those who do. With the signs he offers, we are able to see where we are going. The bible becomes a guidebook, and Camping becomes out guide.
Camping believes that the world will end, and to a degree he is correct. Whether or not the rapture occurs, May 21, 2011 stands as a demarcation in the long history of expected doomsdays. If the faithful are not raptured, their beliefs will be shaken. They will have to deal with the consequences of decisions made in preparation for the end times, especially those who gave up their friends, family, possessions, and wealth in anticipation of the end time. An old history will end, and a new one begins, awaiting yet another blueprint for the future.
---
Post Script
Eschatological blueprints are not limited to Christians. The Mayans also used a system of cycles to define history. Most people have heard of the impending “Mayan apocalypse” December 21, 2012. The key thing to remember here is that the end of a Mayan cycle does not indicate an apocalyptic end of life, but rather a renewal. On December 21, 2012, the old cycle will be shed and the new one will begin fresh. Ten days later we will ring in a secular new year, and a new cycle of interest in the end times will begin.
That is the blueprint for the End of Days.
Camping’s reasoning comes about from cherry-picked passages stitched together into biblical mathematics, substituting verses the way mathematicians substitute variables. (See the run-down on his website)
Camping’s history as an engineer no doubt helped him in charting the apocalypse. D.T. Brown’s interview at Killing the Buddha quotes him as saying:
I was an engineer and that helped me enormously in studying the Bible, because, just like engineering, the Bible is very analytical. ...I approached the Bible the same way I approached any engineering question, in a very analytical way.This “analytical way” means a mapping out of the end times, something hardly new in eschatology. Many of Camping’s adversaries are quick point to 2 Peter 3.10: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night…” However, there is an enduring and perhaps innate desire to know exactly when the end will occur, and to identify and map out the signs of the times leading to it.
Micheael Shermer in the Wall Street Journal writes about “The Enduring Appeal of the Apocalypse,” suggesting that eschatology helps us to cope with a world we do not completely understand:
For human beings, it is much easier to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune when we believe that it is all part of a deeper, unfolding plan. We may feel like flotsam and jetsam on the vast rivers of history, but when the currents are directed toward a final destination, it gives us purpose and meaning. We want to feel that no matter how chaotic, oppressive or evil the world may be, all will be made right in the end.Camping’s eschatology, like many other eschatologies, is based on a succession of eras. In these, there are one or more watershed moments that delineate between the old, sinful time, and the new time of salvation.
I remember the first time I was given a handout of the “Chart of Ages” by the Chicago Bible Students. A series of colored arcs intersect and overlap in a number of ages and dispensations. The timeline resembled a dome temple, and within it were pyramids and fragments of pyramids, all explaining events from the bible and those still to come in human history. What I held was a blueprint of all time, starting with the creation of the world and “ending” with a period of eternal perfection. At the time, I did not know what a “dispensation” was. That knowledge came later, with scholarly study.
The chart owed a lot to the evangelist John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), who popularized the idea of the rapture as well as dispensationalism. Darby’s dispensations organized history very neatly, making clear the evolution of God’s relationship with humankind through the past and as it extends into eternity. Though he takes Martin Luther’s idea of sola scriptura to an extreme, surely Camping draws something from Darby in the way he maps out the end times.
In fact, though, there is a man even further back that informs both of them. Joachim of Fiore (1135-1202) was a medieval theologian whose ornate diagrams (figurae) traced history from the beginning of the world through three distinct ages. Through these elaborate charts of interlocked rings and seven-headed dragons, the man attempted to chart God’s plan from creation to the eternal kingdom. Joachim saw order in biblical numbers, and relied on the trinity for his idea about the history of the world. The Age of the Father was explicated in the Hebrew Scriptures, and was typified by God’s revealed law. The Age of the Son was explicated in the Gospels, and was typified by the “good news” brought by Jesus Christ. The Age of the Spirit was foreshadowed by Revelation and other apocalyptic literature. Joachim believed the Age of the Son was coming to an end, and the Age of the Spirit was to begin at some point between 1200 and 1260. That span came and went, with a fair amount of terror and repentance, but the Age of the Spirit was never ushered in.
Camping has applied his own eras to history. The “Age of the Church” ended in 1988, nearly coinciding with his failed attempt at forming a congregation. The “Age of Salvation” will end with the rapture, and the age of judgment will begin Saturday.
These three men have in common something that we are very familiar with today: a desire to classify the world. I recall being frustrated as a child that my history book charted the history of specific areas, rather than plotting all history on a gigantic timeline. There it would be much easier to see cause and effect – and I realize now – even perceived effects without true causes. Camping is not searching for Gog or Magog or the Four Horseman, but he shares a similar desire with those who do. With the signs he offers, we are able to see where we are going. The bible becomes a guidebook, and Camping becomes out guide.
Camping believes that the world will end, and to a degree he is correct. Whether or not the rapture occurs, May 21, 2011 stands as a demarcation in the long history of expected doomsdays. If the faithful are not raptured, their beliefs will be shaken. They will have to deal with the consequences of decisions made in preparation for the end times, especially those who gave up their friends, family, possessions, and wealth in anticipation of the end time. An old history will end, and a new one begins, awaiting yet another blueprint for the future.
---
Post Script
Eschatological blueprints are not limited to Christians. The Mayans also used a system of cycles to define history. Most people have heard of the impending “Mayan apocalypse” December 21, 2012. The key thing to remember here is that the end of a Mayan cycle does not indicate an apocalyptic end of life, but rather a renewal. On December 21, 2012, the old cycle will be shed and the new one will begin fresh. Ten days later we will ring in a secular new year, and a new cycle of interest in the end times will begin.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Ecclesiastes: Eat, Drink, and Be Merry!
About a quarter of the way through Ecclesiastes we encounter something familiar - an old song...
The original melody was written by Pete Seeger, but the lyrics come from Ecclesiastes 3.1-8: "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven..." There is a time for constructive acts of all sorts, as well as acts of destruction. Everything goes in cycles created by and comprehensible only to God. These resonate on earth for humans to interpret and to live by. The theology of Ecclesiastes seems to be optimistic existentialism; there is no way for humans to understand God's plan, but this is not a cause of despair:
The ancient Greeks had an idea of kleos, or "glory" as a way to transcend death. Men who built up kleos during their lifetime were remembered after their death as being heroic - men like Achilles.
Kleos can be seen as a means of coping with death. One who was valiant during this lifetime would live on afterward in the words of others, his story ideally passed down through the generations as the spirit of the man resided eternally in gloomy Hades.
The Hebrews did not have this same sense of honor, though the prospect of death is very similar to that of the Ancient Greeks. Rather, their lives were to be lived piously, in constant observance of God's law. The force of life was the covenant, and in a way, perhaps, the Hebrews lived on as a community through their special relationship with God. Deliverance, during the fifth to third century BCE, would happen during lifetime, if at all. Heaven was God's abode, not the eternal resting place of the faithful.
Having no great anticipation of reward after death, it is easy to see life and all its constituent parts as hevel, literally meaning "breath," "breeze," "vapor," or "mist." In the Harper Collins Study Bible translation of Ecclesiastes, hevel appears as "vanity," though the connotation is along the lines of "meaninglessness," "absurdity," "emptiness," "incongruity," or "uselessness."
How do we deal with a life bereft of meaning? We must find some meaning in it, and that meaning turns out to come from God. It is God that controls everything, and all good things that come from God should be enjoyed. Wise people understand this, and are wise because of it (a tautology that actually exists in the pages of Ecclesiastes). Therefore, people should be wise by following God and enjoy all that God gives: food, wine, pleasure, as well as work.
This is the two-fold message of Ecclesiastes: that wisdom wins the favor of God/is bestowed by God and that humans should enjoy what they are given. Now down to the nitty-gritty details:
Ecclesiastes features both an introduction and an epilogue, with the main teaching marked on either end by the saying of the Teacher: "Vanity of vanities;" "all is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1.2; 12.8). This literary device is known as envelope structure, as the contents of the text resides within (and is informed by) the idea that "all is vanity." This could be a distressing or disappointing background, but the author of Ecclesiastes assures us that though everything is meaningless for humans, God imbues everything with meaning. Therefore, humans are to appreciate the gifts of God: food, drink, and even work, and seek knowledge by obeying God's commandments.
We read in the introduction to Ecclesiastes in the Harper Collins Study Bible that "The social, economic, and political evidence in the book points to a time of change and upheaval, of risk and possibility" - possibly around the 5th century BCE. (890). Hence there is a reaction by the author to assert that "there is nothing new under the sun." When there is upheaval, it is all part of God's cycle, which has existed and exists for all eternity. These words would offer a measure of consolation in a rapidly-changing world. As we see, "The book emphasizes the value of rationality despite the irrationality of life" (892).
Part of this rationality is established at the outset with verse that invokes the creation story. We feel the primordial rhythms: the rising and setting of the sun, the blowing of the wind (as the spirit of God blows over the waste waters in Genesis 1), and the streams running to the sea. In all this surely life and effort seem futile. The narrator remarks,
The original melody was written by Pete Seeger, but the lyrics come from Ecclesiastes 3.1-8: "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven..." There is a time for constructive acts of all sorts, as well as acts of destruction. Everything goes in cycles created by and comprehensible only to God. These resonate on earth for humans to interpret and to live by. The theology of Ecclesiastes seems to be optimistic existentialism; there is no way for humans to understand God's plan, but this is not a cause of despair:
He has made everything suitable for its time; moreover, he has put a sense of past and future into their minds, yet they cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end. I know that there is nothing better for them than to be happy and enjoy themselves as long as they live; moreover, it is God’s gift that all should eat and drink and take pleasure in all their toil.The best that humans can do it to put their faith in God and enjoy what they receive, which includes the pleasures of food and drink as well as the work that humans must do. This advice seems practical: if you are going to do something you entire life, you might as well enjoy it! But why exactly is this the message?
(Ecclesiastes 3.11-13)
The ancient Greeks had an idea of kleos, or "glory" as a way to transcend death. Men who built up kleos during their lifetime were remembered after their death as being heroic - men like Achilles.
Kleos can be seen as a means of coping with death. One who was valiant during this lifetime would live on afterward in the words of others, his story ideally passed down through the generations as the spirit of the man resided eternally in gloomy Hades.
The Hebrews did not have this same sense of honor, though the prospect of death is very similar to that of the Ancient Greeks. Rather, their lives were to be lived piously, in constant observance of God's law. The force of life was the covenant, and in a way, perhaps, the Hebrews lived on as a community through their special relationship with God. Deliverance, during the fifth to third century BCE, would happen during lifetime, if at all. Heaven was God's abode, not the eternal resting place of the faithful.
Having no great anticipation of reward after death, it is easy to see life and all its constituent parts as hevel, literally meaning "breath," "breeze," "vapor," or "mist." In the Harper Collins Study Bible translation of Ecclesiastes, hevel appears as "vanity," though the connotation is along the lines of "meaninglessness," "absurdity," "emptiness," "incongruity," or "uselessness."
How do we deal with a life bereft of meaning? We must find some meaning in it, and that meaning turns out to come from God. It is God that controls everything, and all good things that come from God should be enjoyed. Wise people understand this, and are wise because of it (a tautology that actually exists in the pages of Ecclesiastes). Therefore, people should be wise by following God and enjoy all that God gives: food, wine, pleasure, as well as work.
There is nothing better for mortals than to eat and drink, and find enjoyment in their toil. This also, I saw, is from the hand of God, for apart from him who can eat or who can have enjoyment? For to the one who pleases him God gives wisdom and knowledge and joy; but to the sinner he gives the work of gathering and heaping, only to give to one who pleases God. This also is vanity and a chasing after wind.The Israelite is to enjoy toil because toil was bestowed by God. The Israelite is also to enjoy food and wine, because this too was bestowed by God. One who pleases God is rewarded and gains wisdom and joy. One who does not please God is miserable.
(Ecclesiastes 24-26)
This is the two-fold message of Ecclesiastes: that wisdom wins the favor of God/is bestowed by God and that humans should enjoy what they are given. Now down to the nitty-gritty details:
Ecclesiastes features both an introduction and an epilogue, with the main teaching marked on either end by the saying of the Teacher: "Vanity of vanities;" "all is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1.2; 12.8). This literary device is known as envelope structure, as the contents of the text resides within (and is informed by) the idea that "all is vanity." This could be a distressing or disappointing background, but the author of Ecclesiastes assures us that though everything is meaningless for humans, God imbues everything with meaning. Therefore, humans are to appreciate the gifts of God: food, drink, and even work, and seek knowledge by obeying God's commandments.
We read in the introduction to Ecclesiastes in the Harper Collins Study Bible that "The social, economic, and political evidence in the book points to a time of change and upheaval, of risk and possibility" - possibly around the 5th century BCE. (890). Hence there is a reaction by the author to assert that "there is nothing new under the sun." When there is upheaval, it is all part of God's cycle, which has existed and exists for all eternity. These words would offer a measure of consolation in a rapidly-changing world. As we see, "The book emphasizes the value of rationality despite the irrationality of life" (892).
Part of this rationality is established at the outset with verse that invokes the creation story. We feel the primordial rhythms: the rising and setting of the sun, the blowing of the wind (as the spirit of God blows over the waste waters in Genesis 1), and the streams running to the sea. In all this surely life and effort seem futile. The narrator remarks,
What has been is what will be,God's wonders extend beyond this:
and what has been done is what will be done;
there is nothing new under the sun.
(Ecclesiastes 1.9)
the eye is not satisfied with seeingwith modern scientific knowledge, this seems quite obvious, as we know that the brain processes and stores perceptions of sight and sound. However, to the author, this idea represents something marvelous. Mundane containers generally fill up, but God-created vessels like the ocean and ears and eyes do not fill up. They have a special God-given property that allows them to keep taking in, little black holes of creation. This is a proof of God's special powers, testament to his control over all the earth. For the author of Ecclesiastes, God is in control. Rather than trying to understand God's ways, we should accept God's laws and try to be wise. While we are on this earth, we should enjoy what we are given. Even work is a gift from God.
or the ear filled with hearing.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Proverbs: Fear of the Lord
High School
My senior year of high school, I took a class called "Holocaust and Genocide Studies." The first period of the day, it started at 7:15 a.m., roughly two hours before teenagers are meant to get up. But I was fascinated by the course. Dr. Buchanan, the teacher, exposed us all to the basest atrocities of humankind and the ravages or war and genocide. A combination of history, literature, psychology, and philosophy, this was one of the few classes that left a lasting impression on me after high school. To know that humankind was capable of so much evil, and that others had endured such suffering... It changed my perspective.
One of the basic questions of the class was a simple ethical quandary: Is it all right for a person to steal a piece of bread to feed his/her starving family? A moral absolutist would assert that it is wrong to steal anything at all, and therefore it is wrong for a person to steal bread, even if his/her family will die as a consequence. The Hebrew Scriptures show us that moral absolutism is not the answer - that stealing depends upon the situation that gave rise to it.
Teaching
In any case, Proverbs gives us a lot of different teachings on the nature of wisdom and obedience. Unlike most of the text prior to this point, however, Proverbs emphasizes obeying human commands, rather than those of God. God does have a number of rules that are mentioned in Proverbs, but for the most part this is a teacher speaking to a pupil.
If we wish to read God into the bible (that is, place God in a place where he otherwise might not be easily noticed), we may do so by saying that God acts as the undercurrent for the entire book of Proverbs. In fact, obedience to God is stressed a number of times through the phrase "fear of the Lord." This appears every so often, which we might take as a constant subtle reminder that God is omnipresent. [I do not read it this way myself, but it is an interesting thing to think about.]
If we wish for examples, we have all these:
Fear is to be praised, fear causes happiness, fear is good and righteous. Fear's rewards are life and riches. It is good to have fear, but only fear of the Lord.
Teachers
We are told that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom, but we are also told this:
But in all seriousness, these are serious lessons that people should obey. Probably.
My senior year of high school, I took a class called "Holocaust and Genocide Studies." The first period of the day, it started at 7:15 a.m., roughly two hours before teenagers are meant to get up. But I was fascinated by the course. Dr. Buchanan, the teacher, exposed us all to the basest atrocities of humankind and the ravages or war and genocide. A combination of history, literature, psychology, and philosophy, this was one of the few classes that left a lasting impression on me after high school. To know that humankind was capable of so much evil, and that others had endured such suffering... It changed my perspective.
One of the basic questions of the class was a simple ethical quandary: Is it all right for a person to steal a piece of bread to feed his/her starving family? A moral absolutist would assert that it is wrong to steal anything at all, and therefore it is wrong for a person to steal bread, even if his/her family will die as a consequence. The Hebrew Scriptures show us that moral absolutism is not the answer - that stealing depends upon the situation that gave rise to it.
To show partiality is not good -Now, I am only assuming here that I am applying my ideas correctly to the biblical lesson. But this interpretation seems to make the most sense to me.
yet for a piece of bread a person may do wrong.
(28.21)
Teaching
In any case, Proverbs gives us a lot of different teachings on the nature of wisdom and obedience. Unlike most of the text prior to this point, however, Proverbs emphasizes obeying human commands, rather than those of God. God does have a number of rules that are mentioned in Proverbs, but for the most part this is a teacher speaking to a pupil.
If we wish to read God into the bible (that is, place God in a place where he otherwise might not be easily noticed), we may do so by saying that God acts as the undercurrent for the entire book of Proverbs. In fact, obedience to God is stressed a number of times through the phrase "fear of the Lord." This appears every so often, which we might take as a constant subtle reminder that God is omnipresent. [I do not read it this way myself, but it is an interesting thing to think about.]
If we wish for examples, we have all these:
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge;
fools despise wisdom and instruction
(1.7)
Because they hated knowledge
and did not choose the fear of the Lord,
...
therefore they shall eat the fruit of their way
and be sated with their own devices.
(1.29; 31)
[if you seek and accept the teacher's commandments,]
then you will understand the fear of the Lord
and find the knowledge of God.
(2.5)
Do not be wise in your own eyes;
fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.
(3.7)
The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil.
Pride and arrogance and the way of evil
and perverted speech I hate.
(8.13)
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.
(9.10)
The fear of the Lord prolongs life,
but the years of the wicked will be short.
(10.27)
In the fear of the Lord one has strong confidence,
and one's children will have a refuge.
(14.26)
The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life,
so that one may avoid the snares of death.
(14.27)
The fear of the Lord is instruction in wisdom,
and humility goes before honor.
(15.33)
By loyalty and faithfulness iniquity is atoned for,
and by the fear of the Lord one avoids evil.
(16.6)
The fear of the Lord is life indeed;
filled with it one rests secure and suffers no harm.
(19.23)
The reward for humility and fear of the Lord
is riches and honor and life.
(22.4)
Happy is one who is never without fear,
but one who is hard-hearted will fall into calamity.
(28.14)
The fear of others [or "human fear"] lays a snare,
but one who trusts in the Lord is secure.
(29.25)
Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain,
but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
(31.30)
Fear is to be praised, fear causes happiness, fear is good and righteous. Fear's rewards are life and riches. It is good to have fear, but only fear of the Lord.
Teachers
We are told that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom, but we are also told this:
The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom,Is that enough tautology for you? Getting wisdom is the beginning of wisdom. That's like saying the first step to cooking spaghetti is to cook the spaghetti.
and whatever else you get, get insight.
(4.7)
 |
| Thanks, Toothpaste for Dinner! |
 |
| Thanks, XKCD! |
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Proverbs: Obedience to Family and God
[In this introductory post I lay out some ideas that might seem contradictory to last week's analysis of Psalm 119. I am still trying to work through it. Let me know what you think!]
The Book of Proverbs is a collection of wisdom literature that is customarily attributed to Solomon in light of the tradition of his wisdom. In actuality, write Claudia V. Camp and Carole R. Fontaine in their introduction to Proverbs in the Harper Collins Study Bible: "The sages who first began to write and collect these sayings were court-and temple-based men who served as counselors, bureaucrats, and teachers during the Divided Monarchy." Editing occurred much later, in the 5th to 3rd century BCE,
"by scribes and teachers associated with the Jerusalem temple." Proverbs, Camp and Fontaine argue, therefore, "reflects the worldview of the intellectual elite." (849)
This final assertion seem plausible as we read through the book. There are no elements of the folkloric tales that inform other piece of literature, such as certain Psalms and the second account of creation in Genesis. Proverbs features neither Leviathan nor burning bush, and does not seem at all concerned with cosmology or any other aspects of the divine. The view of Proverbs is centered in human life on earth. Of course, humans are still governed by covenantal (revealed) law, but Proverbs emphasizes wisdom, which informs every aspect of life. These are not the Lord's words to his people, but the intellectual elite's words to other members - particularly children - of the elite. Hence the agent of punishment and reward is not always directly explicated by God. The ultimate duty is to God, and the authors are sure to note this, but individual expressions of duty within Proverbs may be directed toward other individuals. Reading the book piecemeal may give the impression that God is not needed at all.
I will explore this topic further in the next post. Questions, comments? Let me know below!
The Book of Proverbs is a collection of wisdom literature that is customarily attributed to Solomon in light of the tradition of his wisdom. In actuality, write Claudia V. Camp and Carole R. Fontaine in their introduction to Proverbs in the Harper Collins Study Bible: "The sages who first began to write and collect these sayings were court-and temple-based men who served as counselors, bureaucrats, and teachers during the Divided Monarchy." Editing occurred much later, in the 5th to 3rd century BCE,
"by scribes and teachers associated with the Jerusalem temple." Proverbs, Camp and Fontaine argue, therefore, "reflects the worldview of the intellectual elite." (849)
This final assertion seem plausible as we read through the book. There are no elements of the folkloric tales that inform other piece of literature, such as certain Psalms and the second account of creation in Genesis. Proverbs features neither Leviathan nor burning bush, and does not seem at all concerned with cosmology or any other aspects of the divine. The view of Proverbs is centered in human life on earth. Of course, humans are still governed by covenantal (revealed) law, but Proverbs emphasizes wisdom, which informs every aspect of life. These are not the Lord's words to his people, but the intellectual elite's words to other members - particularly children - of the elite. Hence the agent of punishment and reward is not always directly explicated by God. The ultimate duty is to God, and the authors are sure to note this, but individual expressions of duty within Proverbs may be directed toward other individuals. Reading the book piecemeal may give the impression that God is not needed at all.
For example, the prologue of Proverbs informs us:The verse informs us that the Lord is the agent of goodness, the source of all knowledge. Yet this fact seems to be obscured by verses like the following:
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge;
fools despise wisdom and instruction.
(Proverbs 1.7)
Hear, my child, your father's instruction,It seems that the father and mother bestow knowledge - and that knowledge seems to be its own reward. But this deference to parents is only part of the larger instruction of obedience of Law.
and do not reject your mother's teaching;
for they are a fair garland for your head,
and pendants for your neck.
(Proverbs 1.8-9)
I will explore this topic further in the next post. Questions, comments? Let me know below!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)