 
## Pocket Journey (1)

**by Marcel Gervais,** Emeritus Archbishop of the diocese of Ottawa, Canada

Copyright 2013, Emmaus Publications on Smashwords

This content of this book was first published in 1977 as part of the _JOURNEY_ Series By Guided Study Programs in the Catholic Faith and is now being republished in Smashwords by Emmaus Publications, 99 Fifth Avenue, Suite 103, Ottawa,ON, K1S 5P5, Canada On Smashwords

Nihil Obstat: Michael T. Ryan, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.

Imprimatur: + John M. Sherlock, Bishop of London

London, March 31, 1980

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Table of Content

Introduction

Preface to Pocket Journey (1)

Foreword to the First edition

Instructions on the use of Journey

Chapter 1 Beginnings

Chapter 1a The Great Harmony

Chapter 1b The Damaged Harmony

Chapter 1c The Collapse of Creation

Chapter 1d The Required Adjustments

Chapter 1e The Division of Nations and its Meaning

Chapter 2 The New Beginning

Chapter 2a Abraham

Chapter 2b Jacob

Chapter 2c Joseph

Chapter 3 Preparations For The Exodus

Chapter 3a Oppression in Egypt

Chapter 3b The Leader and the Lord

Chapter 3c The Passover

Appendix 1

Chapter 4 The Mighty Act of God

Chapter 4a History

Chapter 4b The Literature on the Exodus

Chapter 4c Other Selections From the book of Exodus

Chapter 5 You Shall Be My People- The Covenant

Chapter 5a The Covenant Made Through Moses

Chapter 5b The Literary Form of the Covenant Passages

Chapter 5c Bond of Communion

Chapter 6 The Law

Chapter 6a Purposes and Characteristics of the Law

Chapter 6b Love the Lord

Chapter 6c.And Your Neighbour

Chapter 6d In the Land

Appendix 2

Chapter 7 The Gift of the Land

Chapter 7a Life in the desert

Chapter 7b Settling in the Land

Chapter 7c The Struggle for Survival

Chapter 8 The Roots Of Kingship

Chapter 8a Samuel and Abimelech: the Old and the New

Chapter 8b Saul: the Attempt at a Compromise

Chapter 9 The Beloved

Chapter 9a David's Rise To Kingship

Chapter 9b David King of Judah and Israel

Chapter 9c David: the Beloved of Judah and Israel

Appendix3 Some Discoveries affecting CT Studies

Chapter 10 Glory and it's Consequences

Chapter 10a Solomon in All His Glory

Chapter 10b TheSignificance of the Temple

Chapter 10c A King Like the Nations

Chapter 10d The Consequences of Glory

Appendix 4

Chapter 11-Prophets In Israel

Chapter 11a Elijah

Chapter 11b Amos

Chapter 11c Hosea

Chapter 12 Prophets in Judah (1)

Chapter 12a Isaiah

Chapter 12b Micah

Chapter 13 Prophets in Judah (2)

Chapter 13a Jeremiah

Chapter 13b Zephania

Chapter 14 Prophets In Exile

Chapter 14a Exile in Babylon

Chapter 14b Ezekiel

Chapter 14c Changes in the Life of the People in Exile

Appendix 5 -Some Discoveries Affecting OT Studies

Chapter 15 Prophets In Exile

Chapter 15a I Am Doing a New Deed (Chs 40-48)

Chapter 15b My Ways Are Not Your Ways (Chs:49-55)

Chapter 16 New Directions

Chapter 16a Those Moved by the Spirit of God

Chapter 16b My Messenger

Chapter 16c The Scribes

Chapter 16d The Good Law lived by a Good Foreigner

Chapter 16e Let Them Come to Us

Chapter 16f Let Us Go To Them

Chapter 16g Directions Taken

Chapter 17 Early Wisdom

Chapter 17a The Wine of Wisdom ( Proverbs)

Chapter 17b 2TheLimits of Wisdom

Chapter 17c Human Misery and God (The Book Job)

Appendix 6- The wisdom of the ancient near east

Chapter 18 Later Wisdom

Chapter 18a Events from 400 to 200 BC

Chapter 18b Serenity or despair (Qoheleth)

Chapter 18c The Song of Songs (Canticle of Canticles or Song of Solomon)

Chapter 18d Wisdom meets the Law (Sirach)

Appendix 7 on Old Testament Canon

Chapter 19 Persecution And Hope

Chapter 19a Martyrs and Rebels

Chapter 19b Courage for the times (Book of Daniel)

Chapter 19c From freedom to oppression

Chapter 19d Hope and love (The Book of Wisdom)

Chapter 20 The Praise Of The People

Chapter 20a Origins the Book of Psalms

Chapter 20b The Psalms and worship

Chapter 20c Commentary on selected Psalms

Appendix 8

Bibliography

About the Author

"~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Introduction

## Preface to Pocket Journey (1)

The first edition of the Journey Bible Study Course was published in 1977. It was a response to the Document "Dei Verbum" of the Second Vatican Council. One of the most important recommendations to come out of that document was the recommendation that the national conferences of Bishops should make every effort to publish commentaries on the scriptures which would make the Bible accessible to the laity. Journey was the Canadian response to that recommendation.

Since its publication there have been many Bible Study Programs that have been published but Journey is perhaps the only one that follows the Bible so closely. The commentaries in Journey start with the book of Genesis and continue to follow the biblical books throughout. It is also one of the most comprehensive with selected readings from all of the books of the Bible. It is for this reason that this edition may be most valuable. Since it was directed toward the laity it is in language that can be understood by all yet the scholarship is at a level that it will be appreciated by any student of the bible.

## Foreword to the first edition of 1977

It is one journey of faith, in various stages, but one journey. The events and persons considered in these chapters are our heritage, for they are part of the one journey.

The People of God, both under the Covenant made through Moses and under the Covenant made in Jesus, wrote many books about their experiences. The Holy Spirit gave the People the gift of discerning which of these writings were, in fact, inspired by God. This process of discernment took many centuries. The result of this long process is the Bible, recognized as the Word of God.

The section of the Bible which deals with the People of God under the Covenant made through Moses, is called the Old Testament (Covenant). The word "old" is often misleading, because it can so easily be taken to mean "out of date". The fact is that the Old Testament has permanent value for us and is necessary for a proper understanding of the Covenant made in Jesus, our Lord. If we were to focus only on the New Testament, we would be like people who are satisfied to see only the last act of a play. The events, persons and ideas recorded in the Old Testament are an integral part of our history.

The scholarship used in these chapters might be labelled "standard". It is based on the results of research that is generally accepted in the Church. The positions taken in this course are basically those which are found in such standard works as the Jerome Biblical Commentary, and the Jerusalem Bible, both produced by recognized Catholic scholars.

Journey is guided, as it should be, by the teaching of the Church on the interpretation of the Scriptures. Beginning in Chapter Three, a brief commentary will be given on the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, which contains the official teaching of the Church on the Bible.

It is impossible to say everything that can be said on any passage of Scripture. In fact, it is not possible to say all the significant things which could be said. We have attempted to dwell only on things which will assist you in a general overview of the Old Testament. We have tried to avoid trivialities as much as possible.

The major difficulty encountered in any attempt to read the Old Testament is the vastness of the materials. We have developed a selection of readings from most of the books of the Old Testament. We believe that this is the most important aspect of Journey.

We are grateful to the religious communities of women and men across Canada, and to the Catholic bishops of Ontario for the confidence they placed in us and for the financial assistance which they provided to get this project underway.

Credit for conceiving of the project and for promoting it has to be given to Dr. Hans Daigeler, of the offices of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, Sister Katherine McCaffrey of the Canadian Religious Conference, Fr. Angus Macdougall of the Catholic Conference of Ontario, and Sister Jean Smith of the Canadian Religious Conference of Ontario.

There was a definite advantage in having to start out on this venture like Abraham, not knowing exactly what was to come. Had we known all that would be involved, we might not have had the courage to begin. From the day that Journey was announced, however, we received support from every part of Canada. We have been given more than enough courage to see the project through to the end.

We pray that these chapters will help you to glory in what God has done for us in the past. We hope that you will gain deeper appreciation of the great men and women God raised up for us before Jesus came. We have been encouraged by your response, and we promise to do our utmost to see to it that you, in your turn, receive strength for the journey. M. A. GERVAIS

## Instructions on the use of Journey

**Format**

Journey is a selection of readings from the Old and New Testament with commentary and exercises but in Pocket Journey we have included only the commentary. We have extracted the chapter and section objectives as well as the practice questions and of course the answers to the practice questions. Journey is a guide through the Bible, and therefore, the most important part of the program is the reading of the Bible. You can use any Bible of your choice. A Catholic Bible is preferable since not all Bibles will contain all of the books of the Bible on which we have chosen to comment. The commentary is designed to make little or no sense unless the biblical passages are read. The selections to be read in each chapter are indicated by the word READING. Before each Reading there is an introduction to the text and then after you have read the text in your bible you can read the commentary.

Three Events in the History of the People

There are three events in the history of the People of God which you must have clearly and firmly in your mind before beginning. They are the Exodus, Covenant, David, and the Exile. Read and reread this short description, share it with others, until you have it practically memorized.

Exodus: around 1250 BC.

The EXODUS is the event of liberation for a group of enslaved people in Egypt. Led by Moses, whom God called for this purpose, they fled from the oppressive conditions of Egyptian society, going through the desert in the direction of Palestine. With the Egyptian army in close pursuit, the people reached an impasse: their way was blocked by a body of water.

Just when hope seemed lost, a great and amazing thing happened. While they were completely incapable of helping themselves, God destroyed the Egyptians, enabling the People to continue their journey in peace.

The Exodus event includes the event of the Covenant when the band of emancipated slaves encountered God on the Mountain. It was then that they were formed by God into one People, his own People. God gave them a purpose, a new way of life and a promise to lead them into the land of Canaan.

This great event was the subject of much profound contemplation by thinkers and saints of later generations. It taught the People that God is the defender of the defenceless, the faithful One who " _throws down the mighty and lifts up the lowly_ " (Luke 1:52).

David: around 1000 BC.

Once they arrived in Canaan, the tribes struggled to keep their new God-given identity and to achieve unity as a nation. The unity for which they strove became a reality under DAVID. He succeeded in making one great nation out of the Northern tribes and the Southern tribes.

David went down in history as the model king who ruled justly and won the people's love and devotion. As time went on and they were subjected to kings of lesser quality and kings who were downright unjust, the People looked back to the reign of David and began to hope for another king like him, a "new David". Bethlehem, his birthplace, and Jerusalem, his city, became signs of hope in the minds of the prophets and the People.

Following the reigns of David and Solomon, the nation had split into two Kingdoms: Israel in the North and Judah in the South. After only two hundred years of independent existence, the Northern kingdom was conquered and devastated by the Assyrians.

Exile: 587-538 BC.

The Southern kingdom lasted for about four hundred years until it too was conquered. The Babylonians invaded the land, destroyed the Holy City of Jerusalem and deported tens of thousands of people to Babylonia. This was the beginning of the EXILE.

They lived in exile for about fifty years. During that time they could have been absorbed into the Babylonian culture. They were in danger of losing their identity, but they did not. The Exile was turned into a kind of "retreat", a time of profound reflection and purification of their faith.

Then God worked a new miracle for them by raising up Cyrus the Persian whose powerful armies defeated the much-hated Babylonians. He permitted the People to return to their land and rebuild their temple. This amazing turn of events came to be thought of as a "new exodus", another journey through the desert to the land which God had given to his People.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Table of Important Dates

1850 Abraham

1720 (to 1550) Hyksos rule in Egypt

1700 The patriarchs in Egypt

1250 THE EXODUS

1220 The entry into Canaan The Judges

1025 Samuel and King Saul

1000 King DAVID and the United Kingdom

King Solomon and the construction of the Temple

930 The divided kingdom (Judah and Israel)

850 Elijah Elisha

750 The prophet Amos The prophet Hosea

740 The prophet Isaiah The prophet Micah

721 The fall of the Northern Kingdom (Israel

620 The prophet Jeremiah The prophet Ezekiel

587 The fall of the Southern Kingdom (Judah)

587 --538 THE EXILE

538 Cyrus of Persia permits the return of the People to Judah

520 Construction of the second Temple

440 Nehemiah

330 Alexander the Great conquers Palestine

165 The Maccabees

## Explanation of Biblical References

A few difficulties in using your Bible.

Not all modern translations follow exactly the same numbering system for chapters and verses in every book of the Old Testament. Most translations follow the Hebrew numbering, but some follow the Greek (Septuagint = LXX). In cases where this might cause confusion we have given both references e.g. 1 Kings 4:29-34 (LXX 5:9-14).

Verse Numbering: Many of the psalms have a title preceding the first line of the psalm. (See Ps 4: " _For the choirmaster. For strings. Psalm. Of David_ ". These titles were added by editors. They are not considered part of the sacred text. Some translations omit them altogether.) Some translations number the title as verse 1 (eg. NAB), some give no number to the title and begin verse 1 with the first line of the psalm itself (eg. JB). We follow the numbering used in JB, RSV, NEB. if you use the NAB and notice that our references do not seem to be accurate, add 1 to our verse number (eg. our Ps 22:1 will be 22:2 in.NAB).

###  "~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 1-Beginnings

**Introductory Note to Chapters One to Six The Pentateuch**

The Pentateuch (from the Greek, meaning "five scrolls or books") refers to the first five books of the Bible. These five books are also called the Torah or the Law. Taken together, they form the first section of the Hebrew Bible which is divided into the Law (the Pentateuch), the Prophets (historical books and the prophetic literature), and the Writings (the Psalms and the Wisdom literature).

While tradition has attributed the authorship of the Pentateuch to Moses and while Moses is the central spokesman in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, none of these books actually claim Moses as its author.

The ancient world had a very broad notion of authorship. For example, the Psalms are attributed to David even though the Book of Psalms itself designates certain psalms to other authors (see the titles of Ps 44, 80). Similarly, the Books of Wisdom are generally attributed to Solomon even though parts of these books were actually written by other authors (see Prov 30:1). It is understandable that tradition would relate the name of Moses to the Pentateuch. The books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy have as their historical framework the life of Moses from his birth to his death. The main content of these four books focuses on the Exodus, the Covenant and the Law. Historically Moses participated as mediator in these events and all the later developments in the Liturgy (e.g. the Passover and the Covenant renewal) and in the Law find their source in what Moses said and did. And so, while these books contain laws and prescriptions that might have been written centuries after Moses, they would not have been written without him.

The Book of Genesis, because it is preparation for the other four books, is always associated with them and considered part of the Law (Torah).

The custom of referring to the first five books of the Bible as the Books or Law of Moses is thus both understandable and legitimate. This custom is reflected, for example, in Luke 24:27, 44.

Introductory Note to Chapters One and Two Sources of the Book of Genesis

Was the Book of Genesis written all at once and by the same author? After nearly 200 years of hard work, scripture scholars have developed a theory which has now gained general acceptance by almost all Catholic, Protestant and Jewish students of the Bible. This theory dates the Book of Genesis as we now have it somewhere between 550 and 450 BC, and posits that Genesis is actually a compilation of three earlier works. These three main sources of Genesis each recorded certain events concerning the world's and Israel's beginnings; a later editor, with the help of the Holy Spirit, joined them into the continuous narrative we now call the Book of Genesis.

On the basis of language and content, therefore, scripture scholars have distinguished three main traditions (sources) in Genesis: the oldest source is called the Yahwist, because he generally refers to God by the name YHWH (LORD). Because of his language and theology, the Yahwist writer is thought to have written around 950 BC; because he records traditions centered around Judah, he probably lived in the Southern section of the Promised Land. This source relates material spanning from creation to the death of Jacob in Egypt and forms the basic framework for the whole book of Genesis. When speaking of the Yahwist, scholars abbreviate his name as "J". "J", not "Y", is used because the theory was first developed by German writers whose consonant J transcribes the same Hebrew consonant as Y does for English-speaking people.

A second source is called the Elohist (abbreviated E). He is so named because he often calls God " _Elohim_ ". Situated in the North and dating somewhere in the 9th or 8th centuries before Christ, this source records material from Abraham onwards. It appears to have been joined to the J tradition rather early.

The third main source is called the Priestly tradition (P). It is so named because it emphasizes many details which would be of interest in priestly circles: the role of mediators, ritual, dates, calendars, etc. Perhaps the work of a group of authors, the Priestly tradition is usually dated during or shortly after the Exile (c.550 BC).

All three of these sources contain ancient material which has been handed on to them in both oral and written form. The dates given above suggest when the traditions as we now have them were finally written down. Sometime between 550 and 450 BC, a final editor gathered these traditions together into the Book of Genesis as we now have it.

This chapter considers the first eleven chapters of the Book of Genesis. We will divide it into five sections as follows:

\-- The Great Harmony (Gen 1 :1-2:25)

The Damaged Harmony (Gen 3:1-6:4)

The Collapse of Creation (Gen 6:5-8:19)

\-- The Required Adjustments (Gen 9:1-27)

\-- The Division of Nations and its Meaning (Gen 10:1-1 1:9)

These eleven chapters hold together to form a unit which was carefully planned in order to convey certain truths. It is important to keep this inner unity in mind. For example, it would be wrong to base our notion of sin ("original sin") solely on a few verses of chapter 3, when the author develops the notion of sin through the eleven chapters.

## Chapter 1a The Great Harmony

The first two chapters of Genesis express an ideal; they picture a great harmony of God, man, and the rest of creation. The authors are convinced that the reality they experience of disharmony, disorder, sin and lack of fidelity, CANNOT be the way God intended things to be from the beginning. Their faith in the goodness and fidelity of God leads them to conclude that God must have - in the beginning - established a harmony.

Their experience in life exposed the sacred authors not only to what is wrong in creation, but also to what is right. There is still ORDER in creation, in spite of sin. There are still many people who strive to do the will of God. It is evident that there is still goodness in man; sin has not obliterated his sense of what is right. It is also evident that the earth is still good. True, it takes a struggle to make the earth produce, but it does produce. When man follows God's law, the earth yields fruit abundantly.

Thus, in spite of disorder in the world, the inspired author with the eyes of faith and supported by concrete evidence , is able to see the Goodness of God, of man, and of the earth.

These chapters might be called a prophecy of the past. A prophet is one who sees and who proclaims things as they are, things as God himself sees them. Writing from his own point in history, the sacred author looks back to the beginning of creation and sees both what must have been and what should be now. He bases his judgment on what he knows of God.

A final word of introduction. The first eleven chapters of Genesis recount events that ranged from creation to around 1850 BC. They are thus a reflection on thousands and thousands of years in the life of mankind. It should be clear, however, that this is not a detailed history. While the inspired author used ancient sources about ancient peoples - the best material on hand - he does not pretend to give an account of the history of mankind. His primary object was more theological than historical. Thus many historical details (e.g. where Cain got his wife) did not arouse the author's concern; nor ought they to concern us.

Creation Hymn

The first eleven chapters of Genesis are generally agreed to be a compilation based on two earlier sources or traditions (see section above, The Sources of Genesis"). These two sources are called the Yahwist (J) and the Priestly (P) writers. This section (Gen 1:1-2:4) is usually attributed to the Priestly tradition (source). It was finally written as we now have it somewhere between 550 and 459 BC, but it is based on very ancient material (no one can date exactly how old). When reading this chapter, however, it is important to remember that the final version benefits not only from faith in the Exodus and Covenant, but also from the revelation received through the prophets (Isaiah, Ezekiel) and from the purification which Israel experienced during the exile. It was during the exile that the People arrived at a clear and unswerving belief in monotheism: there is only one God, other gods are nothing. It was then that Israel meditated on the importance and the joy of the Law. It was then that outward practices - and especially the observance of the Sabbath - began to be valued.

Writing from the perspective of the exile, the Priestly author answers many serious pastoral problems of the day. The People had been defeated at the hands of the Babylonians and they were undergoing a crisis of faith in the power of God. Almost despairing of the future, they had lost their sense of dignity and felt very insignificant and worthless. Seeing that the pagans prospered when they worshipped the sun, the moon and the stars, the People were tempted to do the same; they nearly abandoned their faith in the Lord. The writer thus emphasizes the greatness of God and the dignity of man.

The type of literature which we have in Gen 1 :1-2:4 is a contemplative, theological statement on the Creator and creation by a writer of great faith. In form, this passage is a hymn like poem of eight stanzas, an introductory stanza plus a stanza for each of the seven days. (See the illustration, "The Form of Gen I:1-2:4"j When reading this passage we become aware that we are dealing with a truly fine piece of literature, a work of inspiration leading more to wonder than to explanations.

Reading Genesis 1:1 - 2:4

Note: By reading aloud you will be better able to notice the development from stanza to stanza.

General Comments

Perhaps the first thing to notice about this passage is that it is structured according to the seven days of the week. The thrust of the entire poem is towards the " _Rest_ " of God. " _He rested on the seventh day after all the work he had been doing_ " (2:3). In the mind of the sacred writer the wise man of God works for six days and rests on the seventh. In poetic imagery, God is thus described as the wisest of craftsmen who works six days and then rests. It is clear that this passage is not meant to be a scientific statement on how the world was made.

The seventh day rest of God has pastoral implication. It celebrated Israelis own freedom from slavery and participation in the Lord's leisure. An Israelite would say, " _the seventh day is the day of our freedom from slavery (see Deut 5:12-15); the day we are fed to state our dignity by sharing in the 'rest' of God_ " (see Exod 20:8-1 1). Man shows his greatness by work, by conquering the earth. True. But the final dignity of the human person is the celebration of holy leisure with his Creator. (A rather important point for any people enslaved by work or the desire to produce, and who may have stopped loving stillness and wonder.) This is why our writer puts creation in the pattern of the life God has given to his people, six days of work culminating in the day of rest.

Order is the second key to this chapter. Creation is seen as the movement from disorder to order, from chaos to harmony. The author has carefully structured the poem to show this. God first creates light to work by, then he builds the " _house_ " of creation in the first three days and adds the furnishings in the last three days (see diagrams). The first five days of creation prepare the structure to be a fitting home for mankind, who is lord of creation.

Specific Comments

" _God said . . . and so it was_." Unlike the gods of the pagans, Israel's God creates without any mythological struggle. He does so through a simple word of command. This ease with which he makes all things is a sign of God's great power.

" _Evening came, morning came_." The ancient Hebrews measured their days from evening to evening, a custom reflected in our own practice of celebrating first Vespers on solemnities and Sunday Mass on Saturday evening.

" _God made the two great lights_." The Sun and Moon are not named as such; rather, they are called the bigger lamp and the smaller lamp. The author is concerned that the People will yield to the temptation to worship these heavenly bodies; indeed their names were already common as the names of gods. The inspired writer thus deliberately degrades the sun and the moon by treating them in a very prosaic manner, very unlike the accepted practice of his pagan neighbours. He separates " _light_ " from the sun and the moon (See 1 :1 and 1:1 6) to show that God alone (and not the sun and the moon) is to be thanked for the gift of light. The writer also pictured the sun and moon (called 'lamps') as being the mere servants of man, as calendars and clocks, rather than the lords of man.

" _Let us make man in our image_." The sacred author speaks here of all mankind as being in the image of God; he clearly states the equality of male and female, a revolutionary opinion at the time. The Hebrew word for image is " _selem_ " which refers to a three-dimensional "plastic" object, a duplicate, like a statue or idol. What is important is not so much WHAT the image is, rather WHY mankind is created in the image of God.

The phrase " _let them be masters_ " (rule) gives a clue. Like a viceroy representing his king in a foreign land, or like a statue (or postage stamp) which reminds the nation of the monarch, man functions in the universe as steward; he rules in the place and in the name of God. There is a further purpose: because he is in the image of God, mankind -- unlike any of the other animals - is able to have a personal relationship with God.

The " _image_ " refers to the whole, living, human being and not just to a part of him. Thus the idea that man's being in God's image refers to his intellect and will, while not wrong, is misleading because it tends to detract from the purpose of being an image: to stand for God and to relate with God.

Lest anyone misinterpret and develop a crude notion of image - that man looks like God, or that God has a physical body - the inspired author softens the expression in two ways. He adds " _in the likeness of ourselves_ " and begins with " _Let us_ ..". The word likeness (demut) is more subtle than 'selem' and means appearance or similarity. It indicates resemblance without stressing 'plastic' or tangible similarity. " _Let us_ " can be a plural of majesty or, what is more likely, it expresses a kind of deliberation between God and the heavenly court (angels). Such deliberation warns against too direct a resemblance between God and man.

_"Be fruitful and multiply_." Sexuality is viewed as a blessing from God: its purpose is clear, fertility. Fertility- often degraded by Israel's pagan neighbours - is raised to the level of participation in God's blessing and is seen as a response to his desire that mankind should multiply. There is no question at all in the mind of the semitic author: children are a blessing. Mankind is good, therefore children are a good gift from the Lord.

Food. In the concept of harmony which the author has, no living thing - that is, man and animals - should have to destroy life for food. There should be no killing at all. In the science of the time, vegetation was seen as being part of the 'earth' without an independent life of its own. Thus in vss 29-30, living things each receive their own food to eat. Man is to eat fruit and vegetables; animals are to eat grass and leaves. In the opinion of the author, both man and the animals should (ideally) be vegetarians (but see Gen 9:3, where, in the face of damaged harmony, God permits man to eat meat).

" _God saw that it was good_." This phrase is repeated six times, the last time with greater emphasis, " _very good_ " (1:31). By the use of this phrase the author is underlining God's full acceptance of all of creation. " _Very good_ " has the sense of " _perfect_ ", "exactly what l wanted", and it refers especially to the harmony, the order, the sense of great purpose that is in all of creation. While this affirmation of goodness applies first of all to creation as God intended it from the beginning, it continues to apply today to the extent that harmony and order are present in the universe and among people. God sees and affirms all the " _goodness_ " that exists. The very fact that creation continues to exist affirms God's love for it. (See Wisdom 11:24-26.)

The Sabbath Rest. It is noteworthy that God " _completed_ " his work on the seventh day; the completion of work is rest. The formula which concludes the other days ( " _evening came, morning came_ ") is missing for the seventh day. The rest of God has no end, By blessing and making the Sabbath holy, God shows that this endless rest is not for him alone. It is also for man who both shares in and prepares for the endless rest of God by his weekly observance of the Sabbath. ( " _There must still be, therefore, a place of rest reserved for God's people, the seventh-day rest, since to reach the place of rest is to rest after your work, as God did after his. We must therefore do everything we can to reach this place of rest_ " Heb 4:9-1 1.)

. The world view that was common in the ancient Near East was based on the belief that the universe (heaven and earth) was surrounded by water. The firmament was like an enormous upturned bowl, keeping the waters above the heavens from falling down on the earth. This firmament had floodgates in it, which God could open to allow the waters above to come down in the form of rain. The sun, moon and stars travelled inside the firmament.

The earth rested on pillars which were like stabilizers in the waters under the earth. Springs and lakes allowed the waters under the earth to come through.

This view appears very unsophisticated to us, but in an age without telescope or other refined instruments, it proved satisfactory. It made for a great sense of

wonder at God who controlled the chaotic waters and preserved the order of the universe. The Flood Story has God allowing this well-ordered universe to "collapse": the waters above come falling down.

Creation (Second Account

Reading Genesis 2:5-25

Note: Try to distinguish how it differs from chapter 1 in style and vocabulary. Note especially how God is presented.

The Author

This passage belongs to the work of the Yaws author (see comment on the "Sources of Genesis". Since he provides the basic framework for the Book of Genesis, it might be good to make a few preliminary remarks about the Yaws tradition or source.

It is generally agreed that the Yaws completed his work around the time of David or Solomon (950 BC?). He was a man of great faith. He believed in and deeply loved the God of the Exodus and of the Covenant, the gentle God who is concerned: He saved his People from Egypt and brought them to a good land; he gave them laws which are good. The Yahwist was convinced that if these laws had been observed, they would have made for a good and peaceful kingdom. Yet, the author knows from experience that in spite of the goodness and power of God, his laws are often disobeyed. Yet, unlike powerful kings who seek vengeance and always strive to maintain supremacy, the LORD does not kill his enemies when they oppose him and refuse to do his will. God's mercy is a much greater mystery than his justice. The all-powerful God does not kill his enemies!

The Yahwist is faced with several questions. God is good, he has man's best interests at heart, and has given such humane laws to his people, why do people disobey? What lies at the root of man's disobedience?

The Yahwist writes in a very simple, but graphic and imaginative style. Although he communicates very profound truths, they are not abstract theological principles; rather they are presented at the level of emotion. If read correctly, the Yahwist makes us respond emotionally. He wants us to be honest with our own feelings and attitudes towards God. In order that we might identify emotionally with what he writes, the Yahwist never over explains himself; he leaves things unclear, questions unresolved. He is not writing about something that happened only once. Rather, he writes about universal human experiences.

One final general remark about the Yahwist author. He uses very human language to describe God. He portrays a God who works like a potter, making man out of clay, stooping over him; a God who is concerned about man's loneliness; a God who walks in the garden; a God who `comes down' to inspect the tower at Babel (ch 11). We should not be shocked or upset by this very human way of speaking about God. The inspired author is trying to make God humanly understandable. By his warm, human description of God, he establishes a sense of intimacy and closeness.

Reading Genesis 2:5-25 Again

General Comment

The passage follows a pattern which was typical at the time of the author. You will notice that vss 5-7 describe a desert in which God makes water flow. Man is taken from (out of) this desert and placed in (into) the Garden. Man is given a commandment (vs 17). In the following chapter, man disobeys this commandment and punishment follows. This is the basic pattern of the faith of the People; the Yahwist thinks in a way typical of his own day:

The Lord took Israel out of the desert. He led them into a good land.

\- He gave them the Law.

-They disobeyed.

-They suffer the consequences.

Although they had been punished for their sins, the People of the Yahwist's day were prospering under David and Solomon. God's mercy far outweighs his justice.

Specific Comments

Eden in the East (2:8). A mysterious place, impossible for us to locate. The image given is that of a well groomed oasis in the desert, a cultivated garden prepared by God.

The Water. For desert people abundance of water means abundance of life. The detailed description of the water courses, of gold, jewels and other precious things emphasizes the abundant goodness of the Garden and the generosity of God.

The Two Trees. The tree of life symbolizes that, while immortality is not native to man, it is within his reach in so far as he may eat of the tree of life.

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil. By naming the two extremes of anything - good, evil; night, day; east, west; sunrise, sunset - the semitic author includes all that comes between: such expressions mean ALL. The " _knowledge of good and evil_ " is ALL knowledge, including supra-human knowledge which is beyond what is due to man as a creature. The command of vs 16 must be seen in relation to vs 9 which describes the generous abundance of trees, " _enticing to look at and good to eat_ "; of all of these, only one is excepted. The command, then, is not a severe threat, but a gentle warning, a warning which, however, remains unexplained. Man obeys, not because he understands the command, but because he trusts the Lawgiver; obedience requires trust. Still, he has good reason to trust; he is surrounded by endless proof of God's generous love.

This unexplained command is meant to elicit an emotional response from the reader. Why in the midst of such superabundant generosity to man does God declare - for no apparent reason - that a single tree is off-limits for man? Writing from a psychological point of view, the inspired author does not attempt to explain God's action. He allows the reader to feel whatever he wants. How do you feel about it?

_It is not good for man to be alone_ (vss 18-24). God's unexplained command is immediately followed by a beautiful expression of his loving concern. This passage (vss 18-24) gradually builds up to the creation of woman and the institution of marriage. It is deliberately structured in order to create suspense and to emphasize the creation of woman.

The passage begins with a search for a suitable companion for the man. This introduction makes it perfectly clear that woman is not inferior to man. Unlike the animals - none of whom provided suitable companionship for man - the woman is not named by the man (to name means to rule). Rather he cries out in delight when he beholds her.

The sleep Adam experiences is not the sleep of an anaesthetic, but the sleep of mystery. When God does something which is very profound or mysterious man is unable to look on; God acts in mystery while man quietly sleeps (see for example, Gen 15:12; 28:16).

The rib is a general sort of word, and it is better not to focus on mere anatomy. The important point is that God takes PART of man and fashions it into the woman. Not only is

the woman clearly of the same nature as the man, but the man is incomplete without her -a part of him is missing.

Like the father of the bride, or like the ancient friend of the bridegroom, God leads the woman to man. The man greets her with a joyful exclamation, the first love song in the Bible. He recognizes that woman, unlike the animals, is his equal since she is like him. In

Hebrew, as in English, vs 23 has a play on the words " _man_ ' (ish) and " _woman_ " (ishah).

Vs 24 concludes the little narrative by reflecting on the natural attraction of male for female, the attraction so powerful that they are even able to leave the security of their families for the love of each other. This attraction is something experienced not only in paradise but in everyday human existence. Because, as the verses above pointed out, man is incomplete without woman, this attraction is quite understandable. That " _two become one flesh_ " (a reference to the child which crowns the union of love) is another of the generous gifts of God.

_Naked without shame_. The man and woman are able to look at themselves as God made them, with all the limitations of creaturehood. They are quite satisfied with what they see. Their comfort with their own nakedness and sexuality is an expression of human approval of creation. Like God, they are able to judge that what God made is " _very good_ " (Gen 1:31). By this expression the sacred author is also underlining an ideal of mutual acceptance between husband and wife, an acceptance based on an inner sense of worth.

Concluding remarks on the "Great Harmony"(Gen 1:1-2:25)

In these first two chapters of Genesis, the sacred authors reflect on the overwhelming evidence of the goodness of God shown in the order of creation and in his loving plan. From the beginning it has been God's intention that a great harmony should exist between God and his favourite creature, mankind. This harmony must extend to relationships between people - the command to dominate (Gen 1:28) does not apply to one's fellow men. Male and female are to live in harmony; they are to be mutually dependent and comfortable with their creatureliness. Mankind's relationships with the rest of creation should also reflect harmony. All life - whether of an animal or of man - should be respected; there should be no killing. Man is to be the faithful steward who tills the soil, masters the earth, rules all the animals. Yet, although he is earthly, man is related to God; called to be at ease with God, man has the earth as his sphere of activity.

By seeing things as they should be, in harmony, man is able to see God as he is. He is a God of power. He is full of Goodness; he sees what is good. He is generously concerned for man (he gives him a day of rest). For completely unselfish reasons he gives the woman to the man to be his equal partner. All these good things form the basis for man's acknowledgment of the generosity and trustworthiness of God.

The reader is left with an extremely positive impression of the goodness of God, of mankind, of the earth.

## Chapter-1b The Damaged Harmony*

We will deal with this section in two parts:

\- Man and Woman, God and Earth (Gen 3)

-The Serpent

-The Genesis of Sin

-The Effects of Sin

\- God's Reaction to Sin

-Other Dimensions of Sin (Gen 4:1-6:4) -- Envy and Murder (Gen 4:1-16)

\- Cruelty and Vengeance (Gen 4:23-26) - Supreme Arrogance (Gen 5:1-6:4)

*The Christian doctrine on original sin, while it has its foundations in these chapters, is more properly the subject of theology than of exegesis. The development of the doctrine of original sin as we know it began to take concrete shape about the time of St. Augustine (4th century) and remains to this day the topic of lively discussion. We would advise individuals and groups studying this chapter to focus their attention on the content of these eleven chapters and to resist the temptation to discuss current interpretations of original sin.

Man and Woman, God and Earth

At the risk of offending, we want to remind you that the sacred author of this chapter is a writer; he is giving us literature. In giving us this passage, the Holy Spirit worked through a most gifted writer. He writes simply but profoundly, no words are wasted in any line. It deserves attention.

In the history of the Church more has been written on these 25 verses than on probably any other passage of the Bible. And still much more could be written. It is a sign of extraordinarily fine literature when its meaning is never quite exhausted.

Our author here is the same one who gave us the preceding passage about the creation of Man and Woman and the Garden. Remember what was said about him above: he is a man of faith. He believes in the LORD who took his people out of Egypt, who gave them a good law to live by, and a rich land to live in. The LORD has bound himself to his people by a Covenant and has shown himself to be a forgiving God, merciful beyond understanding. He does not strike dead those who disobey him. Many who disobey him walk around as healthy as can be.

Remember also that the Man and the Woman have been presented to us as surrounded with the signs of God's goodness to them, just as the People of God had been surrounded with his blessings. The Man and the Woman have also been given a law (not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge); presumably this law, which was not explained by the writer, is as good as everything else God has done for the Man and the Woman. They are expected to trust that the law is good, just as the People of God of the writer's day had to trust that the Law of God was good, even though they might not understand it completely.

What is the subject of this passage? Clearly, it is sin. Our author knows, just as we know that sin is disobedience against God. The sacred writer, however, is not going to be satisfied with a superficial answer. He wants to probe much more deeply into the dark mystery of sin: not sin in general, but the sin of those who have a knowledge of God and still disobey him. What makes such people sin? What happens to them when they turn from God? What lies at the root of rebellion against God? His answers are as much psychological as they are theological.

Keep in mind as you read this passage, that the sacred writer is dealing not only with sin at the beginning, but also with sin from the beginning. The Man and Woman, therefore, do not stand only for our first parents who sinned, but also for the people of the author's day, and they stand for us as well. What is described as happening to them, is what happens to us today when (God forbid) we sin.

Reading Genesis 3:1-24

The Serpent

Often in scripture, and certainly in the description of the fall of mankind, the sacred author wants to communicate on a level deeper than mere prose can express: and so he employs images, poetry, symbols. As a symbol to introduce the fall of mankind, the sacred author chose the serpent. Is this a good symbol? Yes, for several reasons.

First, almost universally, people have a similar feeling about snakes and serpents. We admire the way they move; their smooth gliding gives us the impression that they are sly, cunning, "sneaky". There is a certain amount of beauty in the serpent's eyes; he even appears intelligent. Jesus himself refers to this popular belief that snakes are clever (Matt 10:16). The sacred author thus uses the serpent as the vehicle to introduce some very cunning and subtle remarks about the origin of sin.

The serpent is a good image for a second reason. Traditionally, from ancient times, the serpent has been admired because it sheds its skin and seems to renew itself year by year. It became a sign of life and the symbol of healing, a belief still witnessed by the emblem of the medical profession. This view is also reflected in the story of Moses and the bronze serpent(Num 21).

Finally, when the People of God ended their desert wanderings and entered the promised land, the first temptation facing them was to participate in Canaanite worship which included cultic prostitution. The pagan inhabitants of the land felt they could ensure the fertility of their crops by re-enacting in sacred ritual the sexual intercourse of the gods. Their ritual often employed the symbol of the serpent and associated it with women, the cult prostitutes. The People of God did, in fact, give in to the temptation to participate in the pagan ceremonies, thus breaking the Law of the LORD. The serpent became a symbol of sin.

At the time of the sacred author, then, the symbol of the serpent would have been very meaningful to his readers. The image allows him to make some very subtle statements about the genesis of sin. He is also able to have the serpent suggest that he is offering life. Finally, the author's fellow Israelites would recall the sin of cultic prostitution.

Traditionally, the serpent here has been seen as a symbol of Satan. While this is acceptable, it should not be exaggerated too much. We must be careful not to read into the text our own idea of Satan, something which developed later.

The sacred author then describes the fall of the man and the woman.

The Genesis of Sin

The serpent suggests that if one tree is excepted, mankind is not able to eat of all the trees in the garden (vs 1). He proposes that it is possible that God has placed them among thousands of fruit trees and forbidden them to eat any fruit. He pictures God as demanding unreasonable things: like a despotic ruler, unanswerable to anyone, such a God could force mankind to do whatever he wishes. Such a God would be unconcerned about man; his greatest care would be that he is obeyed.

The woman enters into dialogue with the serpent (vs 2). She would have done better to ignore him, to drive him away, or to defend her faith in the LORD's goodness.

She begins to fall for the serpent's argumentation. Without denying the possibility that God could make inhuman demands, she states the facts by quoting God's command, but she makes the command more severe than God himself did (" _nor touch it_ "). By this exaggeration the command begins to appear unreasonable and its violation more justifiable.

Seeing the woman's weakness, the serpent confronts her openly (vss 4-5), portraying God as selfish, conceited, greedy for power, commanding only to keep mankind 'down', preventing mankind from attaining greatness (" _like gods'_ ).

Ignoring God's superabundant generosity, the woman concentrates on the one thing forbidden. Her vision becomes more and more distorted. The forbidden fruit appears progressively more attractive - tasty to eat, beautiful to behold, beneficial for knowledge (vs 6).

Almost as an anticlimax, she plucks and eats the fruit. By this time the sin has become inevitable.

She is not alone in her sin. Her husband is " _with her_ " (vs 6) as the Hebrew text clearly states, although some translations omit this phrase. He eats of the fruit too.

The command they have disobeyed is broader than not eating from a particular tree. Rather, they have refused to be what God meant them to be, that is, creatures, which means not having a knowledge of all. By attempting to be more than creatures, they have refused to accept creaturehood and the Creator. This is at the root of all sin.

The Effects of Sin

The results of disobedience are immediate. They notice their nakedness. No longer content to be creatures with the limitation that implies, they are ashamed of their bodies and cover themselves. This dissatisfaction with themselves as they are is the first " _death_ " they undergo as an effect of sin.

Sin causes an irrational and unfounded fear and shame. In spite of the fact that God appears with the gentleness of a cool breeze after a long hot day, the man and woman run and hide themselves (vs 8).

Sin causes alienation when the man transfers the guilt of the sin to God (vs 12). (Read this verse aloud, putting the accent on " _you_ "). By betraying his wife the man shows that sin also separates him from his fellow human beings. Far from being joined in solidarity against God, sinners are also alienated from others. This verse, along with those which follow (vss 12-20), says a lot.

Man is created for relationships; he is truly fulfilled when properly related to God as creature to Creator, to his fellow (wo)man as a partner, and to the rest of creation - the earth as steward.

Sin attacks these orderly relationships. By refusing to accept his proper relationship to God - that of a creature - man also destroys the order in his relationships with his fellow men and the earth.

The `curses' which follow, then, are not so much punishment meted out by God for sin as they are the inspired author's description of the disorder which inevitably flows from sin.

Man's relationship with his fellow man is disordered by sin. He betrays his partner (woman) and even rebukes God for creating her (vs 12). What a contrast to his exclamation of delight at her creation (2:23)! He dominates the woman (vs 16) and gives her a name as he did for the animals (compare vs 20 with 2:19). Even the beautiful event of bringing forth new life is marred for the woman; she suffers not only physical pain but, what is worse, also the humiliation of being dominated by a man who treats her as inferior (vs 16).

Man's relationship with the earth is disordered too (vss 17-18). The land is God's gift to man and working it is man's task; yet the disorder of sin makes this task a bitter struggle. The harmony of God, man and earth has been seriously damaged.

God's Reaction to Sin

In the midst of sin, the Lord remains full of loving mercy. God does not strike the sinner dead. Far from appearing as a stern judge, he peacefully walks in the garden as a gentle father, a kind friend; he gently calls out to the man (vss 8-9). He gives the man and the woman a chance to defend themselves (vss 1 1-13), a privilege denied to the serpent, however. As an act of mercy he fashions leather garments for them (vs 21). Even the expulsion from Eden is motivated, not by wrath, but by love. Realizing that man has sinned, has rejected his creaturehood, has - ironically - become like God who knows good and evil (vs 22), God does not want to leave him in his misery forever. Lest man eat of the tree of life and thus face an eternity of torture, the merciful Lord bars him from the garden. The 'trial' scene thus ends with God taking pity on his sinful creatures.

The chapter, then, has a message of hope in the midst of the chaos of sin. The harmony of man with God, his fellowmen, and the earth, is damaged but not completely annihilated. There will be a constant struggle, but order will prevail. In this connection, re-read verse 15.

Christian tradition has interpreted this verse as a reference to the struggle between man and sin, a struggle which Christ finally wins.

Other Dimensions of Sin

The author introduces a new narrative to illustrate the consequences of sin. He expands his thesis that once God is distrusted and sin been unleashed, once disharmony has entered the world, conditions become gradually worse.

Reading Genesis 4:1-16

Like Adam and Eve, Cain refuses to accept things as they are (creaturehood); he refuses to let God be God. God's favouring of Abel over Cain is not explained; nor should we try to explain the mystery of God's election. The fact is, God has not totally and unfairly rejected Cain (he even encourages him to conquer his jealousy, vss 6-7), even though he does not favour his sacrifice. Cain distrusts God, will not allow God freedom to bestow favour. He thinks God should follow human standards which prefer the firstborn son to his younger brothers (ironically, Cain himself ignores the human rule that the elder son should protect the others). Envy - concentrating on the one thing not granted him - and the subsequent murder, hardens Cain's heart. He lacks pity for his brother. He refuses to acknowledge his crime; he never owns up to his guilt. Disorder in man's relationship with the earth intensifies; the farmer Cain abandons the rebellious earth and becomes a nomad. He wanders far from the LORD. Yet the narrative ends on a note of hope. Strangely and contrary to the reader's expectation, God does not kill sinners. He protects Cain and vows vengeance on anyone who would harm him. The mystery of God's mercy far exceeds his justice.

Cruelty and Vengeance

With the story of Lamech, the horror of sin is expanded - his song of revenge is full of the cruelty and vengeance which marks the hardened sinner.

Reading Genesis 4:23-26

The merciful LORD does not kill sinners. Perhaps the most horrible consequence of this is that man takes advantage of God's mercy. He not only presumes to take vengeance on those who harm him (something God reserves to himself - 4:15), but he does so with astounding cruelty and intensity. (Does Lamech's seventy-sevenfold vengeance perhaps inspire the generous forgiveness urged by Jesus in Matt 18:22?)

God does not reply to the sinful boast of Lamech; he does not give him a trial and a chance to defend himself as Adam and Cain had. By his abusive attitude Lamech bars himself from reconciliation. Yet the passage still ends with a sign of hope (vs 26). Life goes on and Seth receives a son named Enosh (which means the same as " _Adam_ "-mankind), who worships the LORD. True worship of God can coexist with sin as great as that of Lamech.

Note: This listing of the descendants of Adam (Gen 5:1-32), forms a bridge to the flood narrative. Like most similar lists in the Pentateuch, it comes from the Priestly writer. Its basic purpose is to show that with each succeeding generation, mankind spread through the world.

Do not become overly concerned about the ages of the patriarchs. Ancient peoples often ascribed extremely long lives to great men; some kings were said to have lived 10,000 years, clearly a symbolic number. The number of years given here seems to be symbolic too, but no one knows for certain how to interpret the symbolism. (In fact, different ancient manuscripts of the Bible record varying ages). Note, however, that the ages get less as mankind moves away from creation and sin develops.

Supreme Arrogance

The sacred author makes one final statement about the wickedness of mankind with a mysterious little story about a marriage between mankind and heavenly beings.

Reading Genesis 6:14

The mythological histories of many pagan nations proudly claimed intercourse between their ancestors and the gods. The Yahwist writer, however, views this event as a final step in the development of sin; it is mankind's ultimate refusal of creaturehood. The desire to be divine is a horrible insult to the Creator who made man good. This refusal to be satisfied with creaturehood forces God to a drastic solution. If the supreme creature (man) refuses to acknowledge his creatureliness, refuses to love his Creator, all of creation is meaningless. The stage is set for the Flood.

## Chapter-1c The Collapse of Creation

Legends of a primeval universal flood exist among ancient peoples throughout the world, from the semites of the Middle East to the native peoples of North America. Often full of mythology and differing greatly from each other in details, all these legends seem to testify to some catastrophic disaster in very ancient times.

The inspired writer, however, does not include this legend for mere historical purposes. Rather, in the face of the common belief by just about everyone in a universal flood, he is faced with a serious pastoral problem. He has consistently maintained - and he truly believes - that God does not kill sinners. Even when confronted by hardness and abusive behaviour on the part of men, God remains full of love and mercy.

The dilemma which the sacred author faces then, is to explain how God, who is merciful, could have caused a universal disaster, and would God do such a thing again?

The author interprets the flood in the introductory and concluding section.

Reading Genesis 6:5- **8 (introduction)**

Keep in mind that these verses were written some 3,000 years ago. The author's way of speaking of God might not be our way. He (J) has a very simple and human way of speaking of God; he has God walking in the garden, putting a sign on Cain's forehead, having supper with Abraham, wrestling with Jacob. In the flood narrative he has God, merciful and tolerant as he is, coming to an end of his patience with sinful mankind. Sin had become a universal fact; men had refused to accept their creaturehood, had abused God's mercy, and had presumed to claim divine ancestry. The author describes God as being heavy with grief and disappointment when he decides to bring about the destructive flood. The flood is not an act of vengeance, lightly and quickly brought about. God, however, cannot destroy completely; he finds a man who will be the beginning of a new start.

Reading Genesis 8:20-22 **(conclusion to the flood)**

At the end of the flood God resolves never to bring about such a disaster on account of the sinfulness of mankind. He promises to give it seasons and stability in spite of sin. God had good reasons for bringing about the flood, but he will never do it again. In his very human way of speaking about God, the sacred author has God first regretting that he had made man, then regretting having brought about such destruction and promising never to act that way again. It is as though the author were saying that God had learned to contend with the sinful situation of mankind and was now determined to make the best of it.

## Chapter 1d The Required Adjustments

Sin is a reality and God has determined to contend with it. Man too, must learn to contend with the situation of sin in the real world; he cannot pretend that sin does not exist and strive for the implementation of ideals as though the "great harmony" were a full reality.

Reading Genesis 9:1-17

Note the references to Gen 1:26-28

The author (P) referring to the commands of God in his account of creation, now shows God helping man to cope with the fact of sin. The high ideals of the holiness of all living things that led him to support vegetarianism must now give way to the taking of the life of animals for food. The random killing of animals for pleasure is not justified here - the ideal is adjusted, not obliterated. If the life of animals is holy, so much more is the life of man. Even the life of man can be taken, however, in order to curb violence; a murderer shall have to pay with his own life. With strong and poignant irony, the sacred author shows that the " _image of God_ " in man now gives him authority even over human life. Even in this world of sin, man is created in the image of God.

The next section (vss 18-27) is basically a statement about the three main divisions of the nations which developed after the flood. In this story, however, the author (J) returns to the theme of nakedness which he introduced in his creation account (2:25).

Reading Genesis 9:1827

Before sin, being naked and unashamed was a sign of accepting one's creaturehood as good. With the existence of sin and the advent of disharmony, nakedness takes on a different dimension. Nakedness has to be contended with by the use of clothing (the fig leaves, the leather aprons made by God). Ham (Canaan) is condemned in this passage for his lack of respect for the nakedness of his father. The great respect shown by the other sons is praised.

## Chapter 1e The Division of Nations and its Meaning

Step by step the sacred author has thus far traced the development of sin as it is expressed in

\- man's relationship to God.

-the relationship of man and woman.

-the relationship between brothers.

\- the relationship between man and society.

\- the arrogance of peoples claiming divine ancestry.

Now, to conclude his treatment of sin, he deals with sin as it is expressed in the relationships between nations.

First he lists the nations which have multiplied and filled the earth (Gen 10:1-32). They are disordered, speaking different languages, unable to communicate, warring against each other (a painful reality as evident to us as it was to him).

Secondly, he provides a lens through which to view this reality - the story of the Tower of Babel. In the author's day, the very choice of Babylonia (Shinar) would have evoked a certain image in the mind of the reader. Babylonia had been a large empire which attempted to dominate the world. It was noted for its impressive architecture, especially for its ziggurats (towers).

Reading Genesis 11:1-9

The common language spoken by all men presents an ideal of how things must have been and should be now. Yet the present reality contradicts this ideal. Why? Because men arrogantly begin to build a tower, without any reference to God (who is not mentioned in vss 1-4). They use man-made materials - bricks and bitumen. The purpose of their enterprise is that they might not be scattered. They have attempted to establish unity without God. Such a people, united but godless, suggests the cruel and aggressive empires of the past as well as the Nazi aggression of our own day. With delightful sarcasm, the author describes how God " _comes down_ " to inspect the " _great_ " tower; all this vain effort of man seems insignificant to God. The LORD confuses their language and scatters the people throughout the world. It is better that people be divided than that they be united without God: " _This is but the start of their undertakings_." (vs 6).

In each of the previous stories a note of mercy was always introduced - God clothes Adam and Eve; he gives Cain a protective sign; he reminds us of true worship after Leech; he saves Noah from the flood. But here, at the Tower of Babel, we are left without a clear note of mercy. The author concludes with a picture of scattered nations, unable to communicate properly and therefore divided against one another. He concludes with his eyes on the whole world and all its nations. Does God have any concern for all the nations? Will he do anything about the state of the world?

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

Chapter 2- The New Beginning

Historical Background

The alluvial plain of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers had been the scene of continual power struggles. The magnificent Third Dynasty of 'Ur (2060 - 1950) had fallen in ruins Akkadians. Meanwhile, a seminomadic people, called Amorites, were on the move.

There were large migrations of people within the Fertile Crescent in those days. Abraham's family could well have been among these migrating Amorites. Abraham's ancestors had lived in Ur. They had moved from there to Haran where Abraham settled (Gen 11:31; see map on inside front cover).

But neither God nor the times were for settling down. People were still on the move. How Abraham experienced his call we will never know in detail, but experience it he did. He was asked to pull up the roots which had begun to grow, and to move to a land that God would show him.

Note: Ancient documents discovered by archaeologists reveal some interesting things about this period: 1) many of the customs that are found in the stories of the patriarchs, Abraham. Isaac and Jacob, are similar to the customs written about in the documents. This indicates that the stories of the patriarchs reflect very old traditions. 2) the name Hebrew could come from a group called " _apiru_ " or " _habiru_ " The " _apiru_ " were a social class; a kind of homeless, wandering class of people living on the edges of society, hiring themselves out for work, easy victims of exploitation. We might call them migrant workers. It is possible that the " _apiru_ " were from roughly the same racial background. Often when the word " _Hebrew_ " is used in the early books of the Bible it has the ring of a lower class title; it is almost an insult (see Gen 39:14ff).

He wandered south to Canaan, moving through the central hill country of Canaan with his sheep and goats, finding pasture and water where he could, living on the fringes of the cultivated land. He spent time in southern Canaan (in the area that would later be Judah).

It seems that droughts and famines were fairly common in Canaan. When these threatened, Abraham moved on to Egypt where the Nile always assured a supply of water. A move to Egypt would be rather easy as Egypt controlled most of Canaan at that time.

Abraham wandered most of his life. He had to live by faith in the promises made to him by God. He never saw them realized in his lifetime, except that he did have a son, and this son was the beginning of the fulfilment of the promise that he. Abraham, would be the father of a great nation. As to the " _promised land_ ", the closest he ever got to having the land is the grave that he bought for his wife (Gen 23). When he died, Abraham was buried beside Sarah.

Isaac, of whom very little is remembered, got his wife from the land of his ancestors. Haran. And so did Jacob. The wandering life of Abraham was continued by his descendants.

Jacob and his descendants found their way to Egypt; again it was drought and possible famine that forced them to go there. They settled in Egypt for a long time, for centuries, in fact.

The Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, represent a faith in God which was ahead of its time. They lived by trust in the promises of God. God was their guide. We must not, however, imagine them to be completely disconnected from their times. The religion of the Patriarchs had much in common with the religion of the peoples among whom they lived. God was seen by them to be the " _God of the Fathers_ ", a family God who wandered with his children. We should not be surprised to find the Patriarchs using the shrines of the Canaanites. They used some of the same names and titles for God that were in use by others at the time: " _El_ ", " _Elyon_ ", " _El Shaddai_ ".

We should also remember that the Patriarchs lived by what was considered just and right in the culture of their day. We need to remind ourselves that Abraham did not even have the Ten Commandments, and he certainly did not have the Sermon on the Mount.

The history of Egypt was very active in this time. Beginning around 2000 BC and for a century or so afterwards, Egypt enjoyed a great flowering of culture and power. But this did not last. There were internal problems in the country, and struggles for power left it weak and unprepared to defend itself against the invaders who had overrun Syria and Canaan and were bent on conquering Egypt. The invaders with advanced military weapons (they seem to be the first to use horses and chariots for war), took control of Egypt. They were called Hyksos ("rulers of foreign countries"), and began to rule over Egypt in 1720 BC.

The Hyksos were partly Semitic in origin. Jacob and his descendants were Semites of course. It could be that the Hyksos rulers of Egypt would have welcomed the descendants of Jacob the more foreigners in Egypt, the better. Their presence in Egypt might explain what lies behind Joseph's rise to power there.

The Egyptians, however, never accepted these foreign rulers, the Hyksos. We might say that nationalism and the desire to be masters of their own country made the Egyptians forget their own internal disputes. They united against the Hyksos and overcame them in 1 550 BC, regaining their independence after almost two hundred years of subjection to the foreigners. This period in Egyptian history is called the New Kingdom. The first several centuries of this New Kingdom saw Egypt stronger, its control of other territories more vast, its culture and religion more elaborate than ever before. Magnificent temples, palaces, storehouses, and whole cities were constructed.

The shift from the rule of the Hyksos to native Egyptian rule might also explain the change of attitude towards the Hebrews. For many generations the descendants of Jacob had lived rather peacefully in Egypt (possibly under the Hyksos); but a change came and they began to be seen as dangerous. A Pharaoh " _who did not know Joseph_ " came to the throne and he used the Hebrews as slaves for his building projects.

## Chapter 2a Abraham

**Introduction**

The previous chapter ended without hope. We were left with the picture of all the nations of the world, scattered and divided. Against this backdrop, the sacred author records how God chose one man, Abraham, and called him so that he would become a blessing for all the nations of the world.

Abraham is the new beginning in a disturbed world, our world. God accomplishes in him what should have been accomplished from the beginning. Abraham is asked to obey a command more severe than the first man, but unlike Adam, Abraham obeys. Unlike the elder brother, Cain, who should have cared for his brother, but killed him instead. Abraham cares for, defends and saves the life of his nephew Lot. Lamech recklessly sought revenge on those who slighted him; Abraham not only saves the life of his nephew who chose all the good land and left him with the poorest, but he also intercedes for the lives of sinners. Abraham is a new beginning, the successful beginning of God's plan to save mankind. With him things begin to go as God intends.

As you read the chapters on Abraham (Gen 12-23), you will probably notice that some episodes seem to occur twice. You will notice, for example, that the incident of Abraham and Sarah with the Pharaoh in Egypt (12:10-20) is basically the same as the incident with Abimelech (20:1-18). To help you understand these 'doublets', as they are called, it would be good to recall what was said of the "Sources of the Book of Genesis" at the beginning of Chapter One. Because he was so important, stories about Abraham were circulated and handed down, not by one group of the People of God, but by many different groups. Over the centuries, the same incident was retold thousands of times. It is not surprising that different groups could end up inheriting somewhat different versions of the same incident. The sources, or traditions (J,E,P) referred to in Chapter One, represent collections of materials on Abraham coming from different groups in the People. As a result, when the editors put these sources together to form the final text of the Book of Genesis, they found themselves sometimes with more than one version of a given episode in the life of Abraham. Rather than throw one away, showing disregard for a source or tradition precious to many, they preserved them both and wove them into the narrative. Such is the explanation of the 'doublets' which best suits the facts as far as we know them today.

In our commentary we will he drawing out some of the main themes which run through the chapters dedicated to Abraham. The sacred authors have united all the stories of Abraham by emphasizing the promises of God and the response of Abraham. God promises land, countless descendants and blessings, Abraham obeys God and believes in the promises. His faith, however, does not give him full understanding. Gradually he learns to understand and God clarifies the promises. In the process Abraham emerges as the model of humanity, obeying (loving) God and serving his neighbour. The sacred authors also develop the character of Abraham through a 'subplot' which focuses around his nephew Lot. The narrative is so constructed as to sustain interest — the fulfillment of the greatest promise (descendants) is left to the end of the narrative.

Note: We will ask you to read the Abraham passages one by one. We hope that you will have the leisure to savour their beauty. If you lack time, you may omit the passages marked (0) without losing the essence of the chapter.

Commentary

In Gen 12:1-2 God commands Abraham to do a very difficult thing and he promises him land, blessings and descendants. Abraham believes in God's promises and obeys him without question. The sacred author ties this passage with the story of the Tower of Babel: the " _let us_ " of the nations at Babel becomes God's " let us make a name for ourselves" of Babel becomes God's " _I will make your name great_ ".

Reading Genesis 12:1-4

God takes the initiative and Abraham responds without hesitation. God asks Abraham to make a radical change in his life, asks him to uproot himself and to become a wandering semi-nomad. In these few verses the sacred author draws the bold outline of the true man of God, the man who trusts his Lord and hopes in his promises. God promises him land, and many descendants and he tells Abraham that he will become a blessing for the " _tribes of the earth_ ". Abraham is not chosen for himself alone, but for the sake of the nations. It is through his chosen one, Abraham, and his descendants, that God intends to bring to the world what it needs. The nations scattered at Babel receive, in Abraham, their sign of hope.

In the next passage, Abraham, following the Lord's directives, arrives in Canaan and is told that this is the land which his descendants (not he personally) will receive. He worships the Lord there. This is the first act of worship in the "new age" which began with Abraham.

Reading Genesis 12:5

Famine forces Abraham to leave the land of Canaan and to go to Egypt. He tricks Pharaoh in order to save his own life. He is blessed with riches.

Reading Genesis 12:10-20

This paradoxical little story praises the beauty of the ancestress (so beautiful that even the all-powerful Pharaoh takes notice of her). Seeing more deeply into the tradition, the sacred author uses the story to say something more profound. While Abraham is shown as model of faith (12:1-4), his faith needed to be purified. As bearer of the promise he tries to be certain that he stays alive. He deceives the Pharaoh, but is blessed with riches. This is the first of several human attempts to ensure that the promises of God are fulfilled. While he shows admiration for the cleverness of Abraham, the sacred author does not attempt to justify the morality of what he did.

In Gen 13:1-18 Abraham is back in the land of promise. He surrenders the best section to Lot. The promise of descendants renewed.

Reading Genesis 13:1-18

Abraham, as elder of the two, has the right to the first choice of the land; he gives up the right to Lot who selfishly takes the best part. Abraham is not only a man of faith, but also a man of generosity. His generosity rests on the promise that God will give him land; he thus feels free to give Lot the choice (If you compare vs 10 with vs 15 you will notice how the sacred author points out that Lot " _chose_ " the land but God will " _give_ " it to Abraham).

In Gen 14:1-24 Abraham saves Lot: he is a " _blessing_ "for, but he himself is blessed by Melchizedech.

Reading Genesis 14:1-24

This unusual passage about the four kings pictures Abraham as a warrior defending Lot. Again he differs from Cain — Cain had feared for his own life, but here the elder is ready to sacrifice himself for the younger.

He is honoured and blessed by a king-priest Melchizedech. As king of Jerusalem (future site of the Temple), as a priest of the Most High God even before the levitical priesthood was established, and as one who received tithes from Abraham, the mysterious Melchizedech fascinated later readers. Tradition saw him as a type of the Messiah (Ps 110); we consider him as a figure of Christ's priesthood (Heb 7) and the bread and wine of this incident as a foreign of the Eucharist. He is mentioned in the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I).

In Gen 15:1-21 Abraham proposes a way to have the promise of descendants fulfilled. But God makes a covenant with Abraham and clarifies the promise.

Reading Genesis 15:1-21

Abraham proposes a human solution to the problem surrounding the promise of descendants. He has no son and proposes to formally adopt one of his servants as his legal heir. God clarifies the Promise but not completely: the inheritor of the promise will be a natural son of Abraham himself and not one who is adopted. Abraham's response is one of complete trust and renewed faith in the promise of God, even though he still has no evidence of when or how it will be fulfilled. It is this trust and trust alone which makes Abraham just in the eyes of God.

The strange ritual which establishes the Covenant symbolically shows that God was passing between the halves, committing himself completely to Abraham. It is as though God were saying, " _May be cut in half like these animals, if I do not keep my promise to Abraham_."

The author reminds the reader that God's promises to Abraham, while they took hundreds of years to be realized, were fulfilled in the Exodus. The entire happening takes place while Abraham sleeps. Man cannot directly observe such mysterious acts of God (compare Adam's sleep in Gen 2:21).

In Gen 16:1-16 Sarah proposes another human way to have the promise of descendants fulfilled, but God only renews his covenant and clarifies the promise.

Reading Genesis 16:1-16

Being a merely human attempt to fulfill God's promise, Sarah's plan backfires. Ishmael, though not the child of promise, does receive a blessing.

In Gen 17:1-27 God renews his promise of descendants and gives the sign of circumcision.

Reading Genesis 17:1-27

In content, this passage parallels much of what is already said in chapters 15 and 16. It comes from the Priestly tradition and so is concerned to point out that circumcision is the sign of Israel's covenant relationship with the LORD.

Circumcision, a common practice in the Middle East, here receives a new and distinct meaning. Among many of the other tribes, circumcision was a puberty rite, but with God's People, it becomes a sign of covenant relationship with the community and is thus performed on all male children when they are just eight days old. Note that the rite is prescribed not only for natural sons but also for slaves who thus become members of the covenant community.

There is a further clarification of the promise of descendants. The son of promise will he born to Sarah herself.

By changing the names of Abram and Sarai to Abraham and Sarah. God indicates a change in their very lives; a name change is a special sign of election, as in the case of Jacob becoming Israel (contends with God), or of Simon becoming Peter (the Rock).

In Gen 18:1-15 we have the final statement of the promise of descendants. The three visitors announce that a son will be born of Abraham and Sarah

When you read this passage, take time to reflect on its warmth and humour and keep in mind that the passage covers the better part of a day; the feast would have taken hours to prepare: the calf had to be butchered, the bread baked. Abraham is shown as the model of that great virtue, hospitality. To amuse the reader, the author continually plays on the name of the son to be born: " _Isaac_ " is derived from the verb " _yishaq_ ", to laugh, smile, be joyful. Notice how often this verb is used (18:12, 13, 15; also see 17:17 and 21:6, 9).

Reading Genesis 18:1-15

The marvel of the fulfillment of God's promise is underlined by the fact that Sarah is so old and has even given up all hope of ever having a child.

In Gen 18:16-33 Abraham is to be a blessing for others, therefore God consults him concerning the fate of the evil cities.

As you read this passage, again savour its rich beauty and the description of the subtle oriental bargaining skills Abraham employs with the LORD.

Reading Genesis 1816-33

In Gen 6:5-8 the beginning of the flood, God sees the wickedness of man and decides to destroy the earth, a decision he reaches without consultation,

Now that he has chosen Abraham, however, he is bound to consult him and to leave himself open to being influenced by Abraham. Through this very human description of God's consultation with Abraham, the author is presenting a most profound truth. Here for the first time in Scripture we clearly find the notion that events affecting man are brought about through the partnership of God with man. The special role of the chosen People is being underlined. Abraham and the People of God are chosen not for their own sake but for the sake of others. The subtlety of Abraham's argument is that on the surface it appears that he is pleading that the just man should not be destroyed with sinners. But on a closer reading, we notice that Abraham wants to avert the destruction of the wicked.

Writing almost 3000 years ago, the author already understands that as few as ten virtuous people can avert disaster. Several centuries later, the LORD would tell Jeremiah that one virtuous man in Jerusalem could avert the disaster coming to the city (Jer 5:1), and He would reveal to a prophet of the Exile that his servant would bear on himself the sins of all (Is 53:4-5). The teaching which begins in this passage finds its completion in the Cross of Christ who died for all.

In Gen 19:1-38 we see the result of Abraham's intervention. God rescues Lot and his family from destruction.

Reading Genesis 19:1-38

Here we see the disintegration of Lot's character. He is ineffectual in trying to defend his guests against the Sodomites (vss 6-11); he cannot convince his sons-in-law of the seriousness of the Lord's intentions (vs 14); he hesitates to leave Sodom, and has to be led by the hand, as a gesture of pity on God's part (vss 15-16); he becomes confused at the urgent demand of vs 17 and tries to bargain (vss 18-21); his wife is unable to resolve whether she is for the Lord or not (vs 26): finally he becomes a dissolute and lonely old man (vss 30ff).

The children which are born of Lot become great nations, Moab and Ammon — fierce rivals for Israel. Yet their births are the fruit of purely human solutions to the problem of childlessness, in contrast with Abraham whose childlessness is resolved in God's way. This story (vss 30-38) becomes a jibe thrown by the People at their neighbours, who practiced incest.

Sexual ethics received very high priority among the People of God. Societies which approved and practiced homosexuality and incest are seen as depraved.

The district around Sodom and Gomorrah is prone to earthquakes and even volcanic eruptions. The story recalls the destruction of towns south of the Dead Sea, the lowest body of water in the world. The waters of the Jordan and other streams cannot escape the sea except by evaporation. The salt content of the Dead Sea is therefore very high, and salt formations in heaps and pillars are common. The story of Lot's wife perhaps reflects the ancient custom of referring to one of these formations as " _Lot's Wife_ ".

In Gen 20:1-18 Abraham finds himself again in a strange land; he resorts to a ruse to preserve his own life.

Reading Genesis 20:1-18

This passage is basically the same as Gen 12:10-20. It comes from the Elohist tradition and shows a more developed sense of morality. It also points out Abraham's role as intercessor when he prays for Abimelech and his people.

In Gen 21:1-8, the child of the promise, the first of Abraham's many descendants is born. The story is told with simplicity and warmth.

Reading Genesis 21:1-8

In Gen 21:9-21 Ishmael, though not the child of the promise, is blessed.

Reading Genesis 21:9-21 (0)

This passage basically repeats Gen 16:1-16 and is an Elohist version of the incident. It shows the character of Abraham as the loving father of his son Ishmael and it stresses that God is with Ishmael even though he is not the child of the promise. The passage shows great sympathy for Ishmael and his descendants.

In Gen 21:22-34 Abraham settles in Beersheba, the land of promise. He grows in prominence and respect in the eyes of his neighbours a king deals with him as an equal.

Reading Genesis 21:22-34 (0)

Abraham is shown as a man of peace who makes decent and gentlemanly agreements.

In Gen 22:1-24 after his lengthy description of the promises and the human attempts to bring about their fulfillment, the sacred author has just described their completion with

The birth of Isaac, the child of the promise (Gen 21:1-8). He has left the reader with the impression that nothing more remains to be said. As a matter of fact, however, the author now describes the greatest challenge to the faith of Abraham. He uses all his talent to do so and the result is his best piece of writing, a masterpiece of literature.

The passage is very gentle and subtle; it is slow-moving and must be read meditatively. It conveys the affection of Abraham for his son, but at the same time, his unquestioning obedience to the will of God.

Reading Genesis 22:1-24

What lies behind this passage? The question of human sacrifice, especially that of children and even of the firstborn male, was a problem that plagued the People of God for centuries. The sacrifice of children was practiced by the peoples among whom they lived. In particular, the custom of killing infants and burying them in the foundation of a new building was known among the pagan Canaanites (see 1 Kings 16:34). It was even remembered that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter (Judg 11:30-40). The People of God looked upon such practices with horror. They had been taught by God in the Law not to offer human sacrifices. Underlying this passage, then, is the teaching that animals are to be substituted for people in sacrifices (vs 13) and that the first-born are to be redeemed by offering an animal. This, however, is not the main teaching of the passage which shows Abraham as the perfect man of faith, a fact manifested by the way he carries out this most extreme of tests. The author portrays Abraham as believing that God would somehow stand by his promise even though his command appears to contradict the promise.

For an old man, to give up his only son is a more costly sacrifice than to lay down his own life.

It is with good reason that tradition has seen in this passage an image of the sacrifice of Christ, the only Son of the Father.

In Gen 23:1-20 Abraham, in buying a burial place, shrewdly gets a foothold on the promised land.

In Gen 25:7-11 we find a short passage recording the death of Abraham and his burial with his wife Sarah. (Note: In the verses preceding and following the account of his death, the many descendants of Abraham are listed).

Reading Genesis 25:7-11

Note: The importance of Isaac lies in the fact that he receives the promises made to Abraham (Gen 26:3-5).

From a literary point of view he is the bridge between Abraham and Jacob. Almost all of the material on Isaac is given either in connection with Abraham his father, or Jacob his son. There are no themes developed around Isaac which are not in the sections on Abraham and Jacob. For this reason, no section of this chapter deals directly with Isaac.

## Chapter 2b Jacob

**Introduction**

Gen 25:19 to 35:20 is made up of several stories that must have existed for many centuries before they were written down and became part of the inspired text.

In all probability these stories were handed down orally. They were eventually put in writing, arranged in a definite order and edited to form a continuous narrative revolving around the figure of Jacob.

The focus points of this narrative are the three encounters of Jacob with God: the dream at Bethel (28:16-22) while he is on his way to Haran to find a wife, his wrestling with God at the Jabbok (32:23-33) On his way back from Haran with his wives, and a second

encounter with God at Bethel (35:9-13).

Woven around these three events are a series of stories mainly about Jacob and Esau and Jacob and Laban.

As we move from the stories about Abraham to those about Jacob, we notice a great change in "climate". Gone are the mostly peaceful stories of Abraham, conflict is the constant theme with Jacob. He is found in conflict with his brother Esau, in conflict with his uncle Laban and Jacob's sons are in conflict with the men of Shechem

Along with this change in the literature we notice another: God deals with Jacob and Jacob responds to God in ways which are very different from the relationship between God and Abraham. It was for his total obedience that Abraham was blessed by God (Gen 15:6 and 22:17-18). When Abraham showed initiative and proposed solutions to his problem of childlessness, God .would not accept the proposals. Abraham is an example of God requiring "blind faith".

When we come to Jacob, however, we find one instance after another of one who relies on his own ingenuity. Jacob prays, but no miracles or extraordinary intervention of God take place to solve Jacob's problems. Jacob has to devise his own way out of dilemmas. The ideal figure of man found in Abraham, the man who trusts in God alone, is balanced by the figure of Jacob who trusts that God will bless human resourcefulness, and God does bless it abundantly.

The remainder of the Jacob stories are interwoven with those of Joseph in the last part of the Book of Genesis. Jacob dies in Egypt, but his bones are brought back to the land of promise and buried in the field that Abraham purchased for a burial ground (Gen 50:12-13).

Commentary

The two nations, Israel and Edom, were neighbours who were often in conflict with each other.

This conflict is presented as going back to the origins of the two nations when their twin ancestors, Jacob and Esau, struggled in the womb of their mother.

Reading Genesis 25:19-34

Esau, strong but not too alert, is the man of the senses; Jacob, physically weaker but more keen, is the man of the mind. Justifying their actions by the fact that Esau had recklessly sold his birthright to Jacob, Rebekah and Jacob plot to deceive Isaac and to have the important paternal blessing given to Jacob instead of Esau.

Reading Genesis 27:1-45

Esau, naturally inclined to solve his problems by a show of strength, resolves to kill Jacob for having stolen the blessing from his father. Jacob escapes by leaving for Haran but he will have to face Esau's threat when he returns from Haran years later.

On his way to Haran to find a wife among his kinspeople, Jacob has a dream in which the promises made to Abraham are given to Jacob. In the dream a " _ladder_ " is seen. It is not our kind of ladder, but rather a stone staircase like the ones which would be found in certain temples (Ziggurats) in ancient times. These staircases led to the shrine at the top of the ziggurat where the gods were thought to dwell (see illustration).

Reading Genesis 28:10-22

Here God chooses Jacob, favouring the younger brother over the older in the same way he mysteriously chose Abel over Cain. Though Jacob is a sly deceiver, he is the one who receives the promises that were given to Abraham and renewed to Isaac. It is once again underlined that Jacob is not called for himself alone; he and his descendants are to be a blessing for all the tribes of the earth. The union between God and mankind which is to be effected through Jacob and his descendants is symbolized by the stairway (ladder). To Jacob and his sons the angels will come down to give God's commands and will go back, bringing the human response to God. (For the fulfillment of this image in Jesus, see John 1:51). The story also explains the origin of the later shrine of Bethel by showing its relationship with the ancestor Jacob. Bethel was to be the major shrine of the Northern Kingdom for most of its history.

In his dream his stone pillow appears to become the first step of a stone ladder to God.

In chapters 29 to 31 we find Jacob working in Haran for his uncle, Laban. Laban is a hard man and makes harsh demands on Jacob, but Jacob is not easily discouraged. He shows fortitude and determination in the way he has to work to get the wife he wants, and he shows no little ingenuity in getting his flocks to grow in number. It is through Jacob's own efforts that God blesses him with a large family and prosperity. Jacob has to deal with his demanding Uncle Laban before he can enter Canaan again. He settles with Laban, only to find that Esau is coming to meet him with 400 men. Esau has not forgotten his threat to kill his brother Jacob. What ensues shows Jacob at his best in dealing with his powerful, but not too perceptive brother. This story revels in the cleverness of Jacob. His diplomacy, his cunning and sly manoeuvres completely outwit Esau. It is a battle of mind over muscle and mind wins.

Reading Genesis 32:4-33 and 33:1-7

The encounter with Esau is interrupted by an incident which dramatically characterizes Jacob's whole life and which becomes a kind of parable of the dealings of the People of God with God — a wrestling bout.

To understand the passages on the wrestling of God with Jacob, it is necessary to know the significance of the phrases " _What is your name_?" and " _tell me your name_ ". To know a person's name is to have some real power over that person. To be able to give someone a name, as God does in this passage, is to have full authority over that person. A second idea runs through the story: blessings. Jacob, true to his character, gets a blessing from God, in somewhat the same way as he " _wrestled_ " a blessing from his father Isaac.

The struggle with God is set dramatically at the ford of the Jabbok, surrounded by high ominous hills. Jacob, all alone, spends the night in one-to-one struggle. The event might well have been presented as a dream experience originally.

Reading Genesis 32:23-33

While the influence of Jacob is powerful with God (the wrestler asks to be released from the deadlock), it is not so powerful that Jacob can know the name of God and therefore have power over him in any absolute sense. But Jacob does have power nevertheless — he " _wrestles_ " a blessing from the mysterious wrestler who turns out to be God himself. Though Jacob comes out of the match blessed, he is injured. This story epitomizes Jacob, the one who is determined to be first, determined to be blessed, determined to win any contest. He does come first with men; he does get blessed by both man and God; but in his contest with God his victory is not complete. God names him " _Israel_ ", indicating his authority over Jacob.

Tradition has seen in this passage a symbol of man's dealing with God, especially in prayer. By prayer one has great, but not absolute power over God. Yet prayer, closeness to God, cannot leave one unchanged.

## Chapter 2c Joseph

**Introduction**

The story of Joseph occupies most of the latter part of the Book of Genesis (chapters 37 to 50). Joseph is the man through whom God saves Jacob and his family. It is through Joseph that Jacob's family grows and prospers in Egypt.

The sacred authors use the Joseph stories to describe another type of man of God. In Abraham we saw a docile man of faith, in Jacob we found an aggressive man who trusts God and his own resourcefulness, and now, in Joseph, we discover a man whose life is managed by God and whose greatest attribute is sheer talent. Joseph never attempts to direct his own life, in fact he has little opportunity to do so

People are most cruel and unjust towards him, He is thrown to the very bottom of the pit of life, he does not complain, does not become a schemer or a plotter. God is with him and Joseph rises to the top no matter how low his starting point. In this respect the Joseph stories become parables of the life of the People of God: no matter how desperate the situation, God is present and will lift up his people. This pattern in Joseph anticipates the pattern of the Exodus, from slavery to freedom. The encouraging message that emerges is that God is not hindered by the evil and unjust actions of men. God can bring good out of the most desperate situation.

Commentary

Joseph is a favoured son of Jacob. Envy causes some of his brothers to act hatefully towards him.

Reading Genesis 37:2-36 and 39:1-23

From his high position as the favourite of his father, Joseph falls to the lowest estate. He is sold as a slave and becomes the property of an Egyptian. Before long, however, he rises to the top. The household and all of Potiphar's possessions are placed in Joseph's hands. It would have been easy to take advantage of this exalted position. Potiphar's wife thought she could sway him, but Joseph is a man of principle even when he enjoys high rank.

It is because of his integrity that he is falsely accused and unjustly put in jail. Even in jail, however, the talents of Joseph force him to rise above the others. God is with him and all goes well in jail.

Reading Genesis 41:1-45

Joseph moves up from jail to the highest position in the land, next to Pharaoh himself. (As indicated in the "Historical Background" at the beginning of this chapter. Joseph's rise to power is made more believable by the Hyksos rule in Egypt. These foreign rulers would quite probably favour non-Egyptian high officials.) Joseph begins his program of food storage to avert the disaster that could accompany the " _lean years_ ".

In chapters 42 to 46 the story of Joseph's brothers is introduced. Through subtle and skillful planning the whole family, including Jacob, is brought to Egypt and given a great welcome, an audience with the Pharaoh.

The narrative then returns to the organization of Egypt under Joseph. What the sacred author is describing is the strange totalitarian government of Egypt.

Reading Genesis 47:13-26

Step by step, possessions, property and finally the human person himself is owned by the state, Egypt had always been ruled by absolute rulers. As long as such a system was headed by someone who cared for the people and had a sense of justice, all was well enough. Should such a system be in the hands of an evil or unwise ruler, the effects would be disastrous for those on the bottom of the political pyramid. The political and socio-economic organization as described in this passage is exactly what is needed for absolute tyranny and merciless oppression.

The sacred author, writing from the perspective of the Exodus, the Covenant and the Law of God, has a clear notion of what a just and brotherly society should be. Egypt described here is anything but such a society. All the land, all the property and even the people themselves belong to the ruler: that is Egypt, " _that house of slavery_ ".

A new ruler " _who did not know Joseph_ " did come to the throne of Egypt. With all the needed organizational tools of oppression in working order, the new Pharaoh can oppress whom he wills. And he does. We will consider this in Chapter Three.

"~~~~~~~~~"

## Chapter 3- Preparations For The Exodus

## Chapter 3a Oppression in Egypt

**Historical Background**

The prosperity of the descendants of Jacob in Egypt is probably best situated in the period of the Hyksos rule over Egypt. The Hyksos were probably from the area of southern Syria and Canaan and would be likely to welcome and even favour foreigners, while they occupied Egypt. Their rule began around 1720 BC. The Egyptians, finally, were able to overthrow their alien rulers and establish their own native rule again sometime around 1550 BC. The end of the Hyksos rule could also be the end of the peaceful life of the sons of Jacob and the beginnings of their troubles under a Pharaoh " _who did not know Joseph_." We do not know how long the slavery and persecution of the sons of Jacob lasted. It might have been a very long time. Exod 1:11 speaks of their being forced to labour on the construction of the storage cities of Pithom and Rameses. As far as can be determined by archaeologists and historians, these delta cities would have been built under Ramses II (1290-1224).

The periods of severe oppression described in Exodus, are probably best placed in the early 13th century (c. 1290-1250 BC).

 Figures taken from an ancient Egyptian painting showing slaves (and their

overseer) at work.

Commentary

The Biblical account of the call of Abraham and the promise to him and his successors (the patriarchs) as related in Gen 12-50 forms a prologue to the Exodus story. The opening verses of the Book of Exodus continue this description and set the stage for God's great entry into history.

Reading Exodus 1:1-7

This short passage describes the prosperity of the sons of Israel in Egypt. God has fulfilled his Promise to give Abraham descendants as numerous as the stars of night or the sand along the beach (cf. Gen 22:17; 12:2; 17:6: 35:11; etc). However, lest Israel become self-satisfied in the blessings of the Lord, the passage continues by describing a sudden change.

Reading Exodus 1:8-22

(Note: see also Exod 5:6-6:1)

With the accession of a new king, Israel has become ensnared in the injustices of the inhumane Egyptian society described at the conclusion of Chapter Two (cf. Gen 41:33- 49; 47:13-26). A cruel and unjust bureaucracy has reduced the Hebrews to slavery. Although having one's roots in slavery is hardly the kind of tradition that a nation would boast about, the People would often recall this period of shameful slavery. Recollection of their deliverance, which involved no heroism on their part, filled them with pride.

## Chapter 3b The Leader and the Lord

God began preparations for the Exodus slowly. Through the hidden workings of his providence, he chose a leader and prepared him for the task. Finally, he dramatically breaks into the leader's life and gives him a mission.

The Infancy Narrative

In the Bible, the infancy narratives have a character of their own; they serve the purpose of introducing the reader to a great person's life. They are usually popular and appealing in style and a careful reader can find in them hints of things to come in the person's life. (Can you find allusions to future events in the life of Moses in this passage?)

Reading Exodus 2:1-10

In these few verses the writer already shows the reader that God is clearly working in hidden ways to prepare for the Exodus. Sometimes God's salvation comes from very unlikely sources such as the two midwives or Pharaoh's daughter. Moses is being prepared to be the one who can speak to the Pharaoh and the one who can feel compassion for his countrymen.

His name, Moses, is the shortened form of an Egyptian name and means "son of" or "born of". But the sacred authors love to give a popular explanation for people's names. Usually they play on the sound of the name. " _Moses_ ", in Hebrew " _Mosheh_ ", sounds like " _mashah_ ", which means to " _draw out_ " and is an appropriate explanation of the name of the one who was " _drawn out_ " of the waters and who " _drew out_ " the People from Egypt.

Moses Grows in the Likeness of the Lord

Reading Exodus 2:11-22

Without knowing what is happening to him, Moses is developing a sensitivity to the sufferings of his people. He is beginning to see and to hear what God sees and hears (3:7). Moses, however, has not yet experienced the greatness of the plan of God nor has he yet received his vocation, and thus reacts with anger and violence, not seeing any thorough or long-term solution to the oppression of his people.

Fearing for his life, Moses flees into the desert. By having his life threatened and by living as a stranger among the Midianites, Moses experiences in his own life the conditions of his people. He is personally united to their suffering. His flight into the desert anticipates theirs.

God Remembers His Promise

Reading Exodus 2:23-25

While Moses is in the wilderness, the LORD hears the cries of the oppressed in Egypt. These few verses, possibly taken from the Jewish liturgy, express the lamentations of the oppressed, much as the psalms of lamentation do. The LORD will hear their cry of pain, but it is noteworthy that the sacred writer does not say that the People direct their lament to God. The LORD's break into history, then, is pure gift, prompted not by the merits of the people nor by their prayers to him, but by their misery alone. The LORD remembers his promise and comes to the aid of the People. He begins to prepare for the Exodus by calling Moses.

Moses Experiences the Mystery of God

Mystery is best expressed in imagery. The true response to the mystery of God is awe and wonder, fascination and fear. Poetry and imagery communicate this better than clear ideas and scientific prose.

It should be noted that the bush that burns and is not consumed is never explained. God, who is beyond all understanding, reveals himself to Moses as the God of the fathers. Moses is attracted to God and fears him; he is being prepared for obedience.

Reading Exodus 3:1-6

The Vocation of Moses

Reading Exodus 3:7-12

Whoever experiences something of the true God receives a task. The true God is active. God does not reveal himself to us for our entertainment. He does not make himself known simply to give us a thrill. To know him is to work with him. Vocation means mission; to be called is to be sent. Moses (to his surprise) discovers that the God of the fathers, who has seemed to be so inactive, also sees the misery of his countrymen and intends to free them. With this new knowledge of God comes the vocation to work with him. Reacting typically, Moses feels his inadequacy. In response to his objections, God reassures him: " _I am with you_." The proof that God is with him will be clear only when the task is completed. Moses, like Abraham, has to walk in faith.

God Reveals His Name

Reading Exodus 3:13-15

The People of God had a personal name for God. It was the proper name of their God as distinct from the God of other nations, and it was a special name different from the general name " _El_ " or " _Elohim_ ", which we can translate simply as " _God_ ".

We no longer know exactly how to pronounce this proper name for God. Out of reverence for the great sanctity of his Name, the People stopped pronouncing it altogether, sometime between 400 and 200 BC. Since Hebrew was written with consonants, most of the vowels being left out of the words, the only really certain parts of God's Name are the consonants. From lack of use, the vowels have been forgotten. Therefore, we know that the four consonants for the holy Name are J, H, V, H (more properly transcribed in English as Y, H, W, H). A large majority of scholars believe that the original vowels were "a" and "e", giving us Jahveh or Yahweh. (See Appendix: Yahweh, Jehovah, Lord) This pronunciation is an educated guess, but nothing more.

However uncertain the pronunciation of the holy Name, its association with Moses and the Exodus is quite clear. By placing the revelation of the Name here in Exod 3, in connection with the call of Moses to save the People, the sacred authors intend us to associate the Name of God with his mighty act, the Exodus. This is the great deed by which God made himself known to his People. Through the Exodus he revealed himself, which is to say he gave them his Name. In Exodus 3:15, we are told that the Name by which God is to be known is YHWH (Yahweh). In the preceding verse we have a paraphrase of the Name, " _I am who I am_." This literal translation can be taken to mean, " _I am who 1 am, and anything more is not for you to know_." In other words, this phrase can be taken to be a refusal to give Moses his Name. This interpretation, while possible, is not completely satisfactory, because in vs 15 God does say he is to be called Yahweh. He does give Moses a name by which he is to be called, so the paraphrase cannot simply indicate a refusal.

So we must look again at the phrase, _"I am who I am."_ It is made up of two identical forms of the verbs "to be" in the first person singular, related to each other by a pronoun which can be translated "who", "what", or "that". The verb "to be" can be much stronger in Hebrew than it usually is in English. In Hebrew "be" very often has an active, dynamic sense. It seldom has the abstract meaning that we give to the verb "to be" when we use it to state a mere fact of existence. Starting at this point, the possible interpretations of the phrase, _"I am who I am_ " are almost endless.

" _I shall be whom I shall be_ ". The meaning is that Moses will know who God really is, and therefore will know his Name, after the Exodus has taken place.

" _I cause to be what I cause to be_ ". Here the verb is made to mean "to effect", "to bring into being", "to bring about." God would be describing himself as powerful to bring into existence what he wills. This could suggest God as creator, especially as Creator of his People.

" _I am the one who is_ ", meaning, I am the one who is present, not as a bystander, but powerfully present, that is, present and active to save his People. In verse 1 2, God says, " _I shall be with you_ ", and the Hebrew verb used is in the same form as in the phrase _"I am who l am_ ".

" _I am the Existent One_ " or " _I am the one who exists_." The meaning here is slightly more abstract, but it does include what was said of the preceding interpretation. God, and he alone, is the one who has the fullness of existence, with all the saving power, unchanging fidelity and unfailing presence divine existence connotes. The Greek translators of this phrase rendered it in this sense, " _I am the Existent One_ ".

All of these interpretations are possible. There are many, many more which could be given. The last two given, however, seem to be the most probable. It would be wrong for us to rule out the others altogether, because they add depth to the Name.

Even in revealing it, God shrouds his name in mystery. Since mystery is that which offers the hope of limitless discovery, it is quite proper that the Name of God should appear to offer endless possibilities to the human mind. God cannot be defined, and neither can his Name. It is quite fitting also, that the revelation of the Name of God should be set against the background of the unexplained mystery, the burning bush that is not burnt.

Signs and Wonders

We are not asking you to read chapters 4 to 11 which recount in a popular fashion the ten plagues which God worked in Egypt: water to blood, frogs, gnats, flies, cattle disease, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, death of the first born. The main function of these signs and wonders — the text itself rarely uses the word " _plague_ " — as a whole is to build up dramatic suspense to the truly extraordinary miracle of the Exodus itself. They also illustrate the continuing struggle between the LORD of justice and the proud and stubborn Pharaoh who hardens his heart even in the face of such great signs.

Most of the plagues represent the heightened form of disasters known to happen in Egypt. The tenth plague gives a background for the tradition of " _redeeming the firstborn_ ". Because they recognized life as a gift from God, the People dedicated their firstborn son (and the first fruits of the harvest) to him. At the Exodus, Israel was provided with a new and greater reason for this custom which was now seen as a response of gratitude for protection from the tenth plague.

## Chapter 3c The Passover

**Celebration of Freedom**

The tenth plague was the straw that broke the camel's back. Pharaoh relented and the Hebrews got ready to leave. The night of their departure they celebrated a " _Passover_ " feast, which was to become an annual memorial festival —zikkaron — of the Exodus.

Because of their way of life as seminomadic shepherds, the Hebrews already had been celebrating a spring festival in which a young animal was sacrificed to secure the fruitfulness of the flock; perhaps the feast was held just as the tribe was setting out for the spring pasture. Being a shepherds' feast, the various nomadic elements (roasting over open fire, herbs for seasoning, unleavened bread, shepherd's staff, etc.) are probably very ancient. This ancient passover might have been the very festival which Moses was to celebrate in Exod 3:18.

At the Exodus it was easy to adapt this ancient feast to celebrate Israel's deliverance and to see it in a new light, as they set out for the new pastures of the promised land.

Later, when the Hebrews became farmers in the land of Canaan, they adopted another spring festival, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, from their pagan neighbours. The feast was a week-long celebration at the beginning of the new grain harvest. The People of God reinterpreted this ancient Canaanite festival in light of the Exodus experience. Instead of celebrating these two festivals separately, Passover and Unleavened Bread, the People joined them together into one feast, Passover being celebrated on the first night of the seven days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

Reading Exodus 12:1-28; 12:43-51; 13:1-10

Our sacred author places the origin of the Passover as a commemoration of the Exodus in its proper historical setting, but he describes the festival in the way it was liturgically celebrated in his own day. The text of Exod 12 and 13 presupposes the union of the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Our present text, then, represents some 700 years of evolving law and liturgy of the Passover celebration (for example, the question of slaves and foreigners— Exod 12:43-49 — probably would not have arisen until the time of Solomon).

Two ancient feasts were thus adapted to commemorate the Exodus. Later united, they developed liturgically into the Passover festival, which in its turn was later seen in a new light and further developed liturgically as the solemnity of solemnities, Easter.

A Reflection on the Passover:

The name " _Passover_ " is of uncertain origin and meaning, but Scripture itself explains it by associating it with the tenth plague during which the LORD promised to " _pass over_ " those homes whose doorposts had been smeared with the blood of the lamb (Exod 12:130. A more common explanation of the name comes from the fact that the feast commemorates the night when the Hebrews " _passed over_ " from slavery to freedom. Such an interpretation is easily extended to the death-resurrection mystery of Christ which is seen as the " _Passover_ " of Jesus from death to life. Our own participation in that Mystery becomes a " _passover_ ", from the death of slavery to sin, to the new life and freedom of grace.

The Passover originated as a family feast, celebrated at home and presided over by the father, and it has remained a family celebration to this day. Nevertheless, when ancient Israel began to centralize all worship at Jerusalem, the Passover became a pilgrimage feast (Deut 16:16) and more and more of it took place at the Temple. Thus, at the time of Jesus, the Jews went up to Jerusalem for the feast (see Lk 2:41; Jn 11:55) and the passover lamb was to be slaughtered only in the Temple (Deut 16:5f).

The Passover feast which was originally a shepherd's rite with many nomadic features to it, had, by the time of Jesus, changed considerably. Originally it was to be celebrated standing with staff in hand, the stance of a shepherd ready to travel, but by the time of Jesus, the Roman custom of reclining while eating had been adopted and wine had been introduced to the meal of lamb and unleavened bread.

The Passover is " _a day of Remembrance_ " (Exod 13:3; 12:14; Deut 16:1-3). But it is not a simple recalling of a past historical event. The Hebrew concept of memorial is much more dynamic. The feast recalls and makes present here and now the saving activity of God in order that the present generation might participate in it. Those who celebrate the memorial do not say, " _Our ancestors were slaves in Egypt_ ", but " _The LORD did this for me when I came out of Egypt_ " (Exod 13:8; Deut 6:20-25). They share in the past event by annually celebrating the feast. Jesus had this type of dynamic memorial in mind when he told his disciples, " _Do this in memory of me"_ (I Cor 11:24).

Finally, this living commemoration of the past provides hope for the future. Since the LORD has delivered us from Egypt and is still delivering us here and now, we can look forward to his saving help in the future. By the time of Christ, the Passover had developed a strong nationalistic character — those who celebrated it looked for the Messiah to deliver them from the oppression of Rome, the way the LORD had delivered them from the Egyptians. Deliverance did come at Passover time (see John 19:31ff).

## Appendix 1

Yahweh, Jehovah, Lord

Hebrew was written with consonants only, most of the vowels being left out of the words. If we did that in English we would have to get used to seeing "Gd mrng Ptrck" and reading, "Good morning, Patrick". It would take considerable skill to read a language that was written with consonants only. As :tong as there were many well-trained people to read Hebrew without vowels, there was no problem. Sometime in the Middle Ages (AD), however, Jewish scholars felt the need to put vowel signs into the consonantal text of the sacred books. Their reverence for the consonantal text was such that they would not insert the vowels directly into the text itself. (They would not write, "Good morning, Patrick", they would write something like "G'd nirong Ptrck".) The little dots and signs representing the vowels to be read were placed in and around the consonants, leaving the consonants undisturbed.

How was the divine Name pronounced? We know for certain that it has four consonants which can be transcribed as JHVH (or, more accurately in English YHWH). But what are the vowels that go with these four consonants? Today no one knows what the vowels really were. How did this come about?

Hebrew was written without vowels, so the divine Name was also written with only its consonants JHVH. Out of reverence for the divine Name the Jews stopped pronouncing it altogether some 2400 years ago. This custom of never saying the divine Name whenever it occured led, over the centuries, to the loss of any memory of what the original vowels were.

To this day, no one knows for certain what the real vowels are that should go with the consonants JHVH (or YHWH).

What complicates the problem even further is the fact that when the Jews stopped pronouncing the divine Name, they developed the custom of saying 'Adonay, LORD, everytime they saw  written down. The Name was written with its proper consonants JHVH, but it was always read as though it were 'adoney (Lord).

When Jewish scholars in Alexandria, around 250 BC, translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek (The Septuagint), they translated what was read (' Adonay, Lord) and not what was written (JHVH). So whenever they came across the divine Name in the Hebrew text, they translated it as KYRIOS (LORD).

If you recall that the actual vowels of the divine name had been lost, you will appreciate the next step of our problem. When the Jewish scholars of the Middle Ages inserted vowel signs into the consonantal text to make it easier to read, they put the vowels of adonãy which was to be read around the consonants JHVH (or YHWH) which were written.

The Jewish scholars and readers knew that the vowels of 'adonãy had been combined with the consonants of the divine Name, but some Christians, looking at the Hebrew texts with its vowel signs did not know this. So they began the tradition of reading the divine Name combining the consonants of the divine Name (JHVH) with the vowel signs of 'adonãy (e, o, a) with the resulting hybrid name JEHOVAH. Jehovah, therefore, is not the correct pronunciation of the divine Name revealed to Moses in Exod 3:14-16.

JeHoVaH

adonãy

What about Yahweh, is it a correct pronunciation of the divine Name? Yahweh is an educated guess, and nothing more. We are fairly certain of the first vowel "a", because the short form of the divine Name that occurs, for example, in alleluia, has the vowel "a" (allelu = let us praise, is (ya) = JHVH, the Lord). As for the other vowel or vowels, scholars can only advance possible theories. The common theory is that there is only one other vowel and it is "e", so we have Yahweh, or Jahve(h). But this is not certain and, therefore, should not be used as if it were.

There is another reason for retaining the custom of substituting the title Lord for the divine Name in the Old Testament. The New Testament writers read the Greek Old Testament with the word KYRIOS (LORD) for JHVH. When, therefore, they give the name LORD (KYRIOS) to Jesus they are affirming his divinity. The significance of the title LORD given to Jesus in the New Testament is based on the substitution of the title Lord for the divine Name in the Old Testament. Obviously, this bears directly on our teaching concerning the divinity of Christ. It is important, therefore, to retain the ancient custom, especially in the liturgy.

In liturgical practice and in liturgical preaching, attempts to pronounce the divine Name (Yahweh, Jehovah) should be avoided, because: it is a serious departure from a theologically important tradition; it is to introduce an uncertain novelty which, in a few years, might be clearly as inaccurate as Jehovah is today. Furthermore, it can be offensive to some Jews, for whom the attempt to pronounce the unutterable Name is at least impertinent, if not outrightly irreverent.

(Note: The Jerusalem Bible chose to write " _Yahweh_ " for the divine Name. For purposes of study this can be useful, but it is a departure from Judaeo-Christian tradition. As useful as the Jerusalem Bible usage might be for study, it is not to be extended to the liturgy.)

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 4 The Mighty Act of God

**Introduction**

The Exodus is the central event in the history of the People of God before the coming of Christ. It has the same position in the faith of the People of the Old Covenant as the Death and Resurrection of Jesus has in our faith. Both events have the characteristic of movement from helplessness to freedom, death to life. Chapter Three described the situation of slavery in Egypt and the preparation of Moses as the leader whom God would use to deliver the sons of Israel. In this chapter we will concentrate on the Exodus itself.

## Chapter 4a History

Egypt, after the overthrow of the Hyksos rulers, enjoyed a great period of power and prestige. The 18th dynasty of Egypt (c. 1550-1306), which replaced the Hyksos, extended its control as far as the Euphrates to the north-east and as far south as the fourth cataract of the Nile. It was in this period that the famous Pharaoh Amenophis IV (c. 1364-1347) initiated his revolutionary "new religion." He promoted one god, Aten, represented by the sun. Amenophis IV seems to have been so preoccupied with religious reform that he was not able to maintain the control which Egypt had over its neighbours. The empire weakened during his reign.

The transition from the 18th to the 19th dynasty was made by a military man called Haremhab. This man began to bring Egypt back to its former power and prestige and to its traditional polytheistic religion.

The 19th dynasty (c. 1305-1224) was founded by a family which, curiously enough, traced its ancestry back to the Hyksos. The Pharaoh of this dynasty who concerns us the most is Ramses II (c. 1290-1224). Much of his reign was spent in war with the Hittites to the north-east. While Ramses claimed victory, defeat would have been a better word for the outcome of his struggle with the Hittites. The power play of the two empires ended with a treaty of peace between them. Ramses turned his attention to domestic matters. He ordered huge construction projects to be undertaken, one of which was at Avaris, the ancient Hyksos capital. Ramses made it his capital and called it the " _House of Ramses_ ". Avaris bore the name of Ramses until the eleventh century when its name was changed to Tonis.

In Exod 1:11 we are told that the sons of Israel were forced to labour at the construction of Pithom and Rameses. Pithom is a site in north-eastern Egypt, and Rameses can be none other than Avaris. Avaris was a very ancient city and could have been the site of many construction projects involving slaves, but it was not always called Rameses. The biblical reference to work on Rameses shortly before the Exodus took place would seem to favour a date for the Exodus sometime during the reign of Ramses II (c. 1290-1224). An inscription belonging to the reign of Marniptah (c. 1224-1211), successor to Ramses II, refers to Israel as a people in Palestine around the year 1220. This inscription, which contains the earliest known reference to Israel outside the Bible, would indicate that by 1220 the People were already out of Egypt and in Palestine.

The Exodus then can be dated somewhere between 1280 and 1224 BC. In these chapters we are using 1250 as a convenient date. As more information is discovered about Egypt and the ancient Near East, more exact dating might become possible. It is sufficient for us to know that the information in the Book of Exodus is in tune with what we know of Egypt and, that on the basis of available information, a date in the first half of the 13th century BC is appropriate for the Exodus.

The biblical accounts of the Exodus are clear and in agreement with each other on the nature of this event. A mixed group of slaves under the leadership of a man called Moses struck out for freedom from Egyptian bondage. On their way to the desert to the east of Egypt they encountered a body of water and found themselves trapped by the pursuing Egyptians. Something extraordinary happened during the night, because in the morning the Egyptians were found dead on the shore. The slaves, now free to continue their journey, made good their escape. These are the essential facts of the event based on the information in the biblical accounts. The core of the event is the death of the powerful forces of Egypt by which the powerless slaves were given life. In the passage you are about to read, the most important verse is the last.

Reading Exodus 13:17 - 14:31

There are two things which must be retained from this passage: the fact that the event took place and what it meant. The Exodus is the miraculous death of the enemy and the liberation of Moses and his band. Just at the moment when they thought all hope was gone, they saw the Egyptians dead on the shore. We have no witness to the event outside the Bible, but that is in no way surprising. The world at large would not take notice of an event involving such insignificant people. Even if it did take notice, it would hardly believe the testimony of such lowly witnesses.

To say that it happened is not enough. The last verse of the Exodus narrative is the most important: " _they saw ... and they believed in the Lord_." When extraordinary events occur in history, they can be passed off as coincidences, accidents, good luck, and so on. The Exodus was not seen as coincidence or luck; it was seen as the act of God which it was. The confidence that Moses had in the Lord was proven to have been well-founded; the Lord did stand by his promise to deliver them from the hand of Pharaoh.

The importance of the Exodus as a fact of history cannot be over-emphasized, but we should never forget that it is an historical event brought about by God. The Exodus unites faith and history. The faith that is based on the Exodus is not a philosophy, not a system

The Priestly interpretation of the Exodus

of ideas, not poetic imagination; it holds that at a certain point in history God intervened to save a chosen group of runaway slaves from their enemies.

The Exodus was not an event which could be explained away easily. It was from the moment it took place a strange, amazing, extraordinary event, one that could not be explained by human reason. Somehow nature was involved. God mustered the forces of nature to intervene in history.

The Exodus gave the People of God nothing to boast about, except the power of God. Their origin as a people was not due to any heroism, any mighty struggle of their own to obtain freedom. God and only God could take credit for their existence.

## Chapter 4b The Literature on the Exodus

If you have ever been party to an extraordinary and unexpected happening, you will know how many different explanations people can give. No one questions the fact that it happened, but there are usually many versions of how it happened.

It is very unusual that we have only a few, different accounts of how the Exodus took place, one in a poetic song, one in the form of a very striking story, and another in the form of a liturgical drama. We shall now proceed to consider this literature on the Exodus.

Of its very nature the Exodus was " _good news_ " to be proclaimed, announced and spread to all who would hear. It was an event to be passed on from one generation to another. It was the subject of songs of rejoicing and thanksgiving; it was recounted whenever the Passover took place; storytellers told and retold the Exodus account and their narratives were eventually written down and became "sacred readings" in the worship at various shrines. When the Temple was built and its liturgy was developed, the Exodus would certainly form part of its ritual. The "creeds" of the People would include the Exodus as the great, fundamental act of God (See Deut 26:5-10). It was from sources such as these that the account of the Exodus in Exod 13:20-15:21 was composed.

The final editors of the biblical account (working somewhere around 550-450 BC) were in possession of a very old song (Exod 15) which had been sung and added to for centuries before it was written down. The oldest parts of this song (vss 1 and 21) could go back to the event itself, but additions were made to the old refrain which connect the Exodus with everything that came after it, all the way to the time when the Temple was built (vs 17).

Reading Exodus 15:1-21

By placing the song here, the sacred authors are reminding the readers of the significance of the Exodus. What began with the Exodus finds its conclusion in the great liturgies of the magnificent Temple (vs 17), when the People of God were at the high point of prestige and glory (time of Solomon), a long way from the frightened slaves huddled in fear at the water's side. This is a song of praise, jubilant, excited, full of praise of God who has destroyed the enemy. It emphasizes the drowning of the Egyptians and explains it in a variety of ways: God threw them into the sea, they sank like stones; God blew on the waters and they piled up high, then God blew again and the waters engulfed the Egyptians. It also says the earth swallowed them. It is not certain that vs 12 even refers to the Egyptians. Poets are poets and not historians. The song is ecstatic and we should not expect anything less than a variety of images to describe the marvellous aspects of the event it celebrates.

* Other poetic descriptions of the Exodus can be found in Pss 78:52f; 106:9-12 and 136:13-15. The writer of the Book of Wisdom (c. 50 BC) also described the Exodus in poetry (Wis 10:18f and 19:7-9).

The final editors also had two written versions of the Exodus, one which appears to have been put in writing rather early after a long existence as oral literature, and another which appears to have been a liturgical dramatization of the Exodus used in Temple ritual. These two versions were old and very much revered by the People of God; they could not be thrown away in favour of a new version which the editors might compose. These editors, as far as we can understand them, were servants of tradition and certainly not creators of new literature. Having two "sacred" versions of one unrepeatable event posed a problem for editors who wanted to give their work a historical flow. They could not give two versions of the Exodus side by side, so they fused the two together to make one account. Exod 13:20-14:31 is the result of their work. They accomplished their task so successfully that centuries went by without anyone taking notice of their skilful work of compilation. In the last two hundred years or so, scholars have managed to discover how these editors did their work. The story of how scholars arrived at their conclusions is as fascinating as any detective work can be, but we cannot give it to you here. However, in order to give you a rough idea of how their work was done, we propose two little exercises: the first is on a story created for the purpose, and the second is based on the text of Exodus.

Exercise One

**1** Read the following story carefully:

Johnny came home from the temple. On his way some kids in the neighbourhood laughed at him. As he left the worshipping assembly, John was mocked by faithless children. His mom and dad arrived home after him. When his father and mother came to the house, they saw him in tears. "Why are you crying, Johnny", they asked. They questioned him and John said he had been mocked for worshipping the Lord. Johnny said, "The kids laughed at me because I went to the temple". His mom and dad said, "It is better to be laughed at by kids than to be laughed at by God". They said, "The Lord tests his faithful children, to purify them". And they consoled him.

**2** What names are used for the boy?_________________

What words are used for the parents?________________

What words are used for the children?__________________

What words are used to describe the action of the children? __________________

**3** Some of the words and phrases you wrote in number 2 are slangy and popular, some are more formal and dignified. Group the words in the proper column below.

SLANGY & POPULAR--------------------------------FORMAL & DIGNIFIED

____________________----------------------------------______________________

____________________--------------------------------________________________

**4** Underline the sentences in the story where the slangy words occur. Now read the underlined parts only.

Do the underlined parts hold together as a complete story?

**5** Now read the parts that are not underlined. Do these hold together as a complete story?

**6** Can you see that the story is really made up of two versions of the same story?

**7** Was there a sentence or two which you were not sure you should underline or not?

Which one(s)_____________________________________________________

There were originally two versions of this story. An editor who wanted to preserve both stories, put the two together to make one story. The sentences in ordinary print belong to the popular version; the sentences in italics to the formal version:

Johnny came home from the temple. On his way  
some kids in the neighbourhood laughed at him.

_____________________________________As he left the worshipping assembly _________________________________________, John was mocked by faithless children.

His mom and dad arrived home after him.

_____________________________________When his father and mother came to the _________________________________________house, they saw him in tears.

"Why are you crying, Johnny"? they asked.

___________________________________They questioned him and John said he had been _______________________________________mocked for worshipping the Lord.

Johnny said, "The kids laughed at me because  
I went to the temple". His mom and dad said,  
"It is better to be laughed at by kids than to be laughed at by God".

__________________________________They said, "The Lord tests his faithful children, to ______________________________________purify them". (And they consoled him.)

It is difficult for us to decide now where to put "And they consoled him". It might have belonged to the first version, or possibly to the second version. Or maybe both versions ended in the same way. Our guess is that it belongs to the first version because the first version is more emotional; the second is more impersonal, almost cold. But you might argue that "they consoled him" is formal and should belong to the second version. We'll never know for sure.

Some parts of the Bible came to be in just this way: there were two, sometimes even three versions of the same event. The final editors did not want to throw any of the old versions away, and so they kept them and wove them together to make one story. The Flood Story (Gen 6-9) is one example, the Exodus account is another. Scholars, by careful study, have been able to sort out the original versions. This helps us to understand the final combined version and to know how to deal with the apparent contradictions in some of the passages.

But in some cases, a phrase or sentence is disputed (like, "And they consoled him"). Scholars do not agree on the version to which this or that sentence should belong. Maybe we will never know for certain. But in general, the separation of versions is quite clear, especially when it is read in Hebrew.

Exercise Two

Note: While this exercise does not accurately represent the work of the scholars, it does give you an idea of how the traditions were separated on the basis of vocabulary and style. The differences in the versions can be accurately shown only in the Hebrew text.

First step. In the passage below underline the sentences in which one or more of the following words or phrases occur:

hand (of Moses)

people of Israel

water(s)

horses

horsemen

Second step. Read only the underlined sentences and see if they form a continuous narrative.

Third step. Read the parts that are not underlined. Do these make one continuous account?

Then the angel of God who went before the host of Israel moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud moved from before them and stood behind them,

coming between the host of Egypt and the host of Israel.

And there was the cloud and the darkness; and the night passed without one coming near the other all night.

Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea;

and the LORD drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night, and made the sea dry land,

and the waters were divided.

And the people of Israel went into the midst of the sea on dry ground, the waters being a wall to them on their right hand and on their left.

The Egyptians pursued, and went in after them into the midst of the sea, all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots and his horsemen.

And in the morning watch the LORD in the pillar of fire and of cloud looked down upon the host of the Egyptians, and discomfited the host of the Egyptians,

clogging their chariot wheels so that they drove heavily;

and the Egyptians said, "Let us flee from before Israel; for the LORD fights for them against the Egyptians."

Then the LORD said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand over the sea, that the water may

come back upon the Egyptians, upon their chariots and upon their horsemen."

So Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea,

and the sea returned to its wonted flow when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled into it, and the LORD routed the Egyptians in the midst of the sea.

The waters returned and covered the chariots and the horsemen and all the host of Pharaoh that had followed them into the sea;

not so much as one of them remained.

But the people of Israel walked on dry ground through the sea, the waters being a wall to them on their right hand and on their left.

Thus the LORD saved Israel that day from the hand of the Egyptians; and Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the seashore. *

The parts of this passage which you have underlined are from the version which is called "P" (Priestly tradition); the parts which are not underlined are from the version known as "J" (Yahwist tradition). You were introduced to these in Chapter One (p 3). The J tradition comes from the Southern Kingdom, around the time of David and/or Solomon, but it probably is based on much older oral or written traditions. There was another tradition, referred to as E (Elohist), which came from the northern kingdom of Israel. At some point in history E was joined to J to form a composite tradition. You can notice traces of this union in the passage quoted in Exercise Two. If you check the first two sentences in this passage you will see a repetition of the same thought using slightly different imagery:

"The angel of God ... went behind them (E)"

"The pillar of cloud moved ... behind them (J)"

In the J tradition the presence of God is referred to as the pillar of cloud (or fire), but the E tradition prefers to speak of the angel (messenger) of God.

Some phrases or sentences cannot be clearly attributed to a specific tradition, but in the main the separate versions are quite clear. In the following pages we reproduce Exodus 13:20-14:31, using ordinary print for J, with the parts thought to belong originally to E in brackets, and italics for P. First, read the J version (ordinary print) with the bracketed parts (E), and then read the commentary on it which follows.

13-- 20 And they moved on from Succoth and

encamped at Etham, on the edge of the wilderness.

21 And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar

of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in

a pillar of fire to give them light, that they might

travel by day and by night; 22 the pillar of cloud by

day and the pillar of fire by night did not

depart from before the people.

\-----------------------------------------------14- 1 Then the LORD said to Moses, 2 "Tell the

\-----------------------------------------------people of Israel to turn back and encamp in front of

\-----------------------------------------------Pi-ha-hiroth, between Migdol and the sea, in front

\-----------------------------------------------of Baal-zephon; you shall encamp over against it,

\-----------------------------------------------by the sea. 3 For Pharaoh will say of the people of

\-----------------------------------------------Israel, 'They are entangled in the land, the

\-----------------------------------------------wilderness has shut them in. ' 4 And I will harden

\-----------------------------------------------Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them and I will

\-----------------------------------------------get glory over Pharaoh and all his host; and the

\-----------------------------------------------Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD." And

\-----------------------------------------------they did so.

5 (When the king of Egypt was told that the

people had fled), the mind of Pharaoh and his

servants was changed toward the people, and

they said, "What is this we have done, that we

have let Israel go from serving us?" 6 So he

made ready his chariot and took his army with

him, 7 and took six hundred picked chariots

and all the other chariots of Egypt with officers over all of them.

\----------------------------------------------8 And the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king

\-------------------------------------------------of Egypt and he pursued the people of Israel as they

\------------------------------------------------went forth defiantly. 9 The Egyptians pursued them,

\---------------------------------------------all Pharaoh's horses and chariots and his horsemen and

\-----------------------------------------------his army, and overtook them encamped at the sea, by

\------------------------------------------------Pi-ha-hiroth, in front of Baal-zephon.

10a When Pharaoh drew near, the people of

Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold, the

Egyptians were marching after them; and

they were in great fear.

\--------------------------------------------10b And the people of Israel cried out to the

\--------------------------------------------LORD;

11 and they said to Moses, "Is it because

there are no graves in Egypt that you have

taken us away to die in the wilderness? What

have you done to us, in bringing us out of Egypt?

12 Is not this what we said to you in Egypt, 'Let

us alone and let us serve the Egyptians'? For it

would have been better for us to serve the

Egyptians than to die in the wilderness." 13 And Moses

said to the people, "Fear not, stand firm, and

see the salvation of the LORD, which he will

work for you today; for the Egyptians whom you

see today, you shall never see again. 14 The

LORD will fight for you, and you have only to be

still."

\-----------------------------------------------------15 The LORD said to Moses, "Why do you cry

\--------------------------------------------------------to me? Tell the people of Israel to go forward.

\--------------------------------------------------------16 Lift up your rod, and stretch out your hand

\-----------------------------------------------------------over the sea and divide it, that the people of

\-----------------------------------------------------Israel may go on dry ground through the sea. 17

\-------------------------------------------------And I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so

\-------------------------------------------------------that they shall go in after them, and I will get -

\-----------------------------------------------------glory over Pharaoh and all his host, his chariots,

\-------------------------------------------------------and his horsemen. 18 And the Egyptians shall

\-------------------------------------------------------know that I am the LORD, when I have gotten

\-----------------------------------------------------glory over Pharaoh, his chariots and his

\--------------------------------------------------------------------horsemen."

19 (Then the angel of God who went before the

host of Israel moved and went behind them); and

the pillar of cloud moved from before them and

stood behind them, 20 (coming between the host

of Egypt and the host of Israel. And there was the

cloud and the darkness; and the night passed without

one coming near the other all night.)

\----------------------------------------------------21 a Then Moses stretched out his hand over the \-----------------------------------------------------------sea;

21 b and the LORD drove the sea back by a

strong east wind all night and made the sea dry

land,

\---------------------------------------------------and the waters were divided. 22 And the people of

\-------------------------------------------------Israel went into the midst of the sea on dry ground,

\------------------------------------------------- the waters being a wall to them on their right hand

\----------------------------------------------------- and on their left. 23 The Egyptians pursued, and

\------------------------------------------------------- went in after them into the midst of the sea, all

\---------------------------------------------------- Pharaoh's horses, his chariots and his horsemen.

24. And in the morning watch the LORD in the

pillar of fire and of cloud looked down upon the

host of the Egyptians, and discomfited the host

of the Egyptians, 25 (clogging their chariot

wheels so that they drove heavily;) and the

Egyptians said, "Let us flee from before Israel;

for the LORD fights for them against the

Egyptians."

\-----------------------------------------------------26 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Stretch out

\------------------------------------------------------------your hand over the sea, that the water may

\------------------------------------------------------------come back upon the Egyptians, upon their

\-----------------------------------------------------------chariots, and upon their horsemen. " 27a So

\-----------------------------------------------------------Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea,

27b and the sea returned to its wonted flow

when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians

fled into it, and the LORD routed the Egyptians

in the midst of the sea.

\----------------------------------------------------28a The waters returned and covered the chariots

\--------------------------------------------------------and the horsemen and all the host of Pharaoh

\--------------------------------------------------------------that had followed them into the sea;

28b Not so much as one of them remained.

\----------------------------------------------------29 But the people of Israel walked on dry ground

\------------------------------------------------------through the sea, the waters being a wall to them

\----------------------------------------------------------on their right hand and on their left.

30 Thus the LORD saved Israel that day from

the hand of the Egyptians; and Israel saw the

Egyptians dead upon the seashore. 31 And Israel

saw the great work which the LORD did

against the Egyptians, and the people feared

the LORD; and they believed in the LORD

and in his servant Moses.

Commentary on the Yahwist (&E) narrative

This sacred author places the emphasis on God's presence and action. God is the one who leads them both by day and by night under the sign of a pillar of cloud for the day and fire for the night. While Moses is involved, his function is to calm the People and to give them confidence in the Lord. It is the Lord himself who will save them; Moses and the sons of Israel have only to " _stand firm . . . be still_." The Yahwist also pictures the People in all their weakness; they are willing to go back to the security of slavery rather than take the risk of freedom. Without Moses they would probably have surrendered themselves and taken their punishment.

When the Egyptians approach too near, the Presence moves from the lead as a protector between them and the Egyptians. There is no movement through the night, except for a strong east wind out of the desert which dries up the waters. In the morning, before daybreak, the Lord causes panic in the Egyptian camp. The text suggests that their chariots were stuck in the mud as they tried to escape from the Lord. It is the Egyptians now who run for their lives, but the waters return, meeting the Egyptians head-on; sending them flying into the sea. When daylight came the People saw them all dead on the shore, and they finally believed in Moses and in the Lord.

This version is careful to point out that the event took place shrouded in the mystery of night. What the People felt was a strong east wind, what they heard was panic and terror in the Egyptian camp, what they saw were the dead bodies on the shore.

The style of the Yahwist narrative has the characteristics of good story telling. The scenes shift from the escaping slaves to the palace of the Pharaoh, then back to the People. The characters are all given lines to speak which give life and excitement to the story: the Pharaoh says he is sorry he let the slaves go, the slaves say they are sorry they left, and Moses tells them to be still. Only the Lord has no lines, but he dominates the story by his presence and action. All are quiet as the night wind blows, until the silence is broken by the screams of panic in the Egyptian camp, " _Let us flee_ . " The irony of the mighty pursuers fleeing in terror, while their feeble prey stands firm, would not be lost on those who heard this version of the Exodus. The story ends with the People fearing not the Egyptians, but the Lord.

Commentary on the Priestly narrative

Now read the sections of the Exodus narrative which are printed in italics (P) on page 12 As you read, notice the dramatic structure of the account, how it is presented in three acts, each beginning with the words of the Lord and concluding with the accomplishment of what the Lord said would happen.

The three acts begin with " _The Lord said_ .....(vss 1, 15, 26). In each act the Lord instructs Moses and, in each, everything happens as the Lord commanded. You will recall that Gen 1:1-2:4 was from the P tradition as well and showed the same concern for the power of the word of God. In the creation account of the P tradition the Lord spoke, and " _so it was_ ". Here too, the Lord speaks and the event takes place.

You will also recall that in its creation account the P tradition had creation beginning with a watery chaos which God divided on the second day. The power of God to control chaos in nature, represented by water, is manifested again in the Exodus where water is divided and serves to destroy the forces of chaos in history, represented by the Egyptians. The themes of creation and saving history are united in the P version of the Exodus.

Creation took place as a direct act of God, but here everything happens through a man, Moses. His role as God's mediator is emphasized in each phase of the event; God does not act directly, but through his servant.

The style of the P narrative suggests drama more than story telling. It could well be that the P account of the Exodus was originally a liturgical recitation which might even have been ritually dramatized. This is only a conjecture, because we do not have any concrete evidence in the OT rituals of a liturgical dramatization of the Exodus. The theory has some validity: we know that the people of the ancient Near East used dramatization in their liturgy, and we also know that the People of God did some dramatizations as well. The dramatic form of the Priestly version of the Exodus could well have developed as part of a ritual re-enactment of the Exodus.

In summary, Exod 13:17-15:21 contains three types of literature which communicate both the fact and the meaning of the Exodus. The poetry of Exod 15 praises the Lord for the greatness of his deed; the Yahwist narrative sees the act as the work of God alone, while the Priestly tradition emphasizes the role of Moses. All three agree on the basic fact — God destroyed the Egyptians in the water, thus liberating the sons of Israel.

Reflections on the Exodus as Revelation

Through the Exodus, God not only gave life to his People, but also revealed himself to them. He showed himself to be very different from the God people generally imagine him to be. Human reason alone will most often arrive at a notion of God through order, power, stability and permanence. Nature itself is a first witness to its Maker. And surely order, power, unchangeability belong to God. The Exodus, however, reveals something of the mystery of God which is not contained in notions of order, power and stability. The Exodus reveals God in relation to disorder, weakness and change. This revelation seriously disturbs natural human reasoning and throws a new and unexpected light upon God.

When we look at the order, the power and basic stability of creation, we can legitimately conclude that these reflect God. Mankind, however, does not usually stop at seeing God in the order of nature, but proceeds to see God in the order, power and permanence of human society. These attributes of society, however, are ambiguous, because order can serve evil as well as good ends; so can power and permanence. To put it simply, mankind is inclined to see God as the cause and sustainer of what is; the Exodus reveals him as the cause and sustainer of what should be. Through the Exodus God reveals himself as the One who has his own ideas about what human society should be like, and he shows himself as the One who will intervene in history to bring about what should be. The Exodus reveals God not as the One who indifferently causes what exists, but as the One who has a will, a plan, expectations. The Exodus links morality with God, not morality in any cheapened sense, but morality in the sense of norms or expectations of truly human achievements.

Egypt was an orderly society, very powerful and boasting a permanence best symbolized by its pyramids. Egypt was also a very religious country, gods and priests and temples abounded. The gods were seen as causing, supporting and approving the smooth functioning of this strong and stable society. It was seen as divinely willed that the Pharaoh should be on top and that society should be developed under him with a class of wretched slaves at the bottom. Disorder was seen as going against the deities and the structure they had ordained for Egypt. The Exodus shows God passing judgment on a very powerful, orderly, cultured and religious society. The judgment is passed on the basis of the way it treated its least significant members. We see God intervening in history, reaching down to raise up those who are the casualties of a very successful system of government. Further, we see God laying the foundations of his plan to form a new people, a new society in contradiction to " _Egypt, that house of slavery_."

The Exodus tells us that God values human beings and that he is not indifferent when they are reduced to an abject and miserable state. It is, in fact, precisely in their condition of helplessness that God chooses to make them partners with him in the creation of a new and better future. Their weakness calls forth his power. The power of God does not shun the weakness of man, but turns compassionately towards it and invites it to share with him the task of shaping history.

When God will bind himself to his People in the Covenant, it will be in order to create a society that will reflect the revelation of himself in the Exodus. God will give them a plan, the Law, to form them into a people which values its members, from the greatest to the least, a people that is compassionate, a people that will not cling desperately to order, power and stability, but a people who will cling to his will and change accordingly. When the People of God allow Egyptian-style injustices to exist among them, God will raise up prophets to condemn the abuses and call them to change. The prophets will warn them that the wrath shown to the Egyptians will come down on them unless they change.

The good news of the Exodus leads directly to the Good News of Jesus Christ. " _Blessed are the poor_ " finds its roots in the Exodus. Through all ages God brings forth strength from weakness. The poverty, weakness and helplessness of the People in Egypt called forth the power of God; the abasement, lowliness, and paralysis of the One Crucified brings about God's greatest saving act. From the Exodus to the Resurrection God is constant, faithful, as is so well underlined by the Liturgy for the Easter Vigil. The Exodus remains a mystery bright with the light it sheds on God, a light which Christ intensifies, but does not change.

" _And Mary said . . . He has pulled down the princes from their thrones and exalted the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty_ " (Lk 1 :52f).

## Chapter 4c Other Selections From the book of Exodus

**Moses, Servant of God**

Throughout the centuries the People of God reflected long and hard on the qualities of the true leader. Their reflections always brought them back to Moses. It is around him, first of all, that they developed their model of the true leader. (Second to Moses is David). So extraordinary is this picture of the true leader that it would take Jesus, the New Moses, to perfect it. You will recall that in Chapter Three we saw that Moses, like the LORD himself, was sensitive to the agony of the People and that Moses experienced personally what his People suffered. This identification of the Leader with his people is the first mark of the true leader. Along with this we must include the oneness of the leader with the sensitivities of God: he sees and hears what God does.

We will now look at three short passages which describe further the role and qualities of Moses, Servant of God.

Reading Exodus 17:8-16

Note: do not let yourself be distracted by the enmity between the Amalekites and the People of God; rather, concentrate on the intercessory role of Moses.

Comment

The moving picture of Moses with arms outstretched, exhausted with prayer for his people, is a powerful reminder of the role of intercession in the life of a leader of God's People. The direct relationship between the victory of the People over their enemies and the prayer of their leader underlines the importance of intercessory prayer.

Not only does Moses intercede for his People when they are innocent, but he also pleads for them when they are guilty. His bold prayer (almost blackmail) calls on God to set aside deserved punishment and pleads with him to show mercy. And God listens to him.

Reading Exodus 32:7-14

God has threatened not to go with the People, but to send " _an angel_ " to be with them on their journey (33:2f). Moses in this passage will have nothing to do with a substitute for God himself. He wrestles a promise from God, " _I myself will go with you_ ". Again, the LORD does what Moses asks.

Reading Exodus 33:12-23

Moses is made bold by his sense of power over God. He asks for what he desires more than anything else, to see God face to face. Even Moses cannot see God directly. (It would take many centuries before people could say: " _We have seen his glory_ " Jn 1:14¬18.)

The Manna

Among the extraordinary ways in which the Lord fed the People as they wandered through the desert, the manna experience was the most significant. It became the subject of songs (Ps 78:23-24); wise men reflected on it as a wonderful sign of God's providence (Was 16:20-29), it was called " _the food of angels_ "; priests and levites, concerned with preaching the Law, used the manna to illustrate their teaching.

Remnants of these sermons are found in Exod 16.

Reading Exodus 16

The first point that is emphasized in ch 16 argues against greed and the unnecessary accumulation of wealth (vss 17-18). Building on this, the sacred authors emphasize that one must The manna incident is also used to illustrate the point that one is not to work on the Sabbath.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 5- You Shall Be My People- The Covenant

**Introduction**

Chapters Three and Four have described how the Lord freed his People and led them out of bondage, out of the inhumane society of Egypt, " _that house of slavery_ ". He had consistently demanded: " _Let my People go, in order that they might serve me_." The Hebrews were to be delivered from slavery in order to be free to serve God; they are no longer slaves but they are still servants. They are called to form a new society, a just and brotherly society of freedom. It is now time to look at what it means to serve God as a free People, his People. Chapters Five and Six thus consider the meaning of true freedom.

## Chapter 5a The Covenant Made Through Moses

While travelling through the desert, the newly-emancipated slaves had a remarkable, unforgettable experience: they encountered God. Their experience was remembered as the time when God entered into a special relationship with them. They accepted this relationship and thereby became his special People. God's offer and the People's acceptance is expressed in terms of Covenant. Later writers, fearing that the Covenant would be understood as a cold contract, used warm and emotional images to express it: the Covenant is like a marriage based on mutual love; it is like the relationship between parent and child; or it is like an adult adopting an abandoned child out of love and concern. Other images are used as well: the Covenant relationship is like the one between a good shepherd and his flock, or a good and just king and his faithful people. These are all images to express the central idea of the Covenant.

The texts which we will consider have been chosen because in them we find the most important elements of the Covenant. The first passage contains in summary form the basic elements of the Covenant and therefore serves as an introduction to chapters 19¬24 which form the core of the Covenant. Ch 20 gives us the Ten Commandments which are the stipulations of the Covenant and ch 24 is the conclusion in which the Covenant is ratified in a ceremony. We will now look at each of these texts.

When the Lord called Moses to a life of service, he commanded:" _After you have led the People out of Egypt, you are to offer worship to God on this mountain_ " (Exod 3:12). After leaving Egypt and having crossed the Sea of Reeds, the People finally arrived at the base of the mountain. Moses climbed Sinai and God encountered his People there. Read the short, but powerfully rich account of this meeting on the mountain.

Reading Exodus 19:3-8

General comments

The first point to be made concerns the uniqueness of our faith. It is not the belief in a God who is related to his People that makes our faith unique since many other ancient peoples thought of their gods in this way. Rather it is our belief in a God who freely enters into the events of history which sets our faith apart. The pagans considered the fact that their god was in relationship to them to be part of the nature of things: it always was and always would be. They believed their gods to be tied to them and to their land by necessity; neither party had any choice in the matter. But faith in the God of the Exodus has no necessity about it. The Lord did not have to enter into relationship with his People: he established the Covenant freely. These two views of God have very different consequences. The pagan type of thinking can be very dangerous in a society whose structures perpetuate a situation of injustice, as, for example, in Egypt. Those who are in control in such a society can justify their actions by the belief that their god, who was always bound to them, necessarily willed the present situation because he had never indicated otherwise. This is a subtle way for men to make decisions for God, or, in other words, to control him. The Israelite belief, on the other hand, is that the present situation may well be contrary to the will of God and that he can intervene in history with a different idea, an idea of how society should be.

Specific Comments

The Lord discusses his relationship with his People. Through the beautiful poetic imagery of a mother eagle carrying her fragile brood on her back, God recalls that he has taken the initiative to free the People and to care for them in the desert. Here the sacred author gives us, not a description of a stern and forceful God, but that of a gentle and loving mother carrying her young when they were unable to fly on their own (See Deut 32:10-12 where this image is used again). Notice that the author mentions what God did to the Egyptians in as brief a way as possible. God's great power and sovereignty are not to be forgotten, yet the author wishes to place the emphasis on God's tender solicitude for his People.

God's purpose in doing all this for the People was to bring them to himself (vs 4). This is said before all the talk of future blessings and glory as if to make it known that the greatest blessing man can be given is to be with God, that is, to be in communion with him. God draws men to himself by means of promises of good things; he is a generous God who delights in showering blessings on his People. Yet he does not wish them to become so eager for his gifts that they ignore their call to be with him.

Past, present and future are brought together in this passage. On the basis of what God has done (past), the People understand that the Lord is serious about wanting to make them his People (present). If they obey his voice and hold fast to his Covenant, that is, if they accept and live out his proposal, then God promises to make them great (future) as he promised to Abraham and his descendants.

The Covenant is initiated by God, but the People are expected to do their part, so the Lord places a condition on the Covenant: it depends on whether the People keep it or not. There is no question about God's intention to be faithful to the Covenant; that is assumed on the basis of his mighty acts of the recent past.

God promises to make the People his " _segullah_ ". This is the Hebrew word which we translate as " _my special possession_ " or " _my very own_ ". It has the sense of a particular treasure, not necessarily valuable in itself, but extremely valuable to the one who owns it (like an inexpensive piece of jewellery to which one is greatly attached). The imagery suggests that God is the great king who owns the whole world but chooses to reserve this People to himself.

Not only does the Lord promise to make them his special possession, but he will make them a kingdom of priests. Priests occupied a prestigious and powerful position in most of the societies of the ancient Near East and the prospect of being raised to the exalted status of priests would be very appealing to the People who had so recently been on the lowest rung of society's ladder. The promise, therefore, involves a new prestige and dignity for the People, yet the expression " _kingdom of priests_ " means still more. A clue to its meaning is offered by the next phrase, that Israel will be a holy or consecrated nation. To be holy or consecrated means to be different from others, to be set apart for a purpose. Being a kingdom of priests thus means more than having priests among the People and more than having priests governing the country; there would be nothing special about either of these, since most nations had priests and many were ruled by priests. Rather, Israel as a kingdom has a priestly function. A priestly function is never for the priest alone but for others. Israel's role is, therefore, not for itself, but for the sake of others, that is, the nations. Israel serves as mediator: through her instruction (Torah) she brings God to all men; in her sacrifices she brings all men to God because she worships on behalf of the nations. Thus, Israel is consecrated (holy) for the sake of others. She is a sign of God's love; all nations will recognize her priestly function (Isa 61:6); all people will come to Jerusalem to offer gifts to the Lord (Ps 72:10) and to acclaim all the wise teaching of Israel. Thus, God renews the promise which he made to Abraham: that the People will be a blessing to the nations.

" _Those are the words you are to speak to the sons of Israel_ " is a summary sentence implying the whole of God's offer, including the stipulations, or commandments, which are spelled out later. This whole offer is what Moses is to bring to them for their consideration. God is seeking out a People to be his own, whom he will lift up above all other peoples. He has gently drawn the People to himself; he has shown mercy to them and given them a new hope for a glorious future.

By a vote of acclamation the People submit to this relationship with the Lord. God has left them entirely free to accept or reject his offer. He does not intimidate them or coerce them in any way, so that their response might be motivated by love rather than fear.

Concluding remarks on this passage

In this passage we read of God's offer to create a People out of the mixed group whose only common bond was their departure from Egypt. In truth, they were " _no-people_ ". If the Lord had not initiated the Covenant with them, they would have been free in the desert, without unity and without purpose. The very fact that they did stick together attests to the activity of God in their midst, because, humanly speaking, there was no reason for them to form themselves into a people.

The Lord has stepped into the People's history. He asks them to remember how he led them out of Egypt and brought them to himself and promised to make them truly great. Their personal experience of the Exodus should fill them with confidence in his love for them and in his ability to make good his promises. Remembrance inspires gratitude, confidence and hope. These become the motivators for love and submission to the Lord.

The rest of ch 19 contains part of another tradition's description of the Covenant. In contrast to Exod 19:3-8, which is characterized by its warm tone and gentle imagery, this one is very powerful in its portrayal of God. The author of this account vividly describes God's absolute sovereignty and majesty by making him appear in a dense cloud amidst thunder, lightning and trumpet blast. The intended effect of this is to fill the People with awe so as to increase their confidence in the Lord's ability to do what he says he will do. Furthermore, it has the added effect of driving home to the People the seriousness of the Covenant relationship. The Lord does not take it lightly; nor should the People.

In the previous text (Exod 19:3-8) the sacred author gave us a summary of the Covenant. He referred to the fact that God had instructed Moses to convey to the People all the " _words_ " which he wanted the People to know before accepting the offer of a Covenant relationship. Now in this second text (Exod 20:1-17) we will consider what these " _words_ " were that God gave to Moses, and Moses passed on to the People.

In Hebrew the Ten Commandments are referred to as the " _ten words_." ("Decalogue" comes from Greek and also means " _ten words_ ") The Ten Commandments are the fundamental " _words_ " of God about the way his People are to live. By the Covenant God calls them to be his very own People, a special People, holy and different from other peoples. He calls them to be a new society; very different from Egypt, " _that house of slavery_." Thus it is clear that all of God's law is another of God's many gifts to his People. The law, the memory of God's mighty deeds and the promise of a great future together made up a " _gospel_ ", that is, good news which the People were called to bring to the other nations.

The Decalogue is the foundation of the whole of the Torah, or Law. It can be divided into three categories according to our relationships to God, to other people and to possessions.

Reading Exodus 20:1-17

Commentary on the Ten Commandments

The opening verse sets down the ideal motivation for observing God's law: we obey God because of who he is and what he has done and will do for us; that is, we obey him out of love for him. By saying, _"I am the Lord (Yahweh), your God_ ", he identifies himself by his personal name which he revealed to Moses prior to the Exodus. Then he relates himself to what he has done for them by taking them out of the house of slavery. Next, he draws a picture of the society which he desires for them, a society which is in direct contrast to the one which they have just left. Having freed them, he shows them how they can remain free; having taken them out of a situation of injustice, he shows them how to form a society which is just.

_The First Commandment_. When the Lord says, " _You shall have no other gods except me_ ", he is asking them to acknowledge him alone in their life and worship. The point of this commandment is therefore exclusive worship. They would be strongly tempted to adopt religious practices of the pagans so they are given a strong commandment to pay no attention to other gods either in their cult or their conduct. This is the first step of a long process towards pure monotheism when the very existence of other gods was denied (See Isa 45:5).

_Second_. The commandment against carved images does not refer to images of other gods, the worship of which was ruled out above. Rather, it prohibits images of the Lord. Such a commandment would have been no less than revolutionary in a world where all nations had images of their gods. Israel was the only nation to go against the current in this regard.

Behind the desire to make an image of God is a desire to define him, to limit him and, ultimately, to control him. But God defies any such attempt. The commandment asserts God's absolute freedom which is not to be restricted by man's imagining what he is like. Moreover, it was so easy to slip into worship of the image which is lifeless, rather than worship of the true God who is living, personal and often times demanding. A lifeless image cannot do anything, either good or bad. The Lord, however, is a jealous God who punishes transgressions to the third or fourth generation, but who shows favour to the thousandth generation to those who are faithful to him (See also Deut 7:9-10).

Note: When God did choose to give us an image of himself, it was no lifeless idol, but the living image of his own Son.

_Third._ The prohibition against the misuse of God's name is aimed at magical practices where the name of a god was used to bring harm to another person. It was believed that knowing the name of a god gave one a certain control over the power of that god. God gave the People the privilege of knowing his name but he reminds them that he is free and not to be controlled by man. The commandment does not prohibit the use of God's name for the good of another, as when one blesses another in God's name. Put positively, the commandment is meant to ensure that God's name is only invoked to bring good on others in the Covenant.

You will recall that all of these commandments are given as the charter of a new society. The first prerequisite is that the society be obedient to the one God who has saved them; it is this common obedience to the one God which is the basis of their unity as a people. The second is that the People are to realize their God is a God who is free and cannot be manipulated to their own ends; even though he has bound himself to them in a Covenant-relationship, they do not have absolute control over him. Therefore they cannot do whatever they please. The truly humane society is an obedient society which is answerable to God.

_Fourth_. The commandment to keep the Sabbath holy marks the dividing line between those which pertain to God and those which have to do with man. It is a hinge-commandment because it enjoins the People both to revere the Lord and to respect human dignity. It does not primarily command them to worship God on the Sabbath (worship was so much part of their life that there was no need to command it). Rather, it says that all of the People are to cease work. Israel's six days of work and one day of rest was the shortest work-week of ancient times (days of rest were observed in other societies every ten days or more).

The society which is committed to freedom celebrates leisure. The Sabbath rest is an expression of their freedom (See Deut 5:12-15). It is also a reminder that the completion of work is rest (See Chapter One).

_Fifth_. The Hebrew word for " _honour_ ," in the commandment to honour one's father and mother, has the sense of "to give weight to" or "to acknowledge the importance of". This commandment is addressed to adults whose parents are getting on in years. To "give weight" to them means to take them seriously, to listen to what they have to say. It also says that the aged are not to be left on the periphery of society, but they are to be integrated into its life. Thus their wisdom will be preserved in society. To " _honour_ " also includes the duty to provide financial support for the parents. Notice that there is a promise attached: if society takes care of its elderly members, then each one can be sure that he will be cared for in his old age and all will live a long life. For an excellent commentary on this commandment, see Sir 3:1-16.

_Sixth_. The commandment against murder affirms the sanctity of human life. However, it cannot be used as an argument against capital punishment, a right which society has (See Gen 9:5-6); nor does it prohibit the taking of life in war or in self-defence. Rather, its original purpose was to control the practice of killing a fellow-Israelite in the context of blood-vengeance. In the absence of any police force, blood-vengeance was practiced in ancient times as a means of maintaining a rough form of justice between tribes. It was a tribe's duty to avenge the death of one of its members, even if that death were accidental or if a person killed another in self-defence. With the advent of the judicial system in Israel, an attempt was made to ensure that every man received a trial. Therefore, he was not to be murdered by the clansmen of the dead person before his case was heard in court. Thus, the commandment against murder prohibits people from taking the law into their own hands. Its intent is to support proper channels of justice in the new society.

_Seventh_. The purpose of the commandment forbidding adultery is to uphold the sanctity of marriage. Taken literally, it defends the rights of the husband, but its intent is the preservation of the bond of marriage.

_Eighth_. The commandment against stealing originally had a special meaning in that it referred to the theft of persons for the purpose of slave-trade. In the early days this was a problem in Israel, but it was successfully eradicated as a result of strong legislation such as this law. Then the commandment came to be understood as a prohibition of theft of property. But in its original meaning it is a defence of human freedom.

_Ninth_. The prohibition of false witness is meant to maintain the proper functioning of the society's legal system which cannot work if people are able to get away with lying in court. Thus, the commandment defends every man's right to a fair trial.

_Tenth_. The Hebrew word for " _covet_ " means the whole process of theft: conceiving the idea, planning and carrying out an act of stealing another's property. Therefore, it protects a man's right to property. Note: it was only later that people began to interpret this commandment in the more spiritual sense of a prohibition of envy.

Concluding remarks on this passage

The Decalogue gives the reader a good sense of the type of society which God wills for man. The sacred author has deliberately set this charter of a new society in opposition to the conditions in the " _house of slavery_ " which the People have left behind.

Made in God's image and likeness, every person has fundamental God-given rights. The Lord gave his law so as to guarantee those rights and to lay upon the People the corresponding duty to honour the rights of others.

In the first text (Exod 19:3-8) we read a summary of the Covenant; in the second text (Exod 20:1-17) we read the laws which form the basis of the new society, the People of God. In chs 21 to 23 we have a collection of ancient laws covering a variety of matters, all of which were seen as part of the stipulations of the Covenant. Now, in our third text (Exod 24:3-11), we consider the ceremony which is used to ratify or confirm the making of the Covenant. It is a liturgy rich in symbolism that conveys the meaning of the Covenant.

Reading Exodus 24:3-11

Comments

The number of times the People have stated their intention to do all that the Lord has said is striking (Exod 19:8; 24:3; 24:7). Although this repetition is due to the various traditions which are contained in the narrative, the end-result gives an indication of God's persuasive way of acting. He offers them his plan for their continued freedom; he is favouring them specially and giving them great responsibility. However, he wants them to accept in a truly free manner.

All the details of this ceremony are purposely mentioned. Moses writes down the Lord's commands so that they can be regularly reviewed; he is concerned that future generations be able to participate in the Covenant.

The twelve standing stones, or pillars, at the base of the altar, stand for the twelve tribes of Israel, all of whom are witnesses to the Covenant (See Josh 24:26-27).

Moses conducts what is called a communion sacrifice. In this type of sacrifice, part of the animal, the portion which was given to God, was burned and the rest was eaten by the People. This communion sacrifice symbolizes the peace and fellowship existing between God and his People. It is as if they offered the entire animal to God and he returned the compliment by inviting their representatives to join him in the banquet (vs 11). The sprinkling of blood on the altar (representing God) and on the People symbolically unites the two parties. Blood has always been a symbol of life, so it is a living union which is established between God and his People. (Mingling of blood is a common sign of the union of lives, eg., the familiar "blood-brother" ceremony.)

The elements of " _sacrifice_ "and " _mea_ l" which are found in the sealing of the Covenant made through Moses, are retained in the Eucharist, which is the sealing of the Covenant made in Christ Jesus.

In vs 8 Moses utters the formal declaration of the establishment of the Covenant, " _This is the blood of the Covenant the Lord has made with you._ " This expression is echoed in the words of Jesus at the institution of the Eucharist in Luke 22:20.

In vss 9-11 we have a version of the Covenant meal which derives from yet another tradition. The passage is a moving description of an intimate sacred meal; it is laden with mystery as is any description of a mystical experience. In the context of the preceding verses, the passage reports that a select group of notables, or chief men from among the People, slowly ascend the Holy Mountain. As morning breaks and the first rays of dawn appear through the mist, they approach the summit. Then suddenly their eyes behold what is like a firmament made of blue sapphire, pure and bright. Through this shines forth the very glory of the Most High, in splendour and majesty. They realize that the blue firmament is God's platform and, though they do not see him face to face (no one can see God's face and live), they nevertheless do behold his glory: they gaze on God, they eat and drink in his presence. This very special meal is a symbol of what God desires to accomplish by the Covenant. He established a bond of communion with his People, a bond so intimate that they will be able to eat and drink with him. Herein lies the essence of God's plan for all people. The Covenant meal of communion in which people participate now is the foreshadowing of the eternal banquet which the prophets and NT writers longed for (See Isa 25:6-10; John 6; Rev 3:20; 19:5-9). As the hymn says, " _God and man at table are sat down."_

"They gazed on God. They ate and they drank". Exodus 24:11

## Chapter 5b The Literary Form of the Covenant Passages

On the basis of a detailed study of ancient documents (especially Hittite texts), it would appear that covenant-making in the ancient Near East followed a certain pattern particularly when the covenant was between a mighty king and a lesser one (a vassal-king). Scholars have reconstructed what they believe to be the literary form of covenant-making. This form of covenant usually included the following six elements:

1 . _Preamble._ The great king gives his name and his titles, eg., "I am Marduk, the great emperor, the Viceroy of God, the conqueror of empires, . . ."

2 _Historical prologue_. The king then relates his achievements, especially those benevolent acts performed on behalf of the people with whom he is entering into a treaty. This is aimed at engendering a spirit of gratitude in the vassal.

3 _Stipulations imposed upon the vassal_. The great king then makes his demands of the lesser king. These are considered to be his rightful claim and the vassal obeys them out of gratitude. The stipulations are both general and particular. The vassal is required to make an oath of loyalty (eg., " _you must serve me alone'_ ) and a promise of concrete assistance (eg., to provide a specific number of soldiers every year).

4 _Preservation of the treaty_. The king also demands that a written copy of the treaty be made and read regularly, lest the vassal neglect his obligations.

5 _Witnesses to the agreement_. The king usually calls upon his gods and those of the vassal to witness the covenant. In addition, he calls upon natural powers, (eg., heaven and earth, the wind and the clouds).

6 _Blessings and curses_. In order that the lesser ruler continue to obey, the king provides rewards for fidelity and sanctions against disobedience. Although the vassal might well be grateful at the time of the treaty, his loyalty may give way to rebellion. The motives for obeying always include fear.

Most of these elements, common in Hittite treaties, can be found in biblical literature. What follows are examples showing biblical passages which relate to the elements described above.

_1 Preamble_ : " _I am the Lord (Yahweh), your God."_ (Exod 20:2a). The Lord begins with his personal name which he revealed to Moses.

_2 Historical Prologue_ : " _You yourselves have seen what I did with the Egyptians, how I carried you on eagle's wings and brought you to myself."_ (Exod 19:4. See also Exod 20:2b). The Lord recalls his kindnesses to the People in the hope that they will be filled with gratitude and therefore enter into the Covenant.

_3 Stipulations:_ " _From this you know that now, if you obey my voice and hold fast to my covenant,_ . ." (Exod 19:5a. See also Exod 20:3-17). Here the Lord presents his stipulations to the People. They are both general ( " _obey my voice"_ ) and specific (the commandments).

_4 Preservation of the treaty_ : " _Moses put all the commands of the Lord into writing."_ (24:4a). This is one version of the way the Covenant was preserved. (There are versions of this from other traditions; for example, in Exod 24:1 2 we see that God writes the laws on stone tablets). We do not see in these passages a clause to the effect that the laws are to be read regularly but, we can find such a stipulation in Deut 31:10-11.

_5 Witnesses to the agreement_ : This element of the Covenant form is not to be found in the Covenant passages which we have studied. This is because there could be no possibility of invoking other gods as witnesses. But nature is called upon to be a witness in Josh 24:26-27.

_6 Blessings and curses_ : God promises to bless the People on the condition that they listen to his voice. There are blessings and curses in Exod 20:5-7 and a blessing attached to the commandment to honour father and mother (Exod 20:12). Other Covenant curses and blessings can be found in Deut 27 and 28.

The literary form of covenant-making is helpful in that it focuses our attention on certain elements in the Covenant of God with his People which could otherwise be overlooked. in particular, the importance of history is emphasized in the historical prologue of the covenant form. The obedience which the People promise in the Covenant is based on the solid, historical evidence of God's goodness towards them.

God's acts on behalf of the People are a matter of history, not myth or imagination. it is worth noting that the creed of the People of God in the Old Covenant, as expressed in Deut 26:5-9, and in the New Covenant, as expressed in the Apostles' Creed, are basically a-recitation of the historical acts of God on behalf of the People.

When the People appreciate these deeds of God, they can be motivated to obedience by gratitude for his goodness. When, however, gratitude is not strong enough, blessings and curses have to be brought to mind to strengthen their motivation to obey. History, gratitude, blessings and curses, all of these are needed to support the obedience of the People to the stipulations of the Covenant.

The discovery of the form of Hittite covenants has led to important insights into the Covenant of God with his People, but a word of caution is in order. It is possible to gain a very incorrect view of God by emphasizing the similarities between the two types of covenants. The Hittite form involves a superior king imposing the treaty on the inferior one; he makes an offer which the other cannot refuse. Applying this premise to the Biblical Covenant results, in a subtle way, in seeing God as a powerful warlord (or "Godfather") who wants to force people to be grateful and, in effect, to coerce them into submission to his terms. But nothing could be further from the truth because, in the Biblical Covenant, God leaves the People totally free. God is without a doubt very powerful but his power is at the service of his great love for his People; his power is in his extreme gentleness. It seems as if the sacred author sensed the danger implicit in the comparison of God with the Hittite warlord and sought to correct it by giving us the gentle image of God as a mother eagle before giving the powerful description of God as one who comes amidst thick clouds, thunder, lightning and trumpet blast. It may be objected that to emphasize God's tenderness is to forget that God can become angry and punish transgressions, that he can curse as well as bless. But God's curses, like his blessings, are to be understood as following upon the People's acceptance of the Covenant. They were under no obligation to enter into the relationship which God proposed to them. But once they accepted the Covenant, it was with the understanding that they were to be answerable to a living, personal God, a God who like a father, makes moral demands and punishes transgressions. Therefore, a degree of free choice was present in the Biblical Covenant which was not present in the Hittite treaties and this is an important difference between the two.

Yet the Hittite form states a fundamental truth about the People's relationship to God: it implies that the Lord (Yahweh), is their only King. This is a point which would later become an argument against the People having an earthly king to rule over them. In fact, a controversy developed among the People whether or not it was God's will that they have a king, and this controversy is reflected in the Books of Samuel as we will see in Chapter Eight.

The People eventually were to opt for an earthly king, but they never ceased to affirm that their true king was the Lord. The theme of God's absolute kingship over his People occurs frequently throughout the Scriptures, particularly in the " _Psalms of God's reign_ " (eg. Ps 99. See also Ps 23, where " _Shepherd_ " is another image for king).

## Chapter 5c Bond of Communion

The Covenant is an agreement between God and his People whereby God has bound himself to them and promised to be with them. He has committed himself to abide by the terms of the Covenant and he requires that they, in turn, keep certain promises. We will first discuss what the Covenant means in terms of the demands it makes on God with respect to his relationship to his People. Then we will look at the demands which the Covenant makes on the People with respect to their relationship to God and to other people. Note: The points made below are drawn mainly from the texts already considered in this chapter.

God has taken the initiative and freely chosen one small group of people; he has established a relationship with the community; it is a personal relationship which requires the People to be responsible to God who will bless them but who will not hesitate to reprove them.

God has taken the initiative. The Covenant is established by God. It reveals that the Lord is concerned about people who are in need and that he freely takes the initiative to help. The People of God come to know God's love through historical events and circumstances wherein God has acted first: it was he who heard their cry; he who raised up Moses; he who delivered them out of the hands of the Egyptians and he who offered to form them into a People. They must, of course, do their part but it is entirely based on what God has done first. This truth, found again and again in the Sacred Scriptures, is encapsulated by St. John when he says, " _We love because he first loved us_ " (1 John 4:19).

God has freely chosen this People. In considering the Covenant passages we are confronted with the mystery of election: the mystery of God's choice of this People. He desires to make them his special possession, but why he should choose this group rather than another is a secret which remains with him. The mystery of election is part of the uniqueness of the People's faith. They were different from other nations in that their history was nothing to be especially proud of from the human point of view. They had been freed from slavery by the Lord, but they had had nothing to do with it. Their boast was that God had done it all for them; that God, in his great mercy, had chosen to favour them, a poor and insignificant group of slaves. God did not choose the People because of any merit of theirs: it was not because of their size or strength (Deut 7:7), nor was it because they were particularly virtuous (Deut 9:4-6). Rather, he chose them because he loved them (See Deut 4:32-40 and 7:6-10).

God's choice of Israel to be his People was not for its own sake, but for the sake of the nations. Election is to responsibility. The People were given a high ideal of conduct to follow so as to demonstrate to the rest of mankind that their God is wise and good and that the law which he gave them is wise and just (See Deut 4:5-8). This is another way of expressing the People's call to be a kingdom of priests, bringing God to men and men to God.

The relationship is with the community. This is an important point for several reasons. In the first place, it is the witness of the whole society functioning according to certain laws that will impress the other nations and bring them to God. God calls for a societal witness to the nations and not for individual witness, so he makes the Covenant with the community rather than with individuals as such. In the second place, the idea of God's making a Covenant with an individual would have been foreign to the People. Their life was totally communitarian: life was life-in-the-group. This was an absolute necessity during their days of wandering in the desert, since to go out of the camp alone meant almost certain death (either due to the elements of nature or to bloodthirsty nomadic tribes). The group took responsibility for the well-being of each of its members both while they were in the desert and after they had settled in Canaan. Consequently, the group required each member to conform totally to its rules. This resulted in a kind of "anti-individualism" quite contrary to the spirit of our own day. The People accepted their kind of life and demonstrated a healthy ability to subordinate private interests to the common good. Thirdly, when God made the Covenant with the People, it was not only with whoever happened to be at the mountain at the time. The Covenant is not with a limited People. God established it with all succeeding generations and he made it possible for anyone else living at that time to enter into it. This had the effect of guarding against the possibility of an elitist mentality springing up among those who originally received the blessing.

The relationship is personal. The Covenant established a personal relationship between God and his People. The Covenant accounts are characterized by their "personal" vocabulary (" _Your God . . . my People . I led you_ "). Such a personal touch is not only much more appealing to read than expressions such as " _their God_ " or " _the God of the Jews_ ", but it also makes it very clear that God is intimately and lovingly associated with his People; he has created a bond of communion with them.

It involves blessings and curses. God desires his People to be in a loving personal relationship with him. This is the greatest blessing man can receive and it is found in a life of loving obedience to God. The corollary of this is true too, that the greatest curse a man can suffer is to be apart from God. The one who is disobedient to God brings this curse upon himself. The Lord, like any good father, does not hesitate to punish disobedience in his People so as to bring them back to him (See Heb 12). If, however, his People persist in their sin, he will not force them back; he will simply give them sufficient warning about the consequences of their conduct. Thus, in Scripture we find numerous passages which mention promises of abundant blessing for those who remain faithful to the Covenant and curses for those who fail to observe it (See Deut 28 and Lev 26). However, it is clearly expressed that God's mercy far exceeds his justice, and God's final word is one of blessing, peace and love.

Israel's response to God's saving activity is one of gratitude and love, that is, of exclusive allegiance to him. Their life and worship are directed to him; they obey the law out of love for him; they are to be a sign to the nations so as to manifest his glory.

Their life and worship are directed to him. Henceforward their whole life is given a new direction and meaning. Their worship is oriented to the Lord alone. Even when they borrowed ideas about various types of sacrifice from pagan nations, these were completely changed because they were offered to the Lord and in his name; when they borrowed feast days from the pagans these were given a new meaning; when they accepted certain laws from other societies, they obeyed them for a new motive, gratitude to the Lord. Likewise, circumcision was practiced not only by the Israelites but by many peoples of the East, but for the People of God it had a very special meaning: it was the rite of initiation whereby one became a member of the Chosen People (See Exod 12:48).

They obey the law out of love for him. The Law is God's gift to them; it is a light for their path (Ps 119:105). In it they find a way to respond properly to God and to keep their newfound dignity and freedom. Because of what he has done for them, they want to obey him. This response is much more personal and human than a response of blind obedience to a distant and powerful force (See Deut 4:7). God is close to his People and, while he is powerful, he has used his might to do good to them; it is only right that they should obey him happily and gratefully.

Law, like the stipulations of the Hittite treaty, is both general and particular. It is the total (general) "Yes" of surrender to God's will (the spirit of the law) and is expressed in Scripture by terms such as, " _listen to his voice_ ," " _love,_ " " _obey,_ " " _serve_ ," " _remember_ " and " _fear_." But this general attitude can often be nebulous. It must be expressed in particular concrete stipulations (the letter of the law). Both of these elements must be present in law. One shows his love and service precisely by faithfully doing little things in his daily life, yet these details become empty observances if they are not inspired by an attitude of grateful love.

The People's specific obligations to God are contained, in capsule form, in the first section of the Decalogue and their duties toward one another are outlined in the second section. They were called to be a society that was different from all other societies. They were to practice justice in their dealings with one another. In living out this call, the People developed an extensive body of laws to cover various aspects of their life and worship; all of these were elaborations on the basic principles contained in the Decalogue.

They are to be a sign to the nations. The people were called to a dignified life of love and service towards God, towards each other and towards all the nations. God did not choose them solely for their own gratification but also that they, by their conduct and worship, might tell of his glory to all peoples of the world. Thus, the way they lived up to their responsibilities was not simply their own private business. What they did affected others, so they were duty-bound to give a good example as a community. " _When a man has had a great deal given to him, a great deal will be demanded of him._ ." (Luke 1 2:48).

Conclusions

The Covenant event marks the formation of the People of God. The People were born in the pain of oppression. Having gone to Egypt in search of food, they found hardship, toil and oppression. As slaves they were deprived of freedom and justice; they were stripped of their dignity and left without hope. In the eyes of the king of Egypt they counted as nothing, but in the eyes of the King of the whole earth this downtrodden group was precious. The Lord considered them important enough to give them freedom. In this alone he restored dignity to them but he wished to do more; he wanted to make them great not only in his own eyes, but in the eyes of all the nations. He elicited their gratitude and love by virtue of his actions on their behalf, but he did not want them to feel that they had to respond to him out of indebtedness, since this would have diminished their dignity. In promising them a great future, he gave them a sense of purpose and therefore a genuine hope. Moreover, he gave them the means to achieve this purpose by giving them his law. And he increased their dignity further by giving them a responsibility to be his special representatives on earth; he made it clear that he counted them extremely important because he counted on them to proclaim his love and goodness to all peoples.

Lest they feel themselves bound to obey him out of forced gratitude, God gave them a promise of abundant blessing. Lest they become proud of their exalted status, God gave them a serious responsibility to live a life of service, to practice justice and thereby to proclaim his name to the nations.

The Lord had promised Abraham that his descendants would become a great nation. He fulfilled his promise to them by raising them to glory as a nation. They became great politically, economically and culturally under kings David and Solomon. This greatness was to pass quickly, however, but God also gave them a glory that was to last, by raising up among them a host of extraordinary people who would communicate to his people and to the whole world the glory of God and the greatness of humanity.

"~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 6- The Law
## Chapter 6a Purposes and Characteristics of the Law

If the Exodus is the invitation to freedom and the Covenant the acceptance of freedom, then the Law is the Charter of freedom for the new society the Lord had in mind for his People.

These three realities together represent a new act of creation by God. He formed a People out of the soil of Egyptian society; he breathed his own life into them and placed them in the garden which was the Promised Land. He gave them a command, his Law, for their individual and collective good; in obedience to it they would find life and continued communion with him.

" _You shall be holy to me, because I, the Lord am holy, and will set you apart from all these people so that you may be mine_ " (Lev 20:26). God created his People to he images of himself, distinctive and unique among the nations as he himself is distinctive and unique among all the gods that the nations worshipped. The People are called to mirror their God's love of justice, his compassion, his true freedom.

By means of the Law God wished to form a society where the dignity of people would he maintained, a society free from all that enslaves or demeans the human person. This Law was given to form them into the " _great nation_ " which God had promised he would make, of the descendants of Abraham.

The Torah (Law) was given to the People to restore and maintain the harmony that was disturbed by sin. AR aspects of their relationships to God, to each other and to the earth are directed by the Law. Their personal and communal relationships to God are guided by the rules of worship; their relationships with each other are governed by instructions covering everything from kidnapping and usury to the rules of good hygiene; their relationships to the earth are directed by rules for sowing and reaping and for giving the land its own " _sabbath_ " rest, The sacred and the profane, the exalted and the mundane marriage and money, liturgy and latrines - all are viewed as worthy of concern, because the Lord is present to his People and all should be worthy of him.

The Hebrew Torah, which we translate as Law, comes from a verb which means to instruct, direct, point. The Torah is instruction on how to live; it gives counsels to guide the People. The Torah has laws, such as the Ten Commandments, but many of its rules are more properly customs and practices that have proven to be good.

Torah, however, is even more than laws and customs approved by God for the People. You will remember that the Torah written in the five books of the Pentateuch, Gen, Exod, Lev, Num, Deut, contains much more than laws. It includes the lives of the saints, such as Abraham and Moses, and these are Torah as well as the legislation. The virtues of the saints are instruction, they give direction, point the right way. The best behaviour of the ancestors strikes a responsive chord in the hearts of all who seek to live a good life, and in this way the virtues of the ancestors become a norm of good conduct. The weaknesses and failures of the ancestors also instruct the People on what not to imitate.

The nucleus of the laws, including the Ten Commandments, was given by God through Moses when the Covenant was made on the mountain. To be useful, laws must be adapted to fit changes in the life of the People. The core of laws given at Sinai developed through the centuries, as new laws became necessary and old ones needed adaption to fit new situations. The shifts from the life of nomads in the desert, to the life of peasants and then to urban life and to life under an earthly king, all required adjustments and additions to the laws, customs and regulations received.

Whether laws arose one year or six hundred years after Sinai, they were still laws of God given through Moses, because they were laws which were discerned by the People as being worthy of God who was present among them, and consonant with the directions given through Moses at Sinai. in collecting all these laws and placing them in the context of the Exodus and Covenant, the sacred authors give the correct setting for all the laws, because all are God's laws and all are laws came to be because of, and therefore through, Moses. The laws of the People were never attributed to an earthly king, as were the laws of most other nations; nor were they ever credited to a judge or a lawyer, The laws were God's. King, judge, lawyer, priest, rich man, poor man, all came under Law of God without exception.

One last general remark needs to be made on the Law. People today still tend to take literally the expression " _an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth_ " (Exod 21:23-25; Lev 24:17-22: Deut 19:21). There is no evidence that this was ever physically practiced among the People. If you read Exod 21:18-27, the context of this expression, you will see that before and after the words " _eye for an eye_ ." cases are given where physical punishment is not meted out to match the injury. The words " _an eye for an eye_ " are more precisely understood as a proverb, a rule of thumb, than as a strict law, The phrase is an easy slogan for making "the punishment fit the crime - Penalties should be proportionate to the offense, not more nor less severe than the crime deserved.

In fact, the laws of the People were more humane than those of the nations around them. For example, the cutting off of a hand or afoot as punishment for a crime was quite common in some law codes. In Biblical law, however, only one case is given which recommends mutilation (Deut 25:11ff), and that is so exceptional that it should not be taken as law but as stern advice for women who tend to become unfairly involved in their husband's quarrels. Many examples could be given of the thoughtful humaneness of the laws, but we will let the texts speak for themselves.

The Law of God is good and the People were encouraged to have a positive attitude towards it. Ps 19:7ff expresses this very well: the law gives life to the soul; it makes simple people wise, and it brings rejoicing to the heart.

## Chapter 6b Love the Lord

Today we tend to see laws as impersonal demands made on us; we seldom know the lawmakers, seldom feel any injury to our personal relationship to the law-makers when we break a law. The law very often seems to be a thing-in-itself, having a force of its own with no person, or persons intimately connected with it. This attitude could develop among the People of God, and at times did. The leaders of the People were very fearful of such a cold attitude to the Law of GOD, and so they urged their listeners never to separate the Law from the Lord God who gave it to them. It is the Lord himself who stands personally behind his laws; it is the Lord who is served when his Laws are observed. The perfect observance of the Law of God is love of God and to love God is to obey his will. This obedience is the obedience of a son to his father, the response of willing service by children who know their parents' love for them.

The ideal is not mechanical service, empty of any personal feeling on the part of the People. The true ideal is the interiorization of the law which makes obedience personal and freeing. Demeaning, slave-like obedience was never promoted, though it could and did occur. After Egypt, they are not to be slaves ever again, not even slaves of God. The ideal is presented in the text we will now consider.

Reading Deuteronomy 6:4-9

Commentary

_Listen, Israel_ was probably a traditional pronouncement made at liturgical assemblies, somewhat like our " _lift up your hearts_ ".

_The Lord our God, the Lord, one_ is the literal translation of the Hebrew. It can be interpreted in at least three ways. It could mean " _the Lord (YHWH) is our God, the Lord alone and no other._ " This would be a restatement of the commandment which insists that no other gods should be acknowledged except the Lord (YHWH). It could also mean " _the Lord, our God, is one Lord_ " which stresses the fact that there is only one, not many Lords (Yahwehs), that is, that there is only one and the same Lord whether he is the Lord of the shrine at Bethel or Jerusalem, or whether he is the Lord God of Abraham or Moses. Finally, it might be interpreted as " _the Lord (YHWH), our God is the only YHWH (Lord), there is no other like him_ ". This would stress the uniqueness of the Lord. These interpretations do not contradict each other and can be understood as enlarging on the meaning of the phrase. Many other interpretations and elaborations are possible.

_You shall love the Lord_. The Hebrew word ahab (love) is as broad as our English word "love"; it can be used for the passionate sexual attraction between man and woman, the affectionate devotion of husband and wife, or the sturdy and calm dedication of friends.

To love someone is to have affection for that person, to be drawn to a person from inside, from the heart. To love means also to be dedicated to the one you love, to be ready to serve their needs.

When the law urges love of God, it is urging an affection for God that springs from the heart of the person. it is also urging a sense of dedication to God, a desire to obey what God asks. Love of God, therefore, is both affection for God and obedience to him. Hatred of God is both having no feeling for him and no obedience to his law. Hatred begins with indifference to God and ends with disregarding his will.

Obedience is the essence of love of God, but it is not just obedience that is being proposed in Deut 6:5, it is love in the full sense, obedience with a feeling of personal attachment to God himself. The essence of love (obedience) can be commanded (see John 15:10-17), but the experience of being drawn to God as to someone we desire to be close to, is a gift that comes through proper instruction about the goodness of God, and through personal and community prayer.

_With all your heart_ . is an emphatic statement of the ideal interior; personal and wholehearted response to God's Law. A response of personal love of God himself springing from one's innermost self is held up as the norm; cold, formal and empty carrying out of rules is to be avoided, Obedience which binds one lovingly to the person of God himself is what is desired.

_On your heart ,your hand , your doorpost ,your gates_. With these words the sacred author moves from within the person, to his actions, then to his house and finally his property. Starting from the heart and going out, the whole of life, inside and outside the person, is to be permeated with the good Law of God. The People are to teach it to their children, keep it close to mind in whatever they do; they should let it fill them as air fills the lungs.

Note: Over the centuries this passage of Deut, known as Shema Israel (which means " _Listen. Israel"_ ), has become as much a part of Jewish life as the Lord's Prayer is to us. On every significant occasion of rejoicing or sadness it is recited or sung. A practice also developed of actually wearing "phylacteries", or little leather boxes containing this and other Scriptural passages, on the head and on the hand during morning prayer. The People also hung on the doorposts of their houses containers within which were parchment copies of Biblical passages. These customs were based on a literal interpretation of the instructions in Deut 6:4-9 and they served somewhat the same purpose as medals or crucifixes do for us.

The ideal that is given in words in Deut 6:4-9 is also acted out in ritual. The sacrifices which the People offered in their shrines, and later only in Jerusalem, expressed the same total, free submission to God which brought about a joyful union with him. It is not possible here to enter into many details about the various forms of sacrifice which the People could offer. We shall consider one general type of sacrifice called holocaust.

Unfortunately the word holocaust has come to be associated today with dreadful disasters and has lost its original sense. The word translates a Hebrew word which means to go up, referring to the pleasant smoke which went up from the sacrifice.

As you read the next passage answer the following questions concerning the ceremony and the functions of the priest and layman.

a.Who brings the animal to the place of offering?

b.What gesture does he make on the animal'?

c.Who kills the victim?

d.Who handles the blood?

e.What is done with the blood?

f.Who makes the fire to burn the victim?

g.What is pleasing to the Lord in all this?

Reading Leviticus 1:1-9

Commentary

This text gives the directions on how the sacrifice is to be offered, but it gives very little explanation of what it means. It is very much like the directives (rubrics) in our own rituals. A close look at the instructions on how to offer sacrifice, however, can yield some answers as to its meaning.

Note: in any language words can change their meaning with time. In English, for example, "suffer" once meant "allow" or "permit"; today however, it means "to endure pain". This is the case with some Hebrew words which occur in this passage (Lev 1:1- 9). A word in vs 4 can mean " _at-one-ment_ " or " _expiation_ ", depending on what century the translator believes the verse was written, A phrase in vs 9 can mean " _an odour pleasing to God_ " or "an odour that will appease- God, depending on the age of the text. The reason is this: the meaning of the sacrifice described here changed after the Exile, The sacrifice once meant a joyful union with God. but after the Exile the stress changed to expiation for sin. You will notice differences in English translations of this passage. Some use words such as " _expiration_ " and " _appease_ ", others use different words. Our interpretation judges the passage as having been written mostly before the Exile, when the meaning was basically union with God.

To arrive at the meaning of this sacrifice we must distinguish between what is preparation and what is actual sacrifice. The layman brings the animal to the place of sacrifice, he lays his hands on the animal's head, kills the animal, skins it, cuts it in pieces, washes the entrails and legs and gives all to the priest. This is all preparation for sacrifice, it is done not by the priest hut by the layman. The slaughtering of the animal has no meaning in itself, it is only preparation for sacrifice. The priest sprinkles the blood around the altar, prepares the altar with fire and wood, places the pieces of the animal on the fire. This too is preparation. The preparation includes symbolic gestures which indicate the meaning of the sacrifice itself. The layman who is providing the animal for sacrifice lays his hands on the victim's head. This is a gesture of identification; the layman makes himself one with the animal. The priest takes the blood of the animal and sprinkles it around the altar. Since the layman has identified himself with the animal, and since the altar represents God, the sprinkling of the blood around the altar is symbolic of the union of the offerer and God; one life (blood) flows between God and the offerer.

The central feature of the sacrifice, however, is the fragrant smoke that rises up and is found pleasing to God. The offerer has identified himself with the victim, so the pleasant odour that rises from the burning victim represents the offerer himself rising to God and being accepted by God as pleasing. The goal of the sacrifice is atonement, that is at-one-ment, union of the offerer and God. (You will recall that our English word holocaust is a translation of a Hebrew word halah, which means to go up, to rise and not "to destroy".) The burnt offering or holocaust, was a joyful and moving experience for the devout believer; he felt himself rising up to God and being accepted by God as a person pleasing to him. There was nothing morbid about the ceremony.

This sacrifice ritual form the goal of the life of a believing member of the

People of God" union with God. It also expresses his desire to love God with all his heart and mind and strength.

## Chapter 6c.And Your Neighbour

We have considered two texts (Deut 6:4-9; Lev 1:1-9) which express the goal of the Law, free and joyful union with God. In this the Law is promoting the restoration and maintenance of the harmonious relationship with God, In the next passages to be read, the relationships of the People among themselves are considered.

The first passage you will read (Deut 23:16-24:22) gives a good sampling of regulations, showing the very broad scope of the Law of God. There is no clear order in this passage, the topics change with almost every verse. It might help if you imagined that you were reading the laws and customs involved in a day's proceedings at the " _city gates_ ". In one day a judge, seated in public at the city gates, could hear a variety of cases: a worker complaining that his employer did not pay him on time; a poor man complaining that his creditor had taken his millstone as a pledge; a farmer complaining that passer-by had loaded their baskets with his grapes, and so on, The judge would give each: party in the dispute a fair hearing and then, knowing the existing laws of the land and having the wisdom to apply the humane spirit of God's Law to the situation, he would pronounce his judgment.

Reading Deuteronomy 23:16 - 24:22

Note: There are differences of verse numbers for this passage in the English translations. In the RSV and the NEB our reading begins at 23:15 while in the NAB and JB it begins at vs 16.

Commentary

_Runaway slaves_ (vss 16-17). This is about foreign slaves who have escaped to Israel. Slavery was an accepted fact throughout the ancient Near East, Slaves would frequently attempt to gain freedom by escaping to another country In order to force slaves to return to their owners, there were extradition treaties between nations whereby a runaway slave could be returned to his owner, This law annulled extradition treaties and allowed runaway slaves to remain in the country. It also warned the People not to molest an escaped slave or take advantage of his situation. They were to permit him to live where he pleased.

_On temple prostitutes_ (vss 18-19). The Canaanites had fertility rites involving female and male (called dogs) prostitutes. The ceremonies were thought to be necessary to assure good crops. This law was designed both to curb any inclinations the People might have to adopt such practices for the sake of material prosperity, and to free them from degrading superstitious customs.

_Against taking interest on loans_ (vss 20-21). The interest rate was extremely high at that time and it would be hard for one of the People to disentangle himself once he became caught in the web of debt. This law underlines the duty of each one to help his fellow insofar as he is able, without taking advantage of his need to borrow.

_On vows_ (vss 22-24). This is more like advice than law. it states the seriousness of making vows to God, but it also states that vows are not required; they are voluntary.

_Provisions for travellers_ (vss 25-26). This again is not so much a law as a humane way of acting. The right of a person to own property was respected in the Law but here that right is somewhat limited. Yet at the same time it protects the farmer from being robbed. The rule promotes a spirit of brotherly love among the People. We see the Apostles taking advantage of this rule in Matt 12:1ff.

_On the writ of divorce_ (24:1-4). This law protects both marriage itself and the rights of the woman, by stressing the permanence of divorce. The man who divorced his wife was to give her a writ of divorce, attesting to the fact that he no longer had any claim over her, and that she was now free to marry again. The man could not get rid of his wife, and then change his mind and claim her back again. This law discouraged hasty divorces. Divorce was permitted on the grounds of " _uncleanness_ " or " _indecency_ "; the exact meaning of the expression was never clear. Some interpreted it strictly as meaning adultery, others made it mean almost any complaint a man might have against his wife. This law was making the best of a bad situation; the chaos that resulted from frequent and inconsiderate divorces required some legal attempt to curb the harm that came to women as a result.

_On the rights of newlyweds_ (vs 5) This is a good example of the type of customs which God wants the humane society to have. We see here that a happy and successful marriage takes precedence over national security. The exemptions from military service were very broad (See Deut 20:5-9).

_On security for loans or debts_ (vs 6). We saw above that interest on loans was forbidden; but here we see that pledges could be demanded by the creditor. However, this law and the one in vss 10ff plead for kindness. The millstone was needed to grind the ingredients (grains, spices etc.) that were to make supper. The grinding was done every day so a creditor would be depriving a family of their meal if he took the stone.

_On kidnapping_ (vs 7). This is the original meaning of the commandment in the Decalogue which forbids stealing (Exod 20:15). This law upholds the right of every man to liberty.

_On "leprosy_ " (vss 8-9): The word for leprosy here can mean one of a number of contagious skin-diseases. It was the priest's responsibility to diagnose and treat the affliction. In doing this, the nation had an effective means of controlling or preventing the possibility of an epidemic. Thus the law is intended for everyone's health.

_On pledges_ (vss 10-13). The creditor was supposed to show respect for the dignity of the other by waiting courteously outside and not barging in as if he owned the place. The cloak was all the poor man had to keep himself warm at night.

_On wages_ (vss 14-15). The workers were customarily paid at the end of each day, and depended on their pay to buy the family's supper. As the gospels say, " _The workman deserves his keep_ " (Matt 10:10).

_On individual guilt_ (vs 1 6). Highly communitarian ways of life led to rather indiscriminate punishment: one member of a family could be punished for the crimes of others in the same family. This rule urges individual retribution, reminding the People that justice is not achieved by revenge on the family, but by personal punishment given to the offender himself (See Jer 31:29 and Ezek 18).

_Justice for the poor_ (vss 17-22), it would be impossible to write a separate law for every conceivable opportunity for a man to practice charity towards a poor person. In vss 17- 22 we have four concrete examples of ways to be neighbourly. Notice the stress on those whose rights could be easily denied, the stranger, the orphan, the widow.

The next passage which we will discuss expresses the highest ideals which any society could have; it gives us the ideal that lies at the very heart of the whole Law. Jesus, in proclaiming the Gospel, accepts these ideals completely. He gave them to us as ideals only achievable by the power of the Spirit of God, acting in people who are born again to live a new life. We should always remember that these ideals were already present and sought after by the People of God many centuries before Jesus came.

Reading Leviticus 19:17-18 and 33-34

Very little commentary is necessary. The sacred authors preserve in these words the central message of God for the life of his People - no hatred, no vengeance, no grudges -love your neighbour as your own self (See Matt 19:19). The love of one's fellow is expressed by helping him know his fault. If a person does not correct his neighbour, that person takes the sin of the neighbour on himself. Jesus elaborates on this fraternal correction in Matt 18:15-17; and he draws out the implications of love in Matt 7:12 and 5:21-26.

It should be noted that Lev 19:33-34 also says that the stranger is to be loved as one's own self. Not only is the neighbour to be held as precious as one's own life, but the stranger, foreigner, immigrant, is also to be valued as one's equal. The point behind vss 33-34 is that poor and dispossessed people, whether of the People or foreigners, could easily be molested, that is misused, abused. It would be easy to reduce such people to the status of slaves, taking advantage of their condition to underpay them, or to force them to do inhuman work.

" _Remember you were once strangers", recalls Egypt and all he horrors that accompanied that "house of slavery."_

The sacred author uses the same word (ahab) for love of neighbour and stranger as was used for love of God in Deut 6:5. The ideal way of loving one's neighbours, therefore, would be to have a real attachment to them, an affection that leads to service; but this feeling cannot be commanded, it can only be urged and encouraged. The essence of the Law, however, can be commanded — responding to a neighbour's legitimate needs. Hatred is indifference which leads to disregarding the needs of the neighbour.

Too often people today pass off the Law as being primitive or even crude. This attitude to the Law can only arise out of ignorance of the nobility of its contents, such as is expressed in its highest form in Deut 6:4-9 and Lev 19:18 and 34.

The love of neighbour and of the stranger (the non-Israelite immigrant) that is recommended in Lev 19, is pushed even further in the Old Testament. Deut 10:18 tells the People to give food and clothing to the needy stranger; Exod 23:4f orders the People to help their enemy when he is in need; Sir 28:1-7 urges his readers to forgive the neighbours who have sinned against them; and Tobit 4:15 proposes that we should not do to others what we do not want done to ourselves. All of this leads inevitably to the teaching of Jesus.

## Chapter 6d In the Land

The Law of God set forth a lofty ideal, a guide for all the People to follow. One of its most important features is summarized in Deut 15:4. " _Let there be no poor among you_ " ; The Law called for an obedience of the heart which cannot be legislated. If a person wanted to, he could always find ways to get around the demands of generosity which underlie the Law. In the Law we see the constant attempt to assure justice and equality for the poor.

The Lord's good law defends the basic right of all, including the right to property and the right to work. Both of these rights contribute to man's freedom but they can be abused if a person becomes a slave to them. In order to counteract such an eventuality, the law provides limits to the right to property by allowing for the needs of the traveller (Deut 23:25ff) and it controls man's tendency to be a slave to work by commanding the Sabbath rest (Exod 20:8-11 and Deut 5:12-15). The Law thus reminds men that they are not made only for the sake of production and work but that the completion of work is rest. It also reminds us that land and property are God's gifts to men and that men must respect them as such; God commands men to subdue the earth but he does not command them to abuse it. The earth has rights too.

Reading Leviticus 25:1-7

The law about the Sabbatical Year is quite ancient. In fact its origins are to be found in pagan customs whereby every seventh year whatever grew on the land was not to be used by men but left for the gods, The People removed the pagan overtones and made this a rest for the land, the produce of which was to be shared with the poor. In the early days, most of the People lived close to the land so this law affected the majority. Later, however, many members of the society lived in towns and made their livelihood in ways that were not directly dependent upon agriculture. Consequently, the law of the Sabbatical Year had the effect of reducing the income of the farmer without hurting the craftsman or the businessman, The farmer would often be forced to borrow money and eventually bind himself to do certain menial labours in order to pay back his loan, all because of a law which prevented him from working the land in the seventh year; The law which was originally intended for good became the cause of economic inequality among people. To remedy this unhappy state of affairs, the law was modified significantly.

Reading Deuteronomy 15:1-11

The man in need could borrow with a promise to repay in cash or in work. Depending on the amount borrowed, he would work for his creditor for a proportionate length of time. In this passage from Deut, the seventh year was to be the occasion for freeing a man from his debt, whether it be in money or in years of work. This law was a humane adaptation of the original law to a new situation. Unfortunately, however, it contained a loophole which is indicated in the passage. A creditor would be sorely tempted to refuse to lend to anyone if the sabbatical year were only a short time away. The passage mentions this possibility and urges men not to become hard of heart in such a situation. But it was not enough to appeal to the goodness of men's hearts so the law underwent another change.

Reading Deuteronomy 15:12-18

There were slaves among the People but they were of a different type than that which the word usually connotes to us. The slave was usually one who had "sold" himself into another's service for the purpose of repaying a loan. Here we see that he was to remain in the service of his creditor for no longer than six years, after which his debt was to be forgiven completely. This was not the generally observed Sabbatical Year but the individual slave's sabbatical year.

The Sabbatical Year law teaches that the earth is God's and man is to be a steward with regard to it. The law teaches us that the earth is not to be exploited but respected. It also teaches that no man can be owned by another in perpetuity. Especially should the People realize this, as is so well expressed in Deut15:15"

Every :one of the People belonged, of course, to a family and each family had an ancestral home, that is a plot of land, When a family came into hard times, they would often be forced to sell their property. The People considered it wrong for a family to lose its ancestral home, so a law was made to prevent such a loss from being permanent.

Reading Leviticus 25:8-13

The year of Jubilee was also a sabbatical year so the regulations about farming and remission of debt were in force. But the year of Jubilee was very special. When the text commands all the People to return to their ancestral home, it means that they are to take possession of it again. This law was revolutionary, to say the least. With it was a set of guidelines for determining the terms of sale of land,

A family who needed to do so could put its land up for sale. The price varied according to the number of years left before the next year of Jubilee. If there were many years to go, the buyer would be able to reap many harvests and therefore thy family could fetch a high price. They calculated the number of years until the next Jubilee by the number of years since the last one.

Underlying this law is the belief that one could not buy land but only the produce of it. The land was God's and was entrusted to the family whose heritage it remained.

It is not possible to say whether the Sabbatical Year was observed regularly by the People. There is only one clear reference to it outside the legislative texts (1 Macc 6:49,53). The Bible does not give any record that the Jubilee Year was ever observed. Whether these extraordinary laws were ever faithfully carried out or not, they still represent extraordinary attempts to come to grips with justice for the poor and respect for God's ownership of the land.

" _The Jubilee year, precisely because it was dedicated in a special way to God, involved a new ordering of all things that were recognized as belonging to God: the land, which was allowed to lie fallow and was given back to its former owners; economic goods, insofar as debts were remitted, and, above all, man, whose dignity and freedom were reaffirmed in a special way by the manumission of slaves. The Year of God, then, was also the Year of Man, the Year of the Earth, the Year of the Poor, and upon this view of the whole of human reality there shone a new light which emanated from the clear recognition of the supreme dominion of God over the whole of creation."_ (Pope Paul VI)*

*"Bull of indiction of Holy Year 1975", par 34 in L'Osservatore Romano, June 6, 1974.

Conclusion

The Law was a great gift to the People. In its fundamental form, the Ten Commandments, and in all the laws which developed over the centuries, the Law showed nobility, a deep sensitivity to justice, and a practical realism which went far beyond laws and reached towards generosity and love. The obedience which the Law demanded was not left cold and barren in words carved on stone, but was embodied in a man such as Abraham, and the love of God and the neighbour which it encouraged was made visible in the fiery love that Moses had for the Lord and for the People. The Law, both in its regulations and in the persons who were examples of how to live the Law, was truly great and called forth greatness from the People. By means of the Law, the Lord was leading his people away from slavery and into freedom. By following the Law the People could walk proudly, with heads held high (Lev 26:13) as the free People of their honoured God. It is no wonder that Jesus said that nothing of the Law would ever pass away. The Gospel only surpasses the Law in the way that fruit surpasses the blossoms from which it came (Matt 5:17-19).

## Appendix 2

The Development of the Law

The Torah as we know it is the result of a long process of development, beginning with the core or nucleus of laws which came from God through Moses at Mount Sinai. As the People changed their lifestyle from a nomadic to a settled existence in the land of Canaan, they perceived the need to have laws which applied to their new situation. They came in contact with laws which were already practiced by the Canaanites and members of other societies. The People adopted whichever laws they found to be consonant with the spirit of the Law of Moses and they adapted certain other laws so as to make them harmonious with their beliefs.

That this is so is proven by the remarkable similarities between the Torah and the laws of other cultures which have been unearthed through archeological research. But there are several important differences between the Torah and the laws of other nations. The Torah is distinct in that it presupposes a spirit of loving relationship with God as the motive for obedience rather than blind obedience to an impersonal force. lt is different too, in that it does not legislate any specific form of political structure: nor does it assume or condone any sort of distinctions of social class among the People. The Torah is further characterized by its didactic nature and, above all, by its extremely humane spirit.

The People freely borrowed good laws from other cultures and added them to their Torah. The Torah also developed as a result of being applied to particular cases. Legal disputes were settled in public at the gates of a town or city by the travelling judge. Whenever the judge pronounced an especially brilliant decision, the onlookers would take note of it approvingly; Word of the judgment would spread quickly; the precedent would be remembered and eventually find its way into the Torah.

The Torah developed in these ways and it was supported and given colour by the lives of the holy men and women of the past, such as Abraham, Moses and others.

The Division of the Torah

Finally we can say a few words about the contents of the Pentateuch. It is broadly divided into narratives and bodies of laws. These laws in turn are divided into five groups according to their date of origin and the literary tradition to which they belong.

The oldest set of laws is the Decalogue, found in two slightly different versions, Exod 20:1-17 and Deut 5:6-21. Both seem to be based on a very ancient set of laws which probably derives from Moses himself.

_The Code of the Covenant_ is another body of laws and is contained in Exod 20:22- 23:33. It reflects the type of life that the People would have lived soon after their settlement in the land of Canaan; it is a law for a community of shepherds and peasants.

_The Deuteronomic Code_ is found in Deut 12-26. This group of laws seems to have originated in the North and been brought South after Israel fell to the Assyrians in 721 BC.

_The Law of Holiness_ is contained in Lev 17-26. It is similar in many ways to the Deuteronomic Code, but it differs in its greater emphasis on rites and the priesthood. It probably was put in writing just prior to the Exile.

Finally _, the Priestly Code_ is a body of laws that make up most of the remainder of Law, that is chs 1-16. It also reflects concern for rituals and priests.

## Appendix 3

Some laws which are relevant to the reading of the NT.

_On Kosher foods_. The Torah covered every aspect of the life of the People and one of the most important of these was food. Deut 14:3-21 and Lev 11 are two texts which specify what may and may not be eaten. We are not asking you to read them; however, if you wish to read one, read Deut 14:3-21;

The laws about clean and unclean food have their origin in very ancient religious cultic practices. Indeed they were so ancient that the People probably no longer remembered the reasons why some foods were clean and some were not. By the time these laws were written into the Torah, the reason was given as a consequence of the People being _''set apart_ ", different from other peoples. Dietary laws were a very effective way for the People to profess outwardly the faith which they proclaimed inwardly. The dietary laws grew in importance for the People when they went into Exile and were living side by side 'with pagans; With such laws, the People were able to remain separate from the pagans and keep their faith pure.

The Pharisees in Jesus' day continued to uphold the importance of the dietary laws and when Jesus declares all foods to be clean (Mark 7:14-23), they were understandably very shocked (Matt 15:1 2).

_On hanged men_. Read Deut 21:22-23. The dead body of an executed man was believed to bring a curse on the land. This law lies behind the haste with which the friends of Jesus sought to bury his body. St. Paul refers to this law in Gal 3:13. Christ became a curse himself in order to bring a blessing upon all people.

_On touching a corpse_. This was believed to make a man unclean and unworthy to worship as NUM 19:11 says. This could be the reason why the priest and the Levite did not go to the aid of the wounded man who appeared to be dead in the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37).

We see in Luke 2:22-24 that Jesus' mother and Joseph go to the temple in obedience to this law and offer the sacrifice of the poor (See Lev 12:8 and Luke 2:24).

_On purification of women after childbirth_. Lev 12:1-8 provides rules for purification; Many ancient cultures thought women to be unclean after childbirth. This seems to be related to the loss of blood involved; blood was the life of the person and was connected with God, the source of all life. Whatever the original reason for it, the law had the good effect of preventing another conception too soon after the woman had given birth. The husband was discouraged from having intercourse with her while she was unclean since he would become so also. Moreover the law had the effect of freeing the woman from any cubic obligations while recuperating from childbirth.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Chapter 7-The Gift of the Land

**Introductory Note to Chapters Seven to Ten**

Chapters One to Six dealt with the five books which are called The Law (Gen, Exod, Lev, Num, Deut). This is the first of the three traditional divisions of the books of the Old Testament. The second division of books is called The Prophets and includes the books of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve Minor Prophets. The third division of OT books is called The Writings and contains all the other books of the OT. Since the Book of Psalms is the principal book in this third category, the title Psalms is sometimes used instead of The Writings (See Luke 24:44).

In Chapters Seven to Fifteen we will consider The Prophets. The books in this category are subdivided into two sections: Early Prophets referring to Josh, Judg, 1 and 2 Sam, 1 and 2 Kgs; Later Prophets referring to all the books of the prophets. Chapters Seven to Ten consider mostly the Early Prophets. This collection of books, the Early Prophets, is extraordinary in many ways. In all the known literature of antiquity no similar attempt at a continuous history of a people can be found. These books cover over 600 years of history, from the entry into Canaan (c. 1220 BC) to the destruction of Jerusalem (586 BC).

We cannot, however, appreciate these books if we only see them as history. They are called "prophetic" books for a reason. The sacred authors and the editors who put this great collection together were interested first of all in God's assessment of their history. The work of the sacred writers, therefore, is marked by a very critical approach to the materials they collected. The final editors, who put all of these books together sometime during or after the Exile, could look back and see what was right and what was wrong in their past. Their approach to history is very similar to the approach of the Book of Deuteronomy. In fact, many scholars refer to the Early Prophets as the Deuteronomic History.

The story of how these books came to be written is too complicated to describe here. They contain old traditions which represent the positions of different groups among the People; for example, traditions against and traditions for the monarchy, traditions favourable and traditions unfavourable to David, and so on. No thorough attempt is made to iron out all the differences in the traditions.

We also notice a change in literature in these books, a move from popular, folkloric type of literature to straight forward, eye witness literature, to rather dry, factual, documented history. Beginning with David and Solomon, libraries (archives) were developed in which the official records of the affairs of the kings were kept. These are referred to constantly in 1 and 2 Kgs (See, for example, 1 Kgs 11:41).

There are many issues which are at stake in these books. We single out three which we believe are most significant: the issues of leadership, organization of the People and the effects of co-existence with the Canaanites. These concerns may seem remote to us today, but they do reflect serious struggles which are always to some extent present in any living community. The People of God today still wrestle with issues of leadership, self-organization and the danger of being swallowed up by the societies in which we live. The experience of the People of God in the past can contribute to a deeper understanding of what is in some ways still happening among us today.

## Chapter 7a Life in the desert

The People of God had the Covenant Law to live by, but this Law never clearly imposed any one form of leadership, nor did it demand any one form of organization for the People. It is not surprising, therefore, that both in its leadership and in its organization the People went through several different stages. At least four can be singled out: the first is found in the pattern of wandering desert tribes, the second is the transition period of the Judges when the desert tribes began to settle in Canaan, the third is the period of the kings and the fourth is the period after the Exile when the People are organized under priests centred around the Temple in Jerusalem.

The People were never of one mind on the value of any of these forms of leadership and organization. There were groups for and groups against each of the four basic social structures. Some held that the pattern of life in the desert best expressed the will of God; others saw it as primitive and backward. The same type of "pros and cons" could be found for each of the other three forms of society which the People experienced in their history. In this section we will consider some of the main features of life in the desert, and we will use two passages of scripture to illustrate positions for and against the desert model.

Abraham and the other patriarchs, as well as the tribes under Moses, lived a life of semi-nomads. A nomad is one who lives in complete desert and usually raises camels for a livelihood. A semi-nomad is one who raises sheep and goats and therefore has to live, not in complete desert, but on the edges of the desert where the land is not good enough for farming, but good enough for pasturing small animals. Semi-nomads must be ready to move to better pastures whenever it is necessary. They must live in tents and must be able to pack all their belongings and transport them fairly easily.

The People lived this way for many years after the Exodus and the Covenant on Sinai. They were organized in tribes made up of clans, and were under the overall leadership of Moses. Each clan had its leader (elder) and each group of clans making up a tribe would have its leader. The leaders of clans and tribes made up the authority structure of the tribes. The duties of the elders included the administration of justice — the application of the Law.

In the passage from the Book of Exodus that you are about to read, we find a very positive statement about this kind of organization and leadership. The sacred author holds up the desert model as the ideal, with a few modifications. He argues against any exaggerated centralized system of administrating justice which was apt to happen under the kings, but he also points out that Moses did not simply choose the elders of the clans and tribes, but chose capable men, whether they were elders or not.

Reading Exodus 18:13-26

This passage argues that the administration of justice should be available to the People at all times; there should be no backlog of cases to be heard in the courts. The desert model is used to show how this can be done - decentralization is the key. It also argues that competent, capable people should be appointed by an overall "judge" to handle all ordinary cases, and only the most difficult cases should go to the leading judge (Moses).

Life in the desert was family-centred and very strongly communal in character. The People had to stick together, work together, move together in order to survive. The desert life demanded that the People look after each other, and especially that they look after their weaker members. The care and protection of the weak (women, children, orphans, aged, sick) is a strong feature of most tribal groups. So also is hospitality to the stranger who comes to the tribe. A person cannot survive alone in the desert, and so hospitality is essential. As we saw in Chapter Six, many of these concerns which were features of desert life, are reflected in the Law and insisted upon even when the tribes have stopped being nomadic and have settled down to farm and city life.

The leadership of Moses, discussed in previous chapters, was considered ideal. He was not a king, but he was a true leader in his selfless interest in the good of the People. He was not clearly a priest, but he was the mediator, the intercessor for the People. He was not a military leader, but he did pray for the People engaged in battle. Moses was a judge in the sense that he administered justice. He was a prophet in that he interpreted the will of God for the People. The essential quality of the ideal leader, as seen in Moses, is his closeness to God and to the People.

In the following reading from the Book of Numbers we see Moses as a great leader, but we also see life in the desert at its worst. The sacred author, writing long after the People had settled in the Land, is saying that the People were as rebellious, as stupid and ungrateful in the desert as they are in the Land of Promise; they were, are and will be, stiff-necked, stubborn and rebellious. The desert life and life in the Land are very much alike. The desert life was no ideal to be imitated. Only Moses himself presents an ideal; he is the best of leaders.

Reading Numbers 13:25 - 14:24

Note: The People sent spies to scout the land of Canaan. They investigated the land and returned to give their report.

The People are pictured as fearful of anything new. They would prefer to appoint their own leader and go back to Egypt, rather than strike out into the unknown future. They would prefer going backwards to going forward. In the opinion of the authors, life in the desert was clearly bad, because God punished the People by allowing only Joshua and Caleb to enter into the Promised Land.

In spite of the arguments against the desert life, many of the People still retained respect for that period in their history. Possibly it was the celebration of the Passover which kept them in touch with this part of their past. The Passover was a feast of semi-nomads, celebrated in the home and led by the head of the family. It required no official priesthood, no temple, no shrine, no altar (See Chapter Three). This desert celebration required no expensive buildings, no special garments, no lavish equipment. The simplicity of life in the desert was attractive in itself, and it remained as a kind of ideal for many, long after they settled in the Land. Prophets would look back on the desert and see in it an ideal of justice and simplicity, the "honeymoon" of God and his People. Reactionary groups such as the Rekabites (Jer 35) and groups such as the Kenites (Judg 1:16) recreated the desert life, living in tents and refusing to settle down as farmers and city dwellers.

When the desert group entered Canaan, the Land promised to them, they had only the tribal, semi-nomadic form of leadership and organization. Once their life-style began to change and they settled down to farming and living in towns and cities, this desert form of life had to change. They had to discover new ways to live and new types of leaders to direct them. The most obvious people to look to for the new forms of life required by farming and city life were the Canaanites.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

. 

## Chapter 7b Settling in the Land

Canaan, the land promised to Abraham's descendants, was a land of abundance in the eyes of desert people (Deut 8:7-10). It was blessed with regular rainfall, fertile valleys and plains, good hills for vines and forests, stone quarries for buildings and some copper mines. Olives, cereal grains and wine were generally abundant. Certain areas had good pasture land for raising cattle. It was indeed a good land, like the garden of streams and fruit trees of Gen 2.

The Land was occupied by a variety of peoples, most of whom belonged to the same Semitic background as the People. The language of the Canaanites and that of the People would have been very similar. By the standards of our own day, Canaan would be considered sparsely populated. There were areas, especially in the central wooded hill country around Shechem which would have had very few inhabitants before the People took it over.

Farming was the main occupation of the Canaanites, and therefore, fertility their main pre--occupation. They depended on the rainy season for their crops, and so their religion was one geared to the times of rain and dryness so necessary for successful farming. Their gods were mainly gods of fertility. (When the People became farmers, they learned the art of farming from the Canaanites, and it was therefore difficult to reject the religion which went with farming.)

Canaan is geographically broken up into hilly regions and plains. It is no wonder that at the time when the People began to settle in Canaan, the Canaanites had no overall, central government. The country had several, separate city-states, each ruled by its own "king" or "prince." Each ruler would control an area around his city. The Canaanite rulers were not politically united to each other in any central government, though they did co-operate with one another in times of emergency.

Theirs was a feudal system with the aristocracy living in the cities and peasants and serfs living on the outskirts, dependent on the city. In between the city-states, there would be areas which were not clearly under the control of any ruler. These no-man's-lands could quite easily be taken over by new groups willing to be pioneers and to carve a place for themselves on the fringes of the city-states. Since most of the Canaanites were Semitic, as were the Hebrews coming out of the desert, and since many Canaanites were not much more than slaves to the Canaanite kings, it would not be surprising that these oppressed peoples would quickly take to the "new religion" brought by Joshua and his group. The Lord who freed the People from slavery in Egypt would likely be a very attractive God to slaves and oppressed peasants in Canaan.

It is very difficult to reconstruct the way in which the People occupied Canaan. The Book of Joshua gives the impression that the Promised Land was taken by storm, won piece by piece by battles fought in quick succession. The Book of Judges, however, gives a very different version of the occupation. It is not possible in the space allowed here to go through all the possible explanations of the information given in the Bible, and so we offer a theory of the settlement which is at least satisfactory: the People took possession of the Land in three ways: by infiltration, by conversions and treaties and by battles against the city-states.

_1.By infiltration_. Some groups came out of the desert and simply settled in sparsely populated areas on the fringes of the desert (e.g. in the south) or in the areas between the territories of the city-states, or in the central hill country which was also thinly populated.

_2.By conversions and treaties_. The People made friends or came to terms with the others who lived there. It is even possible that the few people already living in these areas were victims of the hard rule of the city-states. The "gospel" of the Exodus could have been attractive to these Canaanites, and they would have been drawn to join the newly-arrived Exodus groups who had the promise of possessing the whole land. Some native Canaanites would have been "converted" and become part of the People by entering the Covenant. (Josh 24 is probably a record of native peoples entering the Covenant.) Some native groups were taken over by treaties, agreements to co-exist peacefully (See Josh 9).

_3.By battles against city-states_. Joshua and his men took some cities by waging war against them. The conquest of Jericho, remembered as the very first city to be taken, was celebrated for generations in the liturgy of local shrines. Other city-states were conquered over the next generations, until the last one, Jerusalem, was taken by David.

It is clear from the Book of Judges that the People did not kill many Canaanites, but rather lived among them.

Reading Judges 1:17-35

Note: Do not be concerned to remember all the names. The reading is meant only to underline the fact of the co-existence of the People with the native Canaanites.

## Chapter 7c The Struggle for Survival

The process of settling into Canaan and gaining control of the whole country took many generations to complete. Taking our date for the Exodus to be 1 250 BC, we can estimate that the occupation of Canaan began around 1220 BC. The Tribes gained each their own territory over the next hundred years or so, but the Twelve Tribes did not have full control of all their territory until the time of David, around 1000 BC.

Each of the Tribes functioned more or less on its own. There was no political unity, no central government, but they did have the Covenant Law in common and a central shrine where the Ark of the Covenant was kept. (More will be given on these topics in Chapter Eight.)

The Tribes believed that the Lord was their king. The Lord did for them what kings did for the other nations; he fought their wars and gave them their law. While the Tribes had some real religious unity, they tended to be independent of each other in most matters.

Their unity of faith, however, seemed inevitably to lead them to further expressions of unity. The Covenant bound them to the Lord, but it also bound them to assist each other, especially when one Tribe or other was in trouble. In the time of the Judges (c. 1220¬1000 BC) we see local heroes leading their Tribe to victory over their enemies, but we also see heroes calling many Tribes together to fight the enemies. The process of political unity among the Tribes began in this way, and is first noticed among the Tribes of the north.

These years between the entry into Canaan and King David's rule were rough pioneer years. Not only did the People have to fight for their lives, but they were also having to learn everything about farming from their pagan neighbours. It is no wonder that we find some very crude customs, pagan practices and superstitions even in the lives of the great heroes. The sacred authors of the Book of Judges record the bad with the good and only tell the reader not to be too hard on these heroes, because, after all, they did what they thought was best and they did not have kings to guide them (Judg 21:25). These were hard days: the People fell to worshipping Canaanite gods, the Lord punished them by sending enemies; they cried out to the Lord, the Lord had mercy and sent them heroes to defeat the enemies. This pattern — sin, punishment, crying to the Lord and the Lord sending a judge to deliver them — is the common pattern of the Book of Judges.

In the passages you are now to read, you will see the great Judge, Deborah, and her general, Barak, calling the tribes of the north together to fight Canaanite kings. The passages present the victory first in prose (Ch 4) and then in poetry (Ch 5).

Reading Judges 4-5

Commentary

Without apology or explanation, the woman Deborah is presented as a Judge, a prophetess in Israel. In this context "judge" and "prophetess" have nearly the same meaning. Deborah applies the Law to cases brought to her, and interprets the will of God for the People, both in matters of justice and in bringing the judgment of God on the enemies of the People, in this instance on Canaanite rulers of city-states in the northern part of the country.

She used to sit under Deborah's Palm .Judg 4:5b

The victory belongs to the Lord and to the two women: Deborah goes to the battle with Barak and gives the order to attack; Jael strikes the commander dead with a tent-peg. (Jael's husband is a Kenite, a group very similar to the Rekabites mentioned earlier in this Chapter. They lived in tents, refusing to settle down in the Land. While the Kenites were not party to the Covenant, they did worship the Lord (YHWH) and were friendly to the Israelites.)

On the basis of its vocabulary and grammar, scholars believe the poem in Ch 5 is one of the oldest pieces of writing contained in the Bible. It probably comes from the time of the Judges. Vss 6-8 describe the desperate state of affairs the Tribes found themselves in before Deborah's victory over the Canaanite kings.

In vss 13-15a the six Tribes who responded to the call to battle are praised as heroes of the People of the Lord. In vss 15b-17 the Tribes who did not respond to the call to battle are reproached as cowards, lazy or indifferent. In all, the ten Tribes of the north are mentioned.

The six valiant Tribes who united to fight::

Ephraim

Benjamin

Machir (a clan of Manasseh)

Zebulon

Issachar

Napthali

The four Tribes reproached for doing nothing to help the cause

Reuben

Gilead

Dan

Asher

The Tribes of the south, Judah and Simeon are not mentioned. They may not have been called because they were too far away, or, as we shall see, they were not in a position to offer much help.

Note: The Twelve Tribes are not always listed in the same way. Tribes could disappear, or be assimilated into another tribe, or a large tribe might even divide in two. The lists of the Twelve Tribes can differ, depending on the period which the records represent. You could compare, if you wish, the Tribes as mentioned in Gen 49 with the Tribes mentioned in Num 1. The lists come from different periods and are not identical.

In the victory of Deborah and Barak we see some of the Tribes of the north getting together to gain control of their territory. In the next readings we see Gideon, a great judge, defending the territories of the Tribes from the raiding nomads, who come out of the desert. The Midianites and Amalekites were nomads, camel breeders who lived in the desert and raided the farmers whenever they felt the need.

Reading Judges 6:1-10

Comment

We notice the typical pattern of the Book of Judges in this passage, sin, punishment, crying out to the Lord. The pattern is completed in the following passage.

Reading Judges 6:33-35

Commentary

The spirit of the Lord came on Gideon . In general, when the spirit of the Lord is given to a person, that person is made ready for whatever the Lord has in mind, whether it be to prophesy, to rule as a king, or to be a judge. The spirit of the Lord takes hold of Gideon to give him strength, courage, audacity and cunning for his work as a judge. He is made ready to do the will of God, which is here understood as the defeat of the Midianites.

In vs 35 Gideon, like Deborah, calls on other Tribes to assist him and they respond to his call. Once again these are northern Tribes.

The fact that the spirit of the Lord is on Gideon makes him a charismatic leader, but this charism does not make him holy, nor does it make him a good theologian. Gideon is a farmer who has not only learnt the Canaanite art of cultivation, but has also absorbed some Canaanite religion as well. He is shown believing in superstitious practices (6:36¬40), and making an idol (8:22-27). Imperfect as he is, he is still the Lord's man to save his People from the Midianites. Using methods we no longer understand (7:1-8), Gideon selects a small group of 300 men and plans a guerilla-type attack on the encamped Midianites. His surprise attack and his nerve-wracking tactics terrify the Midianites.

Reading Judges 7:16-22

The defeat of the encamped Midianites is complete, but Gideon pursues the ones who fled and calls on the other tribes to assist him (7:23-25). The men of Ephraim express resentment over the fact that they were not invited to the original battle and are only called to finish off the deserters (8:1-3). Gideon placates them and continues on his way to battle the army of the " _sons of the east_ " (Midianites). On his way he goes through the towns of Succoth and Penuel in the Jordan Valley and asks for food for his men. Hospitality is refused, and Gideon does not forget. The behaviour of Gideon in the passage you are about to read is very much that of the freedom-fighter-warlord: co-operate with me in the struggle for freedom or else.

Reading Judges 8:4-21

Gideon clearly means business when he sets out to defend his country, and he succeeds in doing what he set out to do. The men of Israel (some Tribes of the north) are so impressed that they ask Gideon to be their king. A judge was only a leader as long as it was necessary. Judges went back to their occupation after the enemies were defeated. Now the men of the north ask for a more permanent institution to defend them against their enemies. They want a king, a king who would set up a dynasty.

Reading Judges 8:22-35

Commentary

Rule over us, you and your sons ... The request is for the establishment of dynastic kingship, where sons succeed their father on the throne. Gideon gives the answer of those who treasure the old desert form of leadership and tribal organization: the Lord is the king. While Gideon goes back to his own house (vs 29), he functions much like a king: he collects part of the booty from the men of Israel, and he takes many wives. Taking wives in various towns and bearing children by them was a way of asserting one's authority. Gideon refuses the title, but he does not refrain entirely from acting like a king. He is said to have seventy sons, that is, many, many sons one of which is Abimelech, son of a woman of Shechem. We shall hear more of him in Chapter Eight.

.As we turn to the tribes who live in the south, it is not too much to say that they were in a sorry mess. The Judges who were raised up among them are a far cry from Deborah, Gideon and the other heroes of the north. Othniel (Judg 3:7-1 1) scores a victory over the Edomites, and Shamgar kills some Philistines. (Shamgar is called " _son of Anath_ ", a Canaanite goddess of fertility and war; if he was a member of the People of God at all, he boasted strange connections.) The best the southern tribes can brag about is Samson. Samson is from the Tribe of Dan which was a southern tribe before it was forced to move north (Judg 1 8). Though Samson is said to receive the spirit of the Lord on many occasions, he remains very much a poor man's hero, physically powerful, vengeful, with a weakness for beautiful women. He never musters an army in the name of the Lord, never leads a group of staunch followers to defeat the enemy. He is the hero of a people so hopelessly entangled with their oppressors that they can only dream of hurting, never of defeating them. Through Samson we can come to feel the situation of the Tribes of Dan, Judah and Simeon in the time of the Judges.

Their oppressors were the Philistines, descendants of the People of the Sea, who came by boat from the Aegean Islands to conquer new lands. They attacked Egypt unsuccessfully and some of them ended up on the coast of Canaan. Their arrival closely corresponded to the arrival of the People from the desert.

The Philistines occupied the best land between the coast and the hill country of Judah. The rolling plains gave them barley and beer aplenty. They had fine city-states—Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, Gaza—each ruled by a leader called a seren . The Philistine city-states were well organized and could function smoothly as a unit, especially in times of war. Their military might was based on the use of chariots and reinforced by their monopoly on iron (1 Sam 13:19-22).

They effectively controlled the southern Tribes. Though these Tribes hated the Philistines, they had neither the resources, nor the numbers, nor the leaders they needed to defeat them. The southern Tribes adjusted themselves to their oppressive situation in order to survive. We might say that the best they could do was to endure their plight by drinking Philistine beer and telling stories of a hero who really gave the Philistines what was coming to them. The story of Samson should be read for what it really is, good entertainment.

Reading Judges 13, 14, 15, 16

Samson damages but does not defeat the Philistines. The southern Tribes were like a small naked boy facing an armoured giant. It would be some time before they would hope that the small boy could bring down the iron giant. David would be the one to raise that hope and fulfill it.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 8- The Roots Of Kingship

**Introduction**

We saw, in Chapter Seven, the Tribes settling in the Land and struggling to maintain their grip on it. We saw in Deborah and Gideon, how the Tribes of the north tended to unite under a strong leader to fight their enemies. And we also saw the Tribes of the south barely surviving under the Philistines. The People were in the Land, they had overcome most of the strong Canaanite city-states, but they were not organized into a single nation. They had destroyed the Canaanite control of the Land, but they had not replaced it with anything solid yet.

This situation would not have been serious if there had not been other groups wanting control of the territory which the People had taken. But there were such groups, and they were preparing to take advantage of the unstable situation created by the downfall of Canaanite control of the Land: the Ammonites to the east, and the Philistines to the west.

The Tribes had relied on Judges, leaders whom God raised up to fight their battles; but these Judges never managed to unite all the Tribes in a common effort to fight their enemies. Besides, these Judges only led the Tribe or Tribes for a while. There was no stability, no continuity. Many people felt the need for a permanent leader, a king. A king would do what kings are supposed to do: organize a standing army to defend the People, and see to it that law, order and justice reigned in the Land.

The struggle which we consider in this chapter is much the same as the struggle which the People of God experience in any time of drastic change. Positions are taken for and against change, each having valid points to make. In this case the struggle is between the conservative, traditionalist believers, and the "modernizers" who believe that God has given people intelligence to be used to meet crises.

The traditionalists are against kingship, considering the rejection of God as king and the adoption of a pagan, Canaanite form of leadership practically heresy. The ideal, they firmly believe, is to have God as king and to allow God to raise up leaders as needed. God had raised up Moses and then Joshua and then great Judges. Why would he not continue to do so?

The "modernizers" want to use reason to come to terms with reality: the enemies are powerful and well organized, we are disorganized and weak. The Canaanites are not all bad — they are good farmers, they had developed strong cities and had had kings to defend them. There must be something to having a king; every nation has one and they seem to be doing well.

Idealism and tradition versus realism and reason. Both in and between the lines of the Books of 1 and 2 Samuel we can read the struggle: one side says "Trust in God", the other says "Use your heads." But there were also those in between who saw no contradiction between faith and reason, only a tension to be resolved. These last, in fact, win the argument, to the credit of both God and man.

The literature of 1 and 2 Samuel reflects this struggle. The arguments for and against kingship did not die easily. Long after they had kings, the debate continued and was preserved in stories which eventually were written down. The final editors had quite a task putting all these stories together. Once again they were concerned to preserve everything they received, throwing nothing away. The result is a text which sometimes gives two or three versions of the way things happened. This poses some problems to the historian, but it should not disturb us very much. The greatness of the work of the editors is in their fidelity to the traditions they received. We benefit from this fidelity because it allows us to see and feel a crucial time of change in the life of the People of God, not very much unlike our own.

## Chapter 8a Samuel and Abimelech: the Old and the New

Whenever a truly great person comes to prominence among a people, every group in the country wants to claim that person as its own. Samuel was loved and respected in his day, and every group wanted to use him to justify its position. Samuel was so important that he is pictured in almost every significant role that groups could identify with: he is pictured as a prophet, a priest, a man against kingship, yet a man who anoints kings. He must have been a most extraordinary person in the minds and hearts of the People. He, like Moses before him, is given an infancy narrative - he is truly a man whom God called. In chapters 1 and 2 of the First Book of Samuel we are given the story of his conception, birth and early childhood. We are also given the beautiful prayer of his mother, Hannah (1 Sam 2:1-10), which is partly the inspiration for Mary's prayer in Luke 1:46-55.

Samuel is dedicated to God by his parents. He serves as a boy at the shrine in Shiloh, under the supervision of Eli, the priest. Times were not of the best. Eli is negligent in his duties and the Word of God is not heard much in the Land. Eli's sons, who also serve as priests at the shrine, are selfish, greedy and irreverent (1 Sam 2:1 2-36). This situation cannot be allowed to go on.

The vocation of Samuel (Ch 3) is a sensitive composition. Samuel is at a shrine serving God whom he does not know. He does not recognize the one who calls. When he does recognize the Lord's voice, he is ready to serve. Samuel is being called to replace Eli and the institution he served.

Reading 1 Samuel 3:1 - 4:1

Samuel grows up to be a man who makes the word of the Lord known " _from Dan to Beersheba_ ", that is, from one end of the country to the other. He is a prophet of the Lord, but he is also a priest, because part of the duty of a priest was to instruct the People in the knowledge of the Lord. Not since Moses had one person influenced all of the People in such a way.

Samuel served in Shiloh. The shrine in Shiloh was important because it housed the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark, a portable-type of " _throne of God_ ", was the ancient symbol of the presence of God, and it held the tablets of the Covenant Law which united the Tribes. It had been used in the desert and after the settlement in the Land it was placed in Shiloh, a place in the central part of the Land, available to all the Tribes. Shiloh was a place of

tradition by virtue of the ancient desert symbol, the Ark of the Covenant. Shiloh must have been very important at one time for the Tribes. It was a gathering place for them and the main centre of worship in the early days after the settlement in the Land. The Ark was a symbol both of the presence of the Lord and of their unity in the Covenant. The importance of Shiloh, however, was not to last. The Philistines mounted attacks, defeated the Israelites, captured the Ark which they carried into battle, and Shiloh's role in the life of the People came to an end (1 Sam 4:2-22).

(1 Sam 5-6 contains crude, humourous stories making fun of the enemy, the Philistines, who are said to make golden mice and tumours, probably haemorrhoids, as sacred objects.) The texts do not say that Shiloh itself was destroyed, but its abandonment as a shrine for the People is certain: without the Ark it had no real significance. The Ark itself is abandoned for all practical purposes. The People pay no attention to it until David reinstates it.

It appears that the centre for the Tribes shifted from the Ark in Shiloh to the person of Samuel. In the following passage we see Samuel calling " _all Israel_ " together to fight the Philistines. He himself does not go into battle, but he prays for the People and they win the battle. Samuel is a leader like Moses was (compare this passage with Exod 17:6-13).

Reading 1 Samuel 7:2-17

Commentary

Samuel is a leader like Moses, the man of powerful prayer who brings about victory over the enemy. He is a judge like Deborah who calls the Tribes together and inspires them to victory. Also like Deborah he is a judge who administers the law of God in the Land. In vss 15-1 6 Samuel is described as a circuit judge who goes from town to town to settle the disputes of the people in accordance with the Law of God.

In effect Samuel was the leader of the Tribes, but he was not a king. It was the Lord who was king. It was the Lord who fought the battle (vs10 0) as kings are expected to fight, and it was the Lord who was imposing his Law, as kings are supposed to do. The Lord acted as king through Samuel who was not a king.

Even under the leadership of Samuel the People do not have any kind of real central government. They are still separate Tribes, having their own form of internal government based on the elders of the clans and tribes. They hold a set of laws in common. They might have gathered round the Ark at times to renew their Covenant loyalty, but there was as yet no overall political organization to override the internal leadership of each Tribe. In these ways the old tribal system that went back to their days in the desert was still present, even though their life had changed radically.

As could be expected, the old tribal system was undergoing a severe test. The times had changed, but the system had stayed much the same. There had been attempts in the past to introduce new forms of leadership and organization for the People. You will remember Gideon from Chapter Seven and how he was asked to be a king (Judg 8:22). Gideon did not accept the title, but he did function somewhat like a king. He married many wives, even Canaanite ones, and had many sons in various places, thus establishing a kind of loose rule over a territory. Some of Gideon's sons seemed to take seriously the idea of becoming kings after their father. The next passage you are to read takes you back to the Book of Judges (Ch 9). It is an important passage, because it shows an attempt to establish kingship modeled on the Canaanite pattern of kingship. There is no way of dating when this took place, but it was before Samuel's time. The incident was long remembered by those who were against kingship in general and dynasties in particular.

To understand the reading better, keep the following points in mind:

— Abimelech (his name means _"my father is king_ ") was the son of Gideon, an Israelite, and a Shechemite woman (Canaanite). He was, therefore, half Israelite, half Canaanite. — Shechem is still largely a Canaanite town, though the leaders are won over to Abimelech for a while.

— Gaal is a purely Canaanite man, who argues that he has more right to rule over fellow Canaanites than the half-breed Abimelech.

— Zebul (his name means "high", "exalted") is a powerful resident of Shechem who is pro-Abimelech, but still has access to Gaal and gives him bad advice.

In the conflict all are losers, especially the people of Shechem.

Reading Judges 9:1-57

Commentary

In vss 1 and 2 Abimelech uses three arguments to have himself made the sole ruler of the area around Shechem which had accepted his father's leadership: it is better to have one ruler than to have many, he is Shechemite on his mother's side, and he is Jerubbaal's (Gideon's) son. The argument which wins over the leaders in Shechem is the one based on blood relationship: " _he is our brother_ " (vs 3c). They finance his drive for kingship and he hires a group of thugs to round up all the other sons of Gideon, who also could claim kingship, and he puts them all to death. " _On the same stone_ " seems to indicate a ritual-type killing.

Unlike Gideon, his father, and unlike Samuel, who are both called to leadership by God, and who prove themselves to be capable leaders before they are accepted by the Tribes, Abimelech has no call from God and has in no way proven his leadership qualities. He rises to the throne on the dead bodies of his brothers and on purely human arguments backed up by the selfish leaders of Shechem and a band of paid mercenaries. There is nothing noble in him, except the shadow of his father.

In vss 7-15 we have one of the few fables to be found in the Bible. The fable of the talking trees is probably the strongest condemnation of kingship in all the traditions of the People. The trees, representing people who want kings, ask a big tree (olive) to rule over them, then a smaller tree (fig), then a vine, smaller still. All these plants have some nobility and serve a useful purpose; they have much better things to do than be kings. Finally the trees ask the completely useless scrub brush, the thorn bush, and he gladly accepts, all puffed up with boasting about his great power. The humour of the passage on the thorn bush is in the invitation to shelter in its shade, and in the threat of burning up the giant trees of Lebanon. The thorn bush is small. There is no way to shelter in its shade without getting pricked and scratched by its thorns. The thorn bush when it is dry, burns easily, causing a little flare-up fire; that is about all the thorn bush can do.

The fable is applied to Abimelech, but it expresses the feelings of the groups in the People of God who despised the institution of monarchy and saw it as a depraved and degrading aspect of their history. They held that kings are the worst of men and only bring about disaster to themselves and the people who want them to reign.

The rest of the story of Abimelech illustrates the fable. In the cruel fighting that follows no one wins, all lose, in particular the people of Shechem who are massacred or burnt to death.

Unlike Gideon who fought the enemies of this people, or Samuel who inspired the Tribes to victory over their enemies. Abimelech only fights and kills his own subjects. In contrast to Samuel who proclaims and applies the Law of God and supports good order among the Tribes, Abimelech has only his own "law", terrorizing his people and causing chaos in his realm. Samuel wins the support of the people by the high quality of this life; Abimelech gains control by manipulation and violence and attempts to hold on to his position by force of arms. Under Samuel, the People are free; under Abimelech they are slaves.

Abimelech has the usual features of pagan kings. He sets up the worst kind of Canaanite rule, full of corruption, violence and injustice in which the ordinary citizen, especially the peasants (vs 42), are the victims.

The leadership of Samuel was coming to an end and his sons were unworthy of their position as judges and were not fit to succeed him. The enemies of the People, especially the Philistines, were gaining ground and threatened to subject all the Tribes to their rule. The realists among the elders ask Samuel for a real king.

## Chapter 8b Saul: the Attempt at a Compromise

**Reading 1 Samuel 8:1-9**

A king " _like the other nations_ ": an insulting phrase to Samuel who represented the best of the traditional system which was based on the unique faith of the People. This faith was meant to make them holy, different from the other nations, unique by their creative newness. To Samuel they are asking permission to abandon their faith. The Lord instructs Samuel to give them their wish, but he must warn them about the ways of kings " _like the nations_ " have.

Reading 1 Samuel 8:10-22

The taxes to support the extravagance of kings is not the worst part of the bargain. The terrifying line is, " _he will make you his slaves_ " (vs 17). The People had been slaves once in Egypt — that should have been enough, but here they are shouting to have a king, clamouring to become slaves again. We can almost hear, between the lines, the argument of desperate, threatened men who are impatient with the idealism of Samuel, and who insistently want a quick, effective way of dealing with the emergency, " _No, we want a king_ " (vs 19). A king they will have.

Given the real threat to their very existence, the elders' request for a king is quite understandable and reasonable. The nations, especially the Philistines, had king-like leaders, and this allowed them to set up a stable system of tax collection which could support a well-trained, standing army always ready to defend them. The system under Samuel and the judges was unstable, unpredictable, with the result that the elders felt unprepared and unfit to defend themselves. The elders also could see the great strength the Tribes would have if they had an established king who could bring together all the Tribes to form a great army. Such an army could defeat the Philistines and any other nation which might make war on them. Once the enemies were defeated, the king would see to the administration of justice throughout the Land. The elders must have argued this way and have urged that kingship would have to be tried before it could be rejected.

The passages in 9:1-10:27 represent different traditions about Saul's rise to kingship. His rise is like the rise of a boy who is looking for donkeys and finds a crown. He is anointed by the prophet Samuel; he is chosen by lot from among all the Tribes and is found to stand " _head and shoulders_ " above all the others.

The first stories about the donkeys and the anointing by Samuel are favourable to kingship, especially the kingship of Saul. But the last story, while it compliments Saul, shows how risky the choice of a king really is - he is chosen " _by lot_ ", that is, by chance.

Saul's rise to prominence is best explained by the next passage to be read. Here we see Saul, much like Gideon, rallying the Tribes to fight the enemy. Much like Gideon he threatens to punish the Tribes who do not co-operate. Saul proves himself to be a real leader and a great warrior.

Reading 1 Samuel 11:1-15

Comment

The People approve of Saul and ask him to be king, just as they asked Gideon to be king (Judg 8:22). So far the pattern is traditional: a man has proven himself to be a leader and a valiant warrior. In vs 6 the " _spirit of the Lord_ " has seized him as it seized the Judges of old. Samuel, still reluctant, accepts the inevitable (vss 12-15).

In chapter 12 Samuel delivers a sermon which reflects the views of the sacred authors who compiled this history. The whole chapter is well worth reading, but you need only read the following.

Reading 1 Samuel 12:12-19

Commentary

In chapter 12 we are given a review of the history of leadership in the People of God. Samuel defies the People to find fault with his own leadership (vss 1-5) and then he goes back to Moses and mentions the great Judges whom God raised up to lead and defend the People in times of need (vss 6-1 1). None of their leaders from Moses to Samuel were kings in the full sense of the word, and the People managed to survive (vs 11).

But now they want a king, and they have chosen the man they want, Saul. They chose him because, like the Judges of old, he had the qualities of leadership and valour which they felt were needed. Verse 13 is an important statement of the relationship between the decision of the People and the action of God: " _Here is the king you have asked for; the Lord has set a king over you_." The decision to have a king, and the choice of Saul as king is not only confirmed by God, but is also presented as the action of God himself -you have chosen a king, I have set a king over you. A decision arrived at by the People of God after much argument and debate is seen as God's decision. (This is powerful theology for the People of God to have, but it is theology which has lasted over the centuries. It is reflected in the New Testament (Acts 15), where the arguments and debates of the apostles lead to a decision which is then presented as a decision made by " _the Holy Spirit and by us_ " (Acts 15:28); it is a position still present in our understanding of the highest forms of teaching authority in the Church.)

Even though God has made the People's decision his own, there are still conditions attached to the successful operation of the kingship. Two conditions are mentioned in this passage: that the king and all the People obey the voice of the Lord and serve him alone (vss 14-15), and that there be prophets to plead and intercede for the king and the People (vss 16-19). God has accepted kingship, but his acceptance does not mean unconditional blessings. Obedience to his law is the constant condition, and to assure that obedience is present, the king must be subject to the Law and must allow himself and his people to be criticized by the prophets, and they must realize their need to have the prophets pleading and interceding for them.

Saul, at the beginning of his reign, is clearly approved of both by the People and by Samuel the prophet. Saul shows a willingness to obey the prophet and is very anxious to have and to keep Samuel's approval. In 1 Samuel 11:12-15 we see that Saul becomes king with the explicit approval of the People and of the prophet Samuel. In chapter 13, however, we begin to sense the expected tension between king and prophet. The Philistines are mobilized for war and Saul prepares to meet them (13:1-5). At the sight of the Philistine armies, Saul's men lose courage and hide (13:6f). To rally his men, Saul disobeys the prophet and incurs his wrath (13:8-15). It is not clear just what Saul did that was wrong; suffice it to say he did something offensive to the prophet Samuel.

Chapter 14 shows Jonathan, Saul's son, as a great hero in battle. (The weaknesses of Saul begin to show here, but these will be mentioned later in the Chapter.) At the end of this chapter a tribute is given to Saul. The successes of his reign are impressive.

Reading 1 Samuel 14:47-52

Comment

Saul has more victories to his credit than any other Judge before him. The administrators of his reign are very few. Only his army commander is named (14:50); Abner son of Ner. By comparison to the central administration of Solomon (1 Kings 4:1-19), Saul's government seems to be a very simple, wartime administration, indulging in no frills or wasteful extravagance (compare 1 Kings 5). He shows no signs of indulging in the more repugnant " _rights of kings_ " described in 1 Samuel 8:10-18. As a result, Saul's reign brought about a stronger taste for kingship among the People. They saw what a king could do for them, especially in war, and they very likely found in him a king who did not abuse his _"rights_."

Chapter 15 is a difficult chapter to interpret. Rather than go into great detail and cause confusion, let it be enough to say that in this passage Saul behaves according to his own will, and not according to the will of God expressed in tradition and upheld by Samuel. Saul fails to measure up to the conditions of chapter 12, where a king is to obey the Lord and his prophets. A break is made between Samuel and Saul. Chapter 15 verse 35 expresses Samuel's realization that Saul's kingship was a mistake.

The figure of Saul, head and shoulders above all other men, begins to stoop. Saul slowly begins to lose his grip on the situation and he feels the crown slipping out of his hands. Saul seems to suffer from some psychological disorder, referred to as " _an evil spirit from the Lord_." He is depressed, filled with a terrifying fear he cannot name or control. His dark, troubled soul is soothed by the music of a young man called David.

Reading 1 Samuel 16:14-23

The task facing Saul is beyond his talents to accomplish. Saul wants to control the way things should go; he is not willing to allow events to unfold and to read the will of God in them. This is most evident in the way he handles David's rise to prominence and popularity. Note: Chapter Nine will consider the passages on David. There is no need to read these now.

Reading 1 Samuel 18:1 - 19:1

Commentary

This passage contains various traditions which can be discovered by careful analysis. We will comment on the text as it is, without distinguishing the traditions.

Several points are made about both David and Saul. Vss 1-4 record an important fact about David. He was the best of friends with Jonathan, Saul's son and the obvious successor to Saul's throne. The love between Jonathan and David makes it clear that while David might have wanted to succeed Saul, he was not at all inclined to compete with Jonathan to obtain the crown. David works for Saul and does his job with unprecedented skill (vs 5). Saul, at first, makes full use of David as a commander of his fighting men. The people hear of David and like him, the officers esteem him. David has a growing basis of popularity among the ordinary people and he inspires admiration among the professional soldiers (vss 5c-7).

Saul, however, is not able to accept this new and unexpected development. He becomes passionately jealous of David, and murderous plans begin to take shape in his imagination (vss 10-11). Saul cannot stand to have David in his presence, so he keeps sending him to battle, hoping he will get killed. David is consistently successful in battle and always returns victorious and unharmed. The greatest tribute is given to David, " _all Israel (north) and Judah (south) loved David_ " (vs 16).

Saul fears the worst: he could be rejected and David could be made king in his place. Saul is divided, torn in heart and mind. He has the right solution to the problem of David's popularity, but he cannot give himself completely to this sensible plan. The events had made it clear that David should at least succeed Saul, as one Judge succeeding another Judge. Saul was a mighty warrior, raised up by God in time of crisis, and now God had raised up another great warrior, proven in battle, accepted by the People throughout the Land. The obvious way to resolve the matter was to officially declare David his successor. Saul knows this is the right solution, and so he offers his elder daughter, Merab, to David (vs 17). This marriage would give David a right to succeed Saul. But in the same verse, Saul's jealous side is hoping to have David killed in battle. This would rid him of the man who is more successful and popular than he is, and it would make it possible for him to establish his son Jonathan on the throne after him. Saul changes his mind and gives his elder daughter to an unknown man who would pose no problems for Saul or Jonathan (vs 19).

Saul offers David his second daughter, Michal. This would still give David a right of succession, but a weaker one (vs 20). Once again, however, Saul hopes to have David's bravery be his undoing (vss 21-25). David again is successful beyond expectations, and Saul can do nothing but give his daughter to David.

Saul now publicly declares that he is out to kill David (19:1). This blind determination to kill his best possible ally and successor is Saul's greatest single failure. He not only alienates David and therefore loses his one chance of becoming the first king of both Judah and Israel, but he also greatly weakens his army and prepares his own defeat.

David escapes from Saul and begins to develop his own following in Judah (1 Sam 22:1¬2). Saul has to fight the Philistines without David. The battle that he engages in at Mount Gilboa is his last.

Reading 1 Samuel 31:1-13

To speak of the "limitations" of Saul is a rather mild way of referring to his failures in judgment which affected his reign, and his defects of character which marred his greatness. In one sense Saul's greatest failure was to be defeated and to die without overcoming the enemy. In another sense his greatest failure was the judgment to reject David, which led to his defeat. And yet if we push the matter further, we come to the flaws in Saul's character which made him oppose David and drove him to do things which could only alienate him from the People.

Saul shows poor judgment on several occasions. He allows his jealousy to overpower his political sense, when he massacres the priests who had befriended David (1 Sam 22:6¬23). He neglects to fight the Philistines, his enemies, in order to pursue David, his ally (1 Sam 19:8). For reasons unknown, he violates a century's old treaty with the Gibeonites (2 Sam 21:1-3; see Josh 9:3-27).

As much as he must have wanted to be a true man of God, approved of by Samuel especially, Saul is still a primitive believer, unable to free himself from taboos and superstitions. He makes a vow as senseless as Jephthah's (Judg 11:27-40) and is blindly determined to keep the vow even if it should cost the loss of a battle and the life of his own son Jonathan. (He had made a vow binding his men to a fast during battle. See 1 Sam 14:24-46.) He also goes against his own orders by consulting a witch (1 Sam 28: 3¬25).

Conclusion

Saul is the tortured hero, seemingly doomed to failure after many great successes.

He is as much a victim of his times as he is a victim of his flawed character. They were times of struggle not only for mere survival, but for survival as the People of God - with its roots in the Exodus, its charter in the Covenant and its ideals of organization and leader-ship wedded to Moses and the desert life. Some, such as Samuel, had thought the old ideal could stand the test of change unchanged; others, such as Abimelech, had no thought for the old ideals and only wanted to enter into the ready-made model that was new to the People but old and well-tested by the Canaanites. Still others had hoped that Saul would bridge the gap, develop a compromise model. In some ways he did, but the times required more than a compromise.

What such times of change and crisis need is someone of exceptional gifts to create a third reality, not a duplicate of the old, nor a copy of a ready-made new thing, but a third reality that surpasses the old and the new, and still remains genuinely related to both. Saul was not so gifted. Samuel's system could not meet the demands of the times; the Canaanite model could not satisfy the demands of the faith of the People. It took David to create the third thing, the unexpected, surprising, new model which was so convincingly authentic that it gave the People a way of life for over four hundred years. This we will consider in Chapter Nine.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Chapter 9- The Beloved

**Introduction**

In the two previous chapters we considered the efforts of the People to contend with the new problems connected with their life in the Land of Promise. The struggle to find the proper kind of Leadership occupied much of this period, in this chapter we consider the man who seems to explode into their history and takes them all by surprise. It is very difficult to describe such a man as David; there seem to be too many sides to him, too many things to say about him. There are more pages devoted to the life of David than are given to any other person in the Old Testament.

The number of popular stories and the amount of written material about David posed quite a challenge to the editors of the Books of Samuel, where his life is recounted. For example, there are at least three, possibly four, different versions of how his career got started: he is anointed by Samuel, as a young boy is called to play music to calm Saul in his bad moods, he is the young boy who slays the giant, and there is a further possible version of the beginning of his career as a man who rises in the ranks of Samuel's army. All of these stories relate some truth but it is no longer possible for us to know for certain what the historical sequence of events really was.

Without attempting to resolve the problem of David's rise to power, we have chosen to begin with David coming to recognition in Saul's army

## Chapter 9a David's Rise To Kingship

When Saul was building up his army, he called into his service " _any strong man or man of valour"_ (1 Sam 14:52) he heard of or met. David entered Saul's service and soon became renowned as a great fighter and, what is even more important, a remarkable leader. His popularity among the people in general is only a reflection of the esteem given him by the officers in the army (1 Sam 18:5, 28-30).

Saul, well aware of the importance of popularity, feared that he would lose his crown to David, or at least, that David and not his own sons, would follow him on the throne. Saul sees David as his enemy and seeks to kill him, David escapes to the hills of his home country, Judah.

At this time Judah was certainly one of the poorest sections of the Land, It is mostly hilly, with the desert taking up a section along the Dead Sea and to the south. There were no clear borders between Judah and the Philistine territory on the Mediterranean coast. The Philistines had, over the years, extended their influence over most of Judah, and no doubt saw it as an extension of their territory. By going home to Judah, David was entering an area which the Philistines considered their own

Judah, unlike most of the northern Tribes, had never had any great leader of its own to give it pride and to establish its control over a piece of the Land. There were towns, a few old city-states, such as Jerusalem, which were still in the hands of the Canaanites and there were farmers, shepherds and a lot of poor, dissatisfied people who were in between nowhere and nowhere David becomes the leader of this lost and rather desperate group of men,

Reading 1 Samuel 22:

Commentary

Adullam was an area in Judah rather near to the cities of the Philistines. Rugged hills,

dotted with area, provided a good base for this group of potential rebels, it would appear that Saul was out to kill David, but David's family as well. His relatives join David at his hideout, in vss 3-4 David is shown taking his parents to Moab to get them safely out of Saul's reach. Saul was serious in his intention to rid himself of David altogether.

In vs 2 we have the best description of the type of people who made up the lowest in the social class of the day. David begins his career as an independent leader of the poorest of the poor. No mention is made of the tribal origins of these men. They could have come from any ethnic background: Canaanite, Philistine, Judean; all that matters is that they had nothing more to lose, and needed a leader to give them some kind of future. According to 1 Sam 23:14 David stayed in the wilderness for some time, but here in 1 Sam 22:5, we are told that a time came when a prophet called Gad went to David and asked him to move more towards the centre of Judah. David then moves his operation to an area probably south of Hebron.

All the oppressed, those in distress, all those in debt, anyone who had a grievance, gathered around him and he became theft leader. 1 Samuel 22:2.

Chapter 23, verses 1 to 5, gives a sample of what David and his band did for a living. In this case, a band of Philistines is plundering a town. (In the mind of the Philistines it was probably seen as collecting taxes by force.) David and his men drive them off and take what the Philistines left behind.

Among the stories about David, there are several which relate incidents where David could have killed Saul, but did not (1 Sam 24, for example). There is no doubt that if David had set his mind on it, he could easily have killed the king. David is shown as having too much respect for the kingship of Saul ever to lay a hand on him in violence.

Chapter 25 of 1 Samuel gives us another incident which shows the activities of David and his followers. They offer "protection" to the farmers and shepherds who live on the borders of the southern desert and are exposed to the raiding nomads. David asks Nabal, a rich sheep raiser, to return a favour and give him and his men provisions, a voluntary tax, for services rendered without charge (1 Samuel 25:21). Nabal ungratefully refuses. David is prevented from doing worse than Gideon (Judg 8:4-9, 13-17) by Nabal's wife who sees her husband's stupidity and gives David and his men ample food. After the death of her husband, Abigail becomes David's wife

Since Judah is seen by the Philistines as part of their territory, David can, without being a traitor to anyone, enter the services of a Philistine king.

Reading 1 Samuel 27:1-12

Achish the Philistine king of Oath, accepts David and his band. When this news reaches him, Saul ceases to search for David. David wants a town of his own as his headquarters in order to operate more freely, without the direct supervision of the Philistines. He is granted the town of Ziglag which then becomes his headquarters. From there David patrols the desert borders, driving away and pillaging the nomadic groups who always threaten to raid the inhabitants of Judah. The booty from his "policing" activities, he shares with the Philistine king, without hesitating to mislead the king as to the origins of the booty.

David does not attack or molest his own Judean countrymen. His conduct with them is beyond reproach. He came very close, however, to being in the Philistine war against Saul. David is rejected by the Philistines as untrustworthy because of his former association with Saul (1 Sam 29:1- / 1),

Chapter 30 records David's battle against another group of nomads, the Ammalekites. David overtakes them and collects all they have. David uses what he has take from the Amelikites to send presents to the towns in the south. These towns had fed and housed his men and David shows them gratitude by sharing with them what he had captured in his fight against their common enemies.

Reading 1 Samuel 30:27-31

David is preparing the way for kingship, not by using force, but by showing appreciation for kindnesses done to him. By fighting their enemies and by showing gratitude to the elders of all these towns, David is becoming the most popular man in Judah

In the meantime the Philistines make war against Saul's army, Saul is defeated, he is wounded and takes his own life. His three most capable sons die in the battle (1 Sam 31), When a man comes to David with this news and claims to have killed Saul (at Saul's request), David reacts passionately, yet without losing his sense of what needs to be done.

Reading 2 Samuel 1:1-27

Commentary

David mourns, weeps and fasts, and all his men do the same (vss 1-12). He does not rejoice, he is not smug, he does not gloat or receive the news indifferently. Spontaneously he grieves the loss of Saul and his sons. He then publicly executes the man who bragged of killing Saul and who thought David would reward him for doing it (vss 13-16), Then David composed and made public a lament over the death of Saul. The editors make a reference to the Book of the Just in which they found it. David had asked that the people of Judah learn and sing this lament (yes 19-22). You will notice that this is strictly a lament over the death of Saul and Jonathan. It is not "religious" in the usual sense of the word - God is not mentioned. This lament and his reaction to the death of Saul will stand him in good stead with the men of Israel (northern Tribes) later,

After the death of Saul, David consults the Lord and receives the advice that he is to settle in the central part of Judah. (Just what the phrase " _consult the Lord_ " means is not certain; could be through prophet, a priest, through some form of casting lots, or simply through prayer)

Reading 2 Samuel 2:1-4a

Hebron was a town which had connections with Abraham (Gen 23) and Jacob (Gen 35:27). It was probably the principal town in Judah, David and his men settle in and around Hebron peacefully, with their wives and families. David does not capture the city. There is no evidence of his using any force to get himself and his men to settle around Hebron, Now that David has decided to stop his life of wandering with his band of followers, he is showing self ready to serve in a different role. The men of Judah take the

hint. T hey come tend anoint him king over Judah,

(David does not get into trouble with the Philistines by becoming king of Judah, It could well be that the Philistines still see him as one of their men and understand his kingship as an extension of their rule)

## Chapter 9b David King of Judah and Israel

By his reaction to the death of Saul and his warrior sons, David has made it clear that he had no wish to have them out of his way. Now that they have died, however, and he is already king of Judah, David loses no time. He wants to make it clear that he hopes to be made king of Israel, but not by force. He sends a message to the people of Jabesh-gilead who had shown their loyalty and devotion to Saul by giving him and his sons burial (1 Sam 31:11-13).

Reading 2 Samuel 2:4b-11

Commentary

David tells the men of Jabesh that he will not oppress them, or make war on them for their devotion to Saul. The people of Jabesh owed their existence to Saul (1 Sam 11:1-11); it was only right that they should give him respect at his death. With Saul and his three best sons dead, the northern Tribes have no fit leader. David invites the men of Jabesh to give him their support. David does not want to make himself king, but to be made king by the northern Tribes.

The lack of leadership in the northern Tribes makes Abner, Saul's army commander take matters into his own hands. It is Abner, not the people of the northern Tribes, who sets Ishbaal (Ishbosheth) on the throne of his father. Ishbaal is clearly unfit to rule anything, and Abner is using him only as a front to justify his own plans to become king.

In 2 Sam 2:1 2 2:1 we have an account of the first skirmish between the men under Abner and those under Joab David's commander. In the battle Abner kills Joab's brother and Joab will use this later as his justification for getting rid of Abner, A kind of "civil war" breaks out between Abner and Joab, There is no clear indication of how long this lasted, nor about the losses on both sides. There is no definite winner, although it is said that David's men were stronger than Abner's (3:1).

Abner is the real leader of Gaul's men (3:6) and he intends to make himself king (3:7-11), When Ishbaal protests, Abner defects from him and turns to David (3:12-16). He makes an agreement with David: he will sway the northern Tribes to David; the unspoken condition is that Abner become the commander of the army, replacing Joab. David insists that his wife Michal, Saul's younger daughter, be returned to him. This marriage gave David a right to succeed Saul and David is intent on using that right. The fact that Ishbaal grants David's request and sends him Michal, shows how little Ishbaal treasured his father's crown. Abner convinces the men of Israel of the wisdom of having David as their king (3:17-19) and communicates his success to David (3:20-21). David accepts.

Joab, however, is not pleased with the prospect of losing his position as commander of the army. Since he has a legitimate excuse for killing Abner - Abner had killed Joab's brother - he murders Abner, The whole plan to bring all the northern Tribes over to David would have collapsed completely had it not been for David's quick and effective reaction. He declares official mourning, composes a lament over Abner's death and gives him a hero's burial (3:26-39). There is nothing artificial in David's grief; the loss of a great warrior was a sad thing to him. Worse still was the prospect that the Tribes might never be united as a result of the murder of Abner,

The men of the northern Tribes have only the weak and ineffective Ishbaal as their leader and he as much as abdicated to David by sending him Michal. Two crass opportunists kill Ishbaal, hoping this will endear them to David (4:1-8). David's reaction to the murderers of Ishbaal is the same as his reaction to the man who claimed to have killed Saul, public execution (4:9-12) He then buries Ishbaal's head by Abner's grave,

David's reactions are genuine, he sincerely regretted the deaths of Saul, Abner and now Ishbaal. He had no part in having them killed. His instinctive response to the deaths of Abner and Ishbaal show him to be a man who can bring the best out of the most explosive situation. David's diplomacy here is not the result of hours of scheming and plotting. It springs spontaneously from him when he is faced with the unexpected, the sign of a great politician, a true leader,

David does not have to force himself on the northern Tribes, they come to him,

Reading 2 Samuel 5:1-5

Commentary

The passage marks two stages in the process of making David king of Israel: the first (vss 1-2) has all the tribes of Israel coming to David to make the request; this is a preliminary delegation, The second stage (vs 3) is carried out by the elders, the official delegates of the Tribes of the north. The first delegation presents the three reasons for their request:

\--- David is their " _flesh and blood_ ", that is, by his marriage to Michal. Saul's daughter,

he is a blood member of their Tribes;

\----- David has proven himself a most capable warrior in Sours army;

— God has made it clear (through what has happened) that David is his choice for the kingship over all the Tribes,

After this first delegation, the elders come to David and he makes a covenant with them. It is quite likely that this covenant involved not only David's acceptance of the promise of loyalty of the elders, but also some sort of promises on David's part. This agreement is made with David personally and does not automatically apply to his sons. In the presence of the Lord means that the coronation ceremony took place in a shrine at Hebron, where the elders anoint David as their king.

Note: the Hebrew word for " _the anointed one_ " is the word from which our word " _Messiah_ " comes, Translated into Greek it becomes " _Christos_ ", and in English, " _the Christ_ ".

With this ceremony David becomes the first king of all the Tribes. The twelve Tribes recognize him as their sole leader. They have moved to the model of kingship and away from the older model, represented by Samuel. Samuel appears to have had authority over most of the Tribes, but he was definitely not a king. Saul was on the verge of uniting all the Tribes under him, but he failed to keep the support of David and Judah. It should be noted that while David is king over all the Tribes, his title officially recognizes the two main divisions: he is king of Judah (south) and Israel (north).

## Chapter 9c David: the Beloved of Judah and Israel

The name David could well be a name taken by the king at his enthronement. If this is the case. David's original name is unknown. Some hold that it was Elhanan, but this is very uncertain (See 2 Sam 21:19). The meaning of the name David is also unclear. It could mean commander, and it could be a kind of popular name meaning the beloved, the one who is loved by all. It is this interpretation which we favour.

From the start of his career we are told that David was loved by all Israel and Judah (1 Sam 18:16). He was loved as a brave and clever warrior, a man gifted with qualities of leadership which made him victorious everywhere he turned. His popularity, however, cannot be explained by his accomplishments alone. There was something about him which appealed, especially to :he common people, He had the qualities of a folk-hero.

Jerusalem, City of David (2 Sam 5:6-12)

Now that he was king over Judah and Israel, it was not fitting for David to remain in Hebron, a town in the middle of Judah. David needed a city that was neither part of Judah nor part of Israel. He set his eyes on Jerusalem, a city in between the two groups of Tribes, still held by Canaanites (Jebusites), and therefore not party to the disputes between northern and southern Tribes.

Reading 2 Samuel 5:6-12

Note: When you read this passage, pay no attention to the line about David hating the blind and the lame. The Hebrew text is not clear and translators guess at its meaning. David did not hate the blind and the lame, as is in 2 Sam 9:1-13. You might prefer to read the capture of Jerusalem in 1 Chr 1 1:4-^ where no mention is made of the blind and the lame.

Jerusalem was such a strong, secure fortress city that the inhabitants claimed it could be defended by cripples. From 1 Chronicles 11:4-9 we can deduce that David's men entered the city through a tunnel which led from a water source outside the city walls to a point inside the city. There is no indication that David destroyed the city, nor that he slaughtered all its citizens. (In fact there are indications that David respected the Jebusites and other Canaanite groups and integrated them into his kingdom.) Jerusalem became David's own personal city - the Citadel of David. Zion, the hill on which Jerusalem was built, was also used as a name for Jerusalem.

Jerusalem was the centre of the united kingdom because it was the City of David. There he built his palace, that is, his residence and the residences of his officials and the rooms necessary for his whole administration. Hiram of Tyre (Phoenician) provided the materials and the skilled craftsmen to do the job. How big the palace was, we do not know: it certainly was too modest for Solomon.

David built a palace, and improved the fortifications of Jerusalem. There is no indication of any other great building projects. He did not impoverish his subjects by undertaking the construction of many fortresses.

Victory of the enemies (2 Sam 5:1 7-25; 8:1-14)

Around the year 1000 BC, when David became the king of Judah and Israel, the great powers - Egypt and Assyria - were weak. Both traditional seats of empires were undergoing internal problems and had no time or strength to control the smaller kingdoms that lay in between them. This meant that all the small kingdoms wanted to take advantage of the power vacuum to get control of as much territory as possible. Every little kingdom between Assyria in the north-east and Egypt in the south-west dreamed of expanding its borders in order to establish a large and strong kingdom that could defend itself against Egypt or Assyria.

The Philistines dreamed of taking over all the territories around them and other small kingdoms such as the Ammonites hoped to do the same. David and the Tribes had to fight off these kingdoms, they had to expand their borders themselves in order to survive.

David first defeated the Philistines (2 Sam 5:17-25) and then subjected the nations all around him (2 Sam 8:1-14), until he was in control of an empire which stretched from the borders of Assyria to the borders of Egypt. David brought a period of peace, peace within his kingdom and peace along all its borders,

The story of David and Goliath (1 Sam 17) dramatizes the truth about David's accomplishments in battle: the boy from the insignificant town of Bethlehem. in the poorest Tribe, Judah, defeated the powerful Philistines and all the other nations around him.

_God raises the lowly and brings down the mighty_.

Jerusalem, City of God (2 Sam 6)

Jerusalem became the political centre of the united kingdom, but David wanted it to be more than that. Jerusalem had to be the centre of the faith of the People, not an artificial new centre, but one with roots deep in their past. So he took the symbol of their desert life and brought it into Jerusalem, where he housed it in its proper shelter, a tent,

The Philistines had captured the Ark when they took Shiloh (1 Sam 4-5). They kept it under supervision in territory under their control. Saul had not attempted to regain the Ark, but now that David had defeated the Philistines, he was free to take the Ark back and save it from being forgotten altogether.

The passage you are about to read (2 Sam 6) is one in which we see the contrast between a superstitious attitude towards the Ark, and the attitude of David. In the mind of most people, the Ark, symbol of God's presence, was a terrible and terrifying thing, to be treated with great caution. As the Ark was being carried to Jerusalem, a disaster occurred which the people interpreted as the frightful and irrational punishment of God; Uzzah, who touched the Ark to keep it from tipping over, died. This event threatens to upset David's plans to have the Ark in Jerusalem. The people fear it so much that they do not really want it in their royal city To counteract this primitive fear of the Ark, and of God. David surrounds the procession with great celebration, he and all those present sing and dance. After the death of Uzzah, however, the people are more fearful than ever and David is angry at God for letting this happen and, it should be understood, at the people for interpreting the accident as an act of God. David fears that the Lord might allow such a thing to happen again.

David then has to leave the Ark with Obed-edom of Gath (a Philistine) until it is clear to all the people that the Ark (and therefore, God) is not dangerous. Then David brings the Ark in, but only David dances; the people make music but they do not seem to feel free to dance before the Lord This seems to move David to dance all the harder and, to emphasize his fearless love of God, he. removes his clothing and whirls about in a '

Reading Samuel 6: -23

Commentary

The " _loincloth_ " which David wears is probably a priestly garment it was fitting that David should wear it as part of the clothing to be worn in his function as a priest offering sacrifices during the Procession. David seems to have removed the outer garments. His " _nakedness_ " and his uninhibited dancing is shocking and disgusting to Michal, his wife, who is Saul's daughter in every way. The superstitions of Saul and his fear-ridden life seem to be Bart of his daughter's attitude. She despises David's action. As a result she identifies herself with the past and refuses to make herself part of the new. Both God and David see to it that she and the House of Saul have no part in the future: " _Michal"_ had no children The reign of Saul is definitely over.

David is determined, at all costs, that the entry of the ark into Jerusalem should be a joyful occasion. He sees to it that the people present eat and enjoy themselves (vss 18-19). If he must lower himself to dancing wildly before the Lord, he will do it. He dances for the Lord and he knows that the common people will not only understand what he is doing, but will approve of it (vss 21-22)

David's behaviour before the Ark of the Lord is the behaviour of a person who knows that he is loved both by the Lord and by the people. Fearlessly, shamelessly he dances, knowing full well that he is accepted without reserve by God and by his people. David is at ease with his Lord, at ease with his people, naked and unashamed (Gen 2:25). He is the free person, free of irrational fears of his Lord and God, and free of inhibiting fear of what people will say about him. In the story of the Ark, David is shown as having that rare and subtle combination of spontaneity and planning which is only possible in one who knows that he has been chosen for his role by God and the people, and that he is suited to that role. He knows he is the right man at the right time and he accepts this with humility.

By bringing the Ark into Jerusalem, David was placing the ancient symbol of the Lord's presence into the centre of the life of the Tribes again. He made Jerusalem the place of the _"throne of God_ " as well as the throne of the " _anointed one of God_ ", the old and the new, side by side and supporting each other.

The covenant of the Lord with David (2 Sam 7)

The passage you are about to read was one of the most treasured texts in the history of the People, especially of the Tribe of Judah. It was probably written down during or shortly after the reign of David, and was very likely solemnly proclaimed at the coronation liturgy of the kings of Judah in the next four centuries. The passage represents God's total acceptance of David in a " _covenant_ " very similar to the one God made with Abraham (Gen 15:1-21). It is a one-way covenant, expressing God's unconditional acceptance of David. God binds himself to David and his descendants forever.

The text plays on the word " _house_ ": David wants to build the Lord a house of cedar, a permanent temple. God does not want a stone and cedar house for himself; he wants to give David a " _house_ ", that is, a dynasty, a reign where David will be followed by his descendants.

Reading 2 Samuel 7: -17

Commentary

" _When David had settled in his house_." David had built a palace for himself and his administration. It was a fine house made of stone and cedar. The building had been built by the skilled craftsmen from Tyre, a Phoenician city (2 Sam 5:11 -12).

_"and the Lord had given him rest,"_ The " _rest_ " is the end of all the previous struggles, from the Exodus to the final and complete possession and control of the land which God had promised to Abraham's descendants. All of David's victories are victories which the Lord had brought about.

_"the king said to the prophet Nathan"_ The prophet is mentioned here for the first time.

In keeping with the sermon given Samuel in 1 Samuel 12, the king is being advised by a prophet of the Lord. Nathan is the king's counsellor, he speaks the will of the Lord to the king. As such Nathan would be a powerful person in the king's court

" _the Ark of God dwells in a tent._ " David had prepared a tent to hose the Ark. The tent

was the appropriate shelter for the portable shrine of God. David seems to be having second thoughts about the tent, especially since he is living in a fine palace. The Prophet agrees with David and tells him to go ahead with his plan to build a " _temple_ "

_"I have never lived in a house_." The Lord makes it clear to Nathan that he has no need of a house of stone and cedar; he has lived in a tent from the Exodus to the present day. A fixed dwelling for God would go against a long tradition tied up with the life of the People in the desert. The Ark, symbol of God's throne, went with the People, indicating that God was with his People. A temple would make God permanently wedded to one place, whether the People were there or not.

The mention of Egypt. the wandering in the desert and the period of the Judges (vss 6-7), connects the promises about to be made to David with the whole history that went before him.

_"Say to my servant David."_ The Lord now calls David his servant. He explains that he is the One who was behind everything that has happened from the day David left his shepherd's work to the day God made him shepherd of his People (vss 8-9).

_"I will make your name great_." In words similar to the promise made to Abraham (Gen 12:2), God promises to make David known throughout the world. David's kingship is a definite improvement on the previous forms of leadership, better than the Judges (vs 11) and better than Saul's reign (vs 15).

_"I will be a father to him and he a son to me_." God promises to be a father to David's descendants, correcting and punishing them, but never destroying them. The relationship between God and David (and his offspring) is one of father to son. This is repeated in the royal psalms (Pss 2:7; 72:1; also 110:3).

" _Your throne will be firm forever_." The House of David in fact lasted uninterrupted for over four hundred years. This promise to David gave the people of Judah an attitude to the House of David which allowed for stability and continuity. When, after Solomon, the northern Tribes break away to form their own separate kingdom, they do so without the advantage of the theology of the House of David. As a result the northern kingdom suffered from many and sudden changes from one dynasty to another. Compared to Judah, Israel (north) was very unstable.

When the city of Jerusalem was destroyed (586), the kingship of David's line ceased to function, The hope, however, of a new David, even greater than the first, was fostered by prophets before the destruction of Jerusalem, and continued to grow long after the line of David ceased to act as kings.

David's prayer in response to this great promise is a fine example of confident humility He realizes his unworthiness, but he accepts God's promise with full confidence that God is with him.

Reading 2 Samuel 7:18-29

David's administration

There follows in chapter 0:1-14 a brief account of David's expansion of the borders of his kingdom, referred to earlier in this chapter. Then in verses 15-18 we are given a very condensed description of David's reign and a list of his main officials.

Reading 2 Samuel 8:15-18

Commentary

_"David ruled all Israel."_ " _All Israel_ " here means all the Tribes of the north and south. Often " _Israel_ " refers to the northern Tribes only. Sometimes it refers to ail the Tribes; the context usually indicates what is meant.

_"administering law and justice_." David takes on the function of king, to administer justice for his people, in the light of their history, however, David is taking on the role of the judges such as Deborah (Judg 4:4-5) and Samuel (1 Sam 7:15-1 7). David is not only a Judge in the sense of a great hero in battle, but he is also a Judge as the one who sees to the promulgation and application of law. David would actually hear cases brought to him, but he would not, of course, hear any and every case. There probably was a system similar to the one described in Exod 18:13-26, with judges in various towns throughout the country to hear lesser cases, the more complex and important cases being referred to the king's court in Jerusalem.

_"-to all his people"_.- This is a very complimentary phrase.. lt is significant that David is never accused of injustice.. The sacred writers, usually very critical of kings, summarize his reign in this verse as one of justice. Little is known about many years of David's reign. We have detailed information only about the beginning and the end. The years in between are marked as years of good government with few complaints from either the northern south; all his people receive justice

The list of officials (vss 16-18) indicates a central government with a standing army under Joab a communications officer (recorder), two official priests, a secretary general, a king's guard, and some minor priestly functions for David's sons. By comparison to Solomon's administration (1 Kings 4), David's is very simple, not seem to have tampered with the tribal organization: it appears that he left it a

Conclusion

Near the end of his life David had a few uprisings to deal with, one led by his son Absalom, the other by a rebel called Sheba. Both were put down without too much trouble, David still had the support of the vast majority of the People.

David and his reign grew more and more wonderful in the eyes of later generations as they experienced the rule of less able and sometimes even very wicked kings, David had set the direction in which the theology of would develop in the future.

Later kings had to measure up, not only to the historical king David, but also to the ideal king and leader which always remained the Lord himself. The best earthly king is the one who behaves in the manner of the Lord, the heavenly king. This way of thinking is expressed especially well in Psalm 72, where the king, like the Lord, is pictured as the one who rules with justice, who cares in particular for the poor in his realm, and who provides food for his subjects and brings peace to all.

The theology of kingship and the kingdom of God are closely related. Whenever a king behaves like God, and the people obey the will of God, then God in tact rules. That is the kingdom (reign) of God. In brief, where his will is done, there God is king. The prophets developed these thoughts over many centuries. The ideals of which they spoke reached such sublime heights, that only God himself could possibly live up to them. And this, of course, is what we believe happened: God himself. came down, took flesh of the virgin and proclaimed his kingdom, accepting the title " _Son of David_."

## Appendix 3 Some Discoveries affecting OT Studies

Mesopotamia. In the last hundred years or so a very large number of excavations have uncovered cities, innumerable objects and valuable texts. Some of these texts (eg. Enuma Elish and The Epic of Gilgamesh) throw much light on our understanding of Genesis 1-11, especially the Flood. The law codes that were discovered (eg. Code of Hammurabi, 1728-1686 BC) help us understand better the background of the Law in the Pentateuch. The ancient languages in which these texts are written help scholars to understand biblical Hebrew.

In two campaigns between 1933 and 1954 at Mari, on the middle Euphrates, important discoveries were made. The royal archives yielded some 20,000 written clay tablets, bringing to light much that was previously unknown about the 3rd and 2nd millenium in the near east. These discoveries have helped us understand the stories of the patriarchs in the Book of Genesis.

Egypt. The Rosetta Stone (a stone slab with the same text carved in two Egyptian scripts and in Greek) was discovered in 1799 and deciphered in 1822. The wealth of Egyptian written material began to be translated. This has made an understanding of Egypt's history and culture possible and has opened up a new source for understanding Israel's history, which was so influenced by Egypt. Some Egyptian texts relate directly to material in the Bible (eg. Wisdom of Amen-em-Ope and the Book of Proverbs).

Northern Syria (Ras Shamra). An accidental discovery by a farmer in 1928, followed by extensive excavations, brought a major city (Ugarit) to light. Many objects and hundreds of texts were found in a temple library. These texts (c. 15th century BC) offer innumerable insights into Canaanite religion and into customs reflected in the stories of the patriarchs in Gen. 12-50. The language now called Ugaritic is closely related to Hebrew; scholars use it to probe many difficult Hebrew texts in the Bible.

Boghazkoy, east of Ankara. Turkey, was the site of the ancient capital of the Hittites, a people often mentioned in the Bible. Well over 10,000 clay tablets, written in Akkadian and Hittite were found in the excavations which began in 1906. They belong to the 2nd rnilienium, BC. Deciphering began in 1915. These texts and other Hittite documents shed light on the patriarchs in Genesis. Hittite treaty texts have led to a better understanding of the notion of Covenant in the 0T.,

Qumran Beginning in 1947, caves near the northwest shore of the Dead Sea have yielded manuscripts and countless fragments; parts of most of the hooks of the Hebrew Bible are represented. These manuscripts, dating between 150 BC and 70 A.D., are about 1,000 years older than the Hebrew manuscripts used till now to establish the Hebrew text of the Bible. The Qumran manuscripts agree, for the most part, with the later manuscripts, thus confirming the accuracy of the transmission of Hebrew manuscripts. (The Qumran discoveries relate more to the New Testament and will be referred to in the New Testament course.)

Ebla. Excavations (1964-1975) between Hama and Aleppo in Syria have uncovered the city of Ebla. The royal archives were found. They date between 2400-2500 BC and con¬sist of over 15,000 clay tablets. It is too early to assess these discoveries, but the first studies of these materials show that they will figure highly in OT studies in the future.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 10- Glory And Its Consequences

**Introduction**

David did not appoint his successor until he was on his deathbed. It would seem that he was hoping that the best son would prove himself worthy of being king. David had allowed his son Absalom to attempt to make himself king (2 Sam 15). Absalom's move was disastrous. Then another son, Adonijah, made his bid for the crown (1 Kings 1:5ff). Court intrigue, however, took over the question of who would reign after David: Nathan the prophet. Zadok the priest. Benaiah the captain of the guard and Bathsheba plotted together to have Solomon named king, and they won.

Solomon becomes king with David's last minute approval. As one tradition would have it, Solomon suppresses all possible opposition to his rule, on the advice of his dying father (1 Kings 2:1-46). Solomon is then securely in possession of the throne of David (1 Kings 2:46). He becomes king of Judah and Israel without having had to prove himself in any way. The Tribes of the north do not appear to have insisted on an agreement with Solomon as they had with David (2 Sam 5:1-3), but they will insist on an agreement with Solomon's son (1 Kings 12).

The literature on Solomon's reign (1 Kings 3-11) represents a mixture of many types of materials excerpts from archives, folk-stories, prayers and architectural descriptions. These chapters are not uniform, nor are they clearly organized. What is even more striking than the diversity of literature are the two, almost opposite points of view that are taken on Solomon: one point of view cannot praise him enough; the other point of view condemns him as one who departs from the true faith. The final editors make a compromise by saying that Solomon was great in his youth, but went wrong in his old age (1 Kings 11:4). It would appear that Solomon was, throughout his life, a mixture of good and bad, like most people. Unlike most people. Solomon did everything in grand style; his successes and his failings also were in grand style. In our first section (Solomon in All His Glory) we will deal mostly with the positive side of his reign; in the second section (A King Like the Nations) we will consider the negative side.

## Chapter 10a Solomon in All His Glory

**On Wisdom**

Wisdom has many meanings in the Bible. What is given here is very general. Wisdom means skill, the ability to handle or manage something properly. In itself wisdom is simply an ability or skill. It is neither moral nor immoral; it can be used well or badly. A thief can be wise in the skillful way he steals; an honest man can be wise in the way he manages his affairs. The Bible does not frequently use the word "wisdom" to describe the clever way evil is done; it generally reserves the word for good things done well.

A person can show wisdom in the skillful way in which he relates to material things, to people, or to God. The talented craftsmen who make beautiful things for the Temple are called wise (1 Kings 7:14). Joseph in Egypt is wise in the way he manages the food supply to avert a famine. One can be wise in knowing how to relate to people properly; a good diplomat is wise. It also takes wisdom to know how to manage and organize people to get things done efficiently. A person who can assess human character intelligently and weigh right and wrong in human behaviour is wise. Finally, a person is wise when his relationship to God is in order. The truly wise person is the one who manages his relationships to things, to people and to God properly. Such a person finds peace, for peace (Shalom) is having all the relationships to the earth, to people and to God in good order. Solomon's name means peace. The most complimentary opinion of Solomon is that he was the wise man par excellence, the man of peace.

Wisdom is a gift from God; some have it "naturally" from birth. But wisdom can, indeed must, be cultivated by practice, by study, and by listening to the voice of experience in wise old people.

To support the growth in wisdom, information (knowledge) is needed about anything and everything. To the wise person, nothing true is useless, even the most trivial data about the smallest creature. The wise man is a curious man.

Also, to the wise man, no one, not even God's chosen People, has a monopoly on truth. The wise man accepts that people are basically the same everywhere, whether they are Egyptians or Israelites or Assyrians. Since human nature is one, human experience is one, and truth is universally available. Even the Canaanites have some truth.

The wise man is open; he is also vulnerable. Solomon is open to everything, within and outside his People. Egyptian wisdom, Arabic wisdom, Canaanite wisdom are welcome to him. He stands in cross-beams of light, one from the traditions of his People, the other from the nations. From Solomon's day to our own day people have argued, some saying he followed the light of the pagans, others of his People.

On the Wisdom of Solomon

Solomon inherited his father's empire. There is no doubt that David had accumulated some wealth in the form of taxes received from the Tribes and in the form of tribute obtained from the nations he had subjected. David had not spent a great deal of this income on buildings or on an up-to-date defence system. Solomon therefore inherited an empire that was both vast and rich.

The first statements on the reign of Solomon make clear that the editors of the material on Solomon knew they were dealing with literature both for and against the glorious king. In these few lines there is both praise and condemnation of Solomon.

Reading 1 Kings 3:1-3

Commentary

_"he married Pharaoh's daughter_." The Pharaoh's daughter! In the minds of Solomon's admirers this marriage was proof that the People from the desert had finally arrived. The Pharaoh's daughter is mentioned several times (7:8; 9:1 6; 9:24), because her presence underlines the power and prestige of Solomon. Egypt was the symbol of the greatest empire of the world. The fact that the Pharaoh gave Solomon his daughter, and not the other way around, meant that Solomon was greater than the Pharaoh. (To the historian it also indicates that Egypt was very weak at the time.)

The more traditional among Solomon's subjects no doubt saw something else in this marriage. Egypt for them was " _the house of slavery_ ", despised for its role in oppressing their forefathers. A political marriage with Egypt must have been looked upon with suspicion.

" _The people were still sacrificing on high places."_ The Canaanites worshipped on hill-tops throughout the country. Their fertility rituals had been adopted by many of God's People. In Solomon's day this use of Canaanite rituals seems to have been considered normal enough. The few rituals which they had received from their tradition were sufficient for the life of semi-nomads in the desert, but they were not satisfactory for their settled life on farms and in towns. The Canaanites had rituals that spoke to the religious needs of farmers and townsfolk. It seemed most natural to use these, in addition to the desert rituals, such as the Passover. Moreover, while the People used the liturgy of the Canaanites, they offered it to the Lord (YHWH), their God; at least this must have been the way these practices were justified at the time of Solomon. The sacred writers, however, looking on these Canaanite rites several centuries later, condemned them as idolatrous. History had taught them the chapter — if you use Canaanite rituals, you end up worshipping Canaanite gods.

_"Solomon loved the Lord, but_. " This line gives the two views on Solomon: he loved the Lord, but he accepted Canaanite worship. Was there any "wisdom" in this? In Solomon's own time it must have been considered wise. There were many Canaanites left in the country. By Solomon's time almost every Israelite family had some marriage ties with the Canaanites. A wise king would respect the heritage of his numerous Canaanite subjects. To put it in modern terms, it would be as natural and necessary for Solomon to take part in these rituals as it is for a Christian president today to attend the religious services of non-Christians in his country.

In the next passage to be read we see Solomon at the most famous Canaanite high place, worshipping the Lord, the God of his fathers. To the sacred authors this was an offensive thing to do, but to Solomon and most of his contemporaries it must have seemed quite in order.

Reading 1 Kings 3:4-15

" _At Gibeon the Lord appeared in a dream_." Nathan the prophet had given the word of the Lord to David (2 Sam 7); this word confirmed the kingship of David and assured him that the Lord would be with his descendants. We are told that the same Nathan had promoted the cause of Solomon, but we do not have any passage where the prophet addresses the word of the Lord to Solomon. Solomon receives it in a dream, at a Canaanite shrine, where he is worshipping the Lord. Traditionally the People accepted dreams as a medium through which the Lord could make his will known, even though it might not be as convincing as the word of a genuine prophet.

" _give your servant an understanding heart_ " (vs 9). The expression literally means " _a hearing heart_ ", and implies a heart that is sensitive to what is heard. The heart, in the semitic way of viewing things, was the seat of understanding. Knowledge (understanding), was not a purely spiritual or intellectual thing, but always involved feelings, so the heart was a better "organ" for knowledge than the brain, because it reacts, it "feels". Solomon is asking for wisdom in his role as head of the judicial system; his role as chief judge for his people will demand that he have a heart that can hear well, assess a situation properly and give good judgments.

_"I give you a heart that is wise_ " (vs 12). In his dream the Lord grants Solomon's wish and promises to add all the other things besides – wealth, splendour, and long life, if he obeys the ways of the Lord. After this experience Solomon returns to Jerusalem and invites his entourage to celebrate (vs 15).

There follows in 3:16-28 a story, well-loved in folklore, which illustrates the " _heart that listens_." Solomon hears the case of two women, each claiming that the child that is present is hers. Solomon discerns the truth by threatening to divide the child in half for them. The woman who preferred giving up the child rather than having it killed is clearly shown to be the true mother. This story is a fine example of the kind of feeling a good judge has to have in hearing a case - he hears with his heart.

Chapter 4 is not in itself inspiring reading. It is a list taken from the royal records giving the names of the main administrators of Solomon's reign. If you compare this list with David's (2 Sam 8:15-18), you will notice at a glance that Solomon has vastly expanded the central government and has reorganized the whole country. The northern Tribes are divided into twelve taxation districts.

The distinction between the northern Tribes and Judah suggests that Judah was considered to be Solomon's royal domain, and the other Tribes his "subjects", though this opinion cannot be proven. What is quite clear, however, is that Solomon organized the Tribes along new lines, giving little or no attention to the traditional tribal territories. The main purpose of this new administration is clear, an efficient method of collecting taxes.

It should also be noted that Solomon has an official, Adoram, in charge of forced labour (4:6). In 2 Sam 20:24, it is said that David had the same man in charge of forced labour. In 1 Kings 12:18, during the reign of Rehoboam. Solomon's son, the same Adoram is killed by the people of the north. Since it is quite unlikely that the same man should hold office in three different reigns, and since there is no other evidence that David used the practice of forced labour enough to have an official in charge, many people believe that the notice in 2 Sam 20:24 is a scribal error.

Note: The last part of 1 Kings chapter four and part of chapter five is badly preserved in the Hebrew manuscripts. Some translations, such as the JB, reorganize the text and use the chapter and verse numbers found in Greek manuscripts (LXX). In our commentary we will be using the Hebrew numbering which can be found in italics in the margin of the JB.

The end of chapter four (LXX = 5:7, 8, 2, 3, 4, 5; 4:20; 5:1, 6) gives a description of the luxurious living in the court of Solomon and points out that everyone in the whole country enjoyed prosperity and lived happily. This optimistic view of Solomon's reign is given some balance in the next chapter. But before that the editors add a note on the extraordinary wisdom of Solomon and his vast store of information about every conceivable topic.

Reading 1 Kings 4:29-34 (LXX 5:9-14)

Commentary

" _Understanding as vast as the sands on the seashore_ " (vs 29). While the information given here has the ring of flattering exaggeration often given to famous people in folklore, it probably rests on some true historical facts. A king of Solomon's stature would certainly do what most kings tried to do, and he would do it even better than most. Kings, if they had any culture at all, were intent on improving their knowledge and promoting as high a level of learning in their courts as they could possibly afford. They developed large collections of written materials, full of information on any and every topic. Solomon had almost a free hand in developing his store of information. He had diplomatic relations with a large number of kings and therefore had in Jerusalem the "ambassadors" and envoys of many countries representing a large variety of cultures.

Jerusalem in Solomon's time was full of scholar-diplomats, both Solomon's own well-trained diplomatic corps and the representatives of the many countries at his court. The city was a hive of intellectual activity, literature flourished and young school boys destined for roles in government were trained in their own language and the languages of other countries. Youth and adult alike among the new upper classes learnt of the traditions, laws, customs and religions of other countries.

" _He composed . . proverbs . . . and songs_ " (vs 32). Solomon himself composed many sayings and wrote songs, but what is more important for us is the period of literary creativity which Solomon represents. No doubt the era of peace in David's own time allowed for the leisure needed for literature and David himself wrote songs. Solomon's reign added to and encouraged what his father must have begun. It was during the reigns of these two kings, in all probability, that the author we called the Yahwist wrote so much of what is found in the Books of Genesis. Exodus and Numbers. Solomon's own literary work and the fact that his reign encouraged literature, made of him the patron of wisdom, and wisdom literature.

In the early days of the People's history, in the days of Solomon, for example, a truly wise man was expected to profit from his wisdom. If he was a genuinely wise man, knowing how to handle all his affairs, he ought to be both rich and famous. Solomon, of course, was both wealthy and his wisdom was world renowned. The Queen of Sheba heard of it in her distant kingdom and came especially to see for herself. She was most impressed with every detail of what she saw and heard (1 Kings 10:1-13). Everything about Solomon was splendid, as befits the wisest of men (1 Kings 10:14-25).

Solomon invested in the art of trading. With the help of the Phoenicians, experts at trading, he built a merchant navy that sailed to eastern Africa and possibly as far as India or even the Moluccan Islands (1 Kings 9:26-28), bringing back gold and rare spices and animals (1 Kings 10:22). He also traded in horses and chariots (1 Kings 10:26-29).

Of all his claims to wisdom. Solomon is best known for his skill in getting magnificent buildings constructed. He built a great palace, the envy of the nations (1 Kings 10:4). It took thirteen years to complete (1 Kings 7:1-12). While we call it a palace, it was in fact everything which we would call government buildings, plus embassies and consulates and residences for himself and his families. He also built any number of fortifications, storage buildings and stables (1 Kings 9:15-19). One construction project surpassed all others, not in size, but in magnificence and significance, the Temple.

The Temple, by today's standards was not a big building (about 90 x 30 x 45 feet). It did not have to be large to suit the needs of the liturgy because the people did not enter it to worship; they stood outside in the court of the Temple where the large altar of sacrifice stood on an elevated platform. Only the priests and, in some cases, the Levites were allowed inside for certain rituals. The description of the Temple which you are about to read is impressive, but not informative enough for us to be able to reconstruct the Temple as it was in Solomon's day. The description is like a "tourist guide" commentary given by one who is well informed, but who is not interested in details which would explain what it really looked like. Because "the visitors" see it with their eyes, they do not need a complete description. As a result we only know some things about it for certain.

The basic floor plan was the same as most shrines and temples of that part of the world in Solomon's day. It consisted basically of three sections, a vestibule (Ulam), a sanctuary (Hekal) and the Holy of Holies (Debir) where the Ark of the Covenant stood under the protective wings of the cherubim. Around three sides of the Temple, on the outside, were two or three levels of storage rooms for precious things dedicated to the Lord. With this basic description, and the illustration, you should be able to follow, in a general way, the "guided tour" in the next passage.

Reading 1 Kings 6:1-38

Commentary

It was the splendour rather than the size of the Temple which left people breathless. The workmanship was superb in every way, the amount of cedar, gold and bronze used could hardly be measured. The Phoenician (Canaanite) craftsmen were the best available at the time. It seems that much of the Temple was "prefabricated" and brought to Jerusalem to be assembled without the "sound of hammer or pick" (vs 7) being heard in Jerusalem.

## Chapter 10b TheSignificance of the Temple

The Temple was beautiful and it was solid. It stood, with some repairs (2 Kings 22:3), for close to four hundred years. It was completed around 960 BC and was destroyed by the Babylonians around 586 BC. After the Exile a second Temple was built (515 BC). This second Temple lasted for close to five hundred years. In 20 BC Herod the Great tore it down and replaced it with a third Temple, apparently more magnificent than Solomon's. But this third Temple did not have a long life. It was barely finished when the Romans took Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple in 70 AD. The Romans returned to make a second attack on Jerusalem in 135 AD. They used the site of the Temple to build a shrine to Zeus their god and Hadrian their emperor. A Jewish temple was never built again. Since 691 AD a Muslim monument, the Dome of the Rock has stood on the Temple site.

Through its long history, close to a thousand years (960 BC - 70 AD), the Temple was the subject of much thought and theological reflection. The attitude towards the Temple underwent an evolution.

In its earliest days the theology of the Temple was not crude. Solomon and most of his contemporaries did not believe that the Lord was contained in the Temple. The Temple was the house of the Lord, because it housed the Ark of the Covenant which was seen as the throne of God. But God was greater than his Temple; he could not be limited to it. The Lord was the God of mystery.

People, however, do not always take to mystery, preferring something more easily understandable. Some people did believe the Lord was literally housed in the Temple. This thinking, primitive and crude, had to be overcome. When it became clear that this simplistic view of the Temple was popular with many people, theologians began to promote a better way of speaking of God's presence in the Temple - they referred to it as " _the house_ " for the name of the Lord.

In the next passage you will read of the transfer of the Ark into the Debir (Holy of Holies) of the Temple and you will read two prayers of Solomon. one very old (8:12-13), the other revised long after Solomon to bring it up-to-date theologically (8:14-21).

Reading 1 Kings 8:1-21

Commentary

" _The Ark of the Covenant_." This was the portable shrine, the throne of the Lord, which had been with the People since their days in the desert. David had brought it to Jerusalem with great rejoicing. When David had proposed to build a temple, the word of the Lord as given by the prophet had rejected the plan. The traditional tent was to remain. But the People were many generations away from the desert and from living in tents and this symbol did not seem to suit them nor their God anymore. They had all settled down to live in houses, so the Lord should settle down with them in a good house. The days of wandering were over.

Solomon had the Ark of the Covenant brought _"to its place in the Debir of the Temple_ " (vs 6). By this transfer the Ark was losing one symbol, the tent, and receiving another. The Ark had settled down, come to rest, in the total darkness of the Debir (Holy of Holies). The Debir had doors or a veil to close it off from the Hekal (sanctuary), but it had no windows. The Ark was enveloped in the mystery of darkness.

It was placed " _under the cherubim's wings_ " (vss 6-7). The cherubim, described somewhat in 6:23-30, were composite creatures, face of a human, body of an animal, wings of a bird. The cherubim were probably seen as protecting or sheltering the Ark with their wings.

The Ark contained " _the two stone tablets_ " of the Law which went back to the days of Moses and the Covenant that was made on Sinai. The Ark therefore, was not simply the symbol of God's presence, but of God's Covenant with the People. It represented the fact that the Lord had freely chosen his People and chose to be with them. The Ark stood for the original Covenant of God with the People. When it was brought to Jerusalem by David, the relationship between the Covenant on Sinai and the covenant of God with David was made. The continuity between the past and the present was being maintained.

" _the cloud filled the Temple_ " (vs 10). In front of the Debir stood the altar of incense, made of cedar and covered with gold (6:21), which was used to make the offerings of burnt incense. The cloud of smoke from this altar filled the sanctuary (Hekal). The cloud in the sanctuary in front of the Holy of Holies, like the darkness inside it, conveyed the profound mystery of God's presence, not a presence that could be seen and described as having this or that shape, but only a presence that could be experienced shrouded in a cloud.

This is the thought expressed in the very old words in vss 12 and 13: " _The Lord has chosen to dwell in a thick cloud._ " These words, which very probably go back to Solomon himself, show us that the early idea of the Temple was subtle and meaningful, not primitive and crude. While these words expressed the notion of God dwelling in the Temple, his presence there could not be imagined or visualized in any way. The cherubim were not images of God; they were symbols of protection for the Ark.

The prayer that follows in 8:14-21, expresses a theology that developed much later and is more refined. In these verses we see once again the connection between the Exodus, the Covenant on Sinai and the covenant with David. The Temple is said to be the dwelling-place of the name of the Lord (vs 20). The name of a person represents that person and his whole personality. The name and the person to whom it belongs can be thought of separately, but they are intimately related to each other.

When, in the remainder of the prayer (vss 22-61), it is said that the Temple is the dwelling-place of the name of the Lord, a subtle distinction is being made: God himself cannot be contained in the Temple, the heavens themselves cannot hold him (8:27), but the Lord's name dwells in the Temple, his presence there is real; it is the place he has chosen for his People to come to him to invoke his name, to praise his name. When the People call on him in the Temple. God will surely hear from his home in heaven (8:43). The Temple becomes the place of true encounter with God, through his name.

## Chapter 10c A King Like the Nations

We have to make a clear distinction between the assessment of Solomon which was made by his contemporaries and the judgment made on Solomon by people who wrote centuries later. Both his contemporaries and the later writers were impressed with his "wisdom" expressed in his skilful administration and organization, in his great political ability which brought nations streaming to Jerusalem, his talent for getting great buildings constructed, and so on. All his critics would have to agree that Solomon brought the People to a high point of prestige and power, which appealed to their pride as a nation. All would have been prepared to pay for such glory, but not at any cost.

Early criticism

The criticism which Solomon received in his own day had to do with the "cost" of all this glory. To finance his many expensive enterprises, Solomon used the customary practices of any king; he collected taxes in money, in goods and in services. Depending on the works which kings undertook, their needs might vary. At times money and goods were most important; at times manpower was more urgently needed. What Solomon needed for all his buildings was all three, but mostly manpower. So Solomon did what kings did, he enforced the corvée, a type of forced labour. The ways of the kings of the nations entered the life of the People with the groans of the work gangs.

Reading 1 Kings 5:13-18 (LXX 5:27-32)

From this passage it is clear that tens of thousands were taken from their farms or businesses and obliged to work on the king's projects. It should be noted that the forced labourers came from " _Israel_ ", that is, the northern Tribes. Nothing is said of forced labour from Judah. We cannot deduce from this that the men of Judah were exempt altogether, but we can conclude that the brunt of the corvée was felt by the northern Tribes.

A later writer, appalled at the thought of Israelites reduced to slave labour in order to build the Temple, introduced a nice distinction: only the non-Israelites were drafted into forced labour; the Israelites served in supervisory capacities or in the military (1 Kings 9:20-23). This opinion contradicts the passage you have just read. It might have applied to a later time, but does not seem to hold true of Solomon's time. Israelite and non-Israelite alike were involved in forced labour for the vast building projects of Solomon.

The northern Tribes felt themselves reduced to slavery. As we will see later in this chapter, forced labour was the main issue behind the beginning of a rebellion in the north during Solomon's reign. And it was the main complaint brought by Israel to Solomon's son.

Samuel had warned the People that a king like the nations would make them his slaves (1 Sam 8:17). Samuel was right. For a large section of the population the oppression of Egypt had returned, brought about by one of their own who behaved like the Pharaoh whose daughter he had married.

Later criticism

The passage of time gives perspective and can yield new insights into the past. While later writers still had to admit the greatness of Solomon, still had to be grateful to him for the Temple and for the period of national pride he had given to the People, they were generally of the opinion that one Solomon was enough, perhaps too much.

It is true that David had sinned. His crimes of adultery and murder, punishable by death, were terrible, but these sins of passion and fear were as nothing compared to the scandal caused by Solomon.

Solomon had wholeheartedly turned to the nations for wisdom, but this attitude which was considered "wise" and sensible in his own day, was judged as criminal by later generations. Solomon's acceptance of foreign worship, especially Canaanite, was judged as a "sell-out" of the unique traditions of the People in favour of false, idolatrous practices. David had upheld the central traditions inherited from the desert; Solomon welcomed the traditions of the Canaanites. The conquerors were being conquered by assimilation.

After several centuries of experience with kingship, theologians and lawyers drafted a strong piece of advice for kings and incorporated it into the Law of God. The text you are about to read truly does give God's assessment of the behaviour of kings, and his advice as to how they should and should not conduct themselves.

Reading Deuteronomy 17:14-20

Commentary

It is quite clear that this text has Solomon in mind. " _Horses_ " (vs 16) and chariots were sophisticated instruments of war, paraded by kings to show their great strength. Horses and chariots made one think of Egypt and its military that God had destroyed at the Exodus. Solomon not only increased his horses and chariots by the thousands, but he also traded with Egypt for chariots (1 Kings 10:26-29).

" _Egypt_ " (vs 16) should be avoided at all cost. Solomon traded with Egypt and married the Pharaoh's daughter. The ways of Solomon resembled the ways of Egypt in other ways; his administration, his urge to build, the use of forced labour, all aped the ways of Egypt.

" _Wives_ " (vs 17) were taken by kings as part of political agreements. Lust is not an adequate explanation for Solomon's many wives. Each foreign wife represented her country of origin in Solomon's court; her marriage to Solomon expressed her country's bond with Solomon's kingdom. A political wife was a kind of "ambassador" for her country. She would normally come to Jerusalem with her own "staff". The religion of her country would necessarily be represented by a priest or religious functionary of her kingdom. Solomon would feel obliged to allow her to practice her cult in Jerusalem, participate in it at least as a diplomatic gesture, and even provide a temple or shrine for her worship. This

" _loose ecumenism_ " of Solomon was considered to be the most damaging aspect of his reign. It was truly a scandal because his participation in foreign and Canaanite worship encouraged his people to do the same (1 Kings 11:1-8).

Note: To say Solomon had 1,000 wives is a way of saying " _a very, very large number of wives_ ". This use of a number is similar to our way of speaking, for example, when we say, "I have a million things to do."

" _nor must he acquire large quantities of gold for himself"_ (vs 17b). Solomon certainly did acquire gold (1 Kings 10:14-25), so much so that he actually had to give twenty towns in Galilee to Hiram of Tyre to acquire more of it (1 Kings 9:10-14). The warning against the king becoming personally very rich has implications concerning social justice. If the king could have become rich without creating a rich upper class of civil servants, merchants and various sorts of aristocrats at the expense of the general public, it would not have been so reprehensible. Solomon and all the kings who shared his love of riches, created a rich class and a pitiful class of miserably poor people. The Law struggled against the injustices which the monarchy caused, and the prophets relentlessly condemned the abuses of the rich and upheld the rights of the dispossessed.

## Chapter 10d The Consequences of Glory

Solomon was not a warrior like his father. One very good thing that can be said about his reign is that there were no wars, so far as we know. In fact Solomon did not even attempt to keep control over foreign kingdoms which his father had subjugated. During Solomon's reign both Edom and Damascus broke free of the rule of the House of David (1 Kings 11 :1 4-25). This was interpreted as a sign of weakness on Solomon's part, and later writers saw it as God's punishment for the sins of Solomon.

More serious than foreign nations breaking away was the beginning of revolt in the northern Tribes. As you read the next passage you will notice the role played by a prophet in encouraging revolt.

Note: " _House of Joseph_ " refers to the Tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, but is used here to refer to all of the northern Tribes.

Reading 1 Kings 11:26-40

Egypt, which probably had only tolerated its political ties to Solomon, is only too glad to give asylum to the king's enemies. Jeroboam, as so often happens with "freedom fighters", has to go into exile to await the appropriate moment to strike. The right time comes on the death of Solomon. Solomon's death is recorded very soberly (1 Kings 11:41-43). There seems to have been no great struggle over succession to his throne. The best of Solomon's legacy was the Temple, the worst was his son, Rehoboam, the despicable "thorn bush" of a man who succeeded him. Rehoboam is as foolish as his father was wise.

Reading 1 Kings 12:1-25

It is interesting to note that Rehoboam has to go to the centre of the northern Tribes, Shechem, to be accepted as king by them. They want new terms introduced in the agreement before they make him king. In spite of the burdens Solomon had imposed on them, they are prepared to have his son as their king, provided he treats them better. Rehoboam could have held the north and south together, had he not been utterly spoiled and, therefore, foolish and calloused. The unity which David had so carefully and skillfully brought about and nourished is destroyed in one day by a nincompoop. (And that is a very polite word for Rehoboam.) In every way Jotham's fable about the trees applies to Rehoboam; he is a proud, useless thorn bush playing king (Judges 9:15).

The north separates, anoints Jeroboam as king. Rehoboam threatens war to bring the Northern Tribes into submission, but a prophet warns against it (vss 22-24), and it appears there was no civil war. The date of the separation is around 930 BC. The Tribes had been united politically for only 70 years.

Reading 1 Kings 12:26-33

The golden calves set up by Jeroboam were no more heretical in their day than the cherubim of Solomon's Temple. The bulls were a Canaanite symbol for the throne of their god. Jeroboam most probably promoted them as the throne of the God of Israel. The biblical historians, however, cannot look at these golden calves objectively, to them they were idolatrous. Solomon's cherubim could be defended because they focused attention on the Ark, the old traditional throne of God. Jeroboam's golden bulls had no Ark to justify them. In the rest of the Books of Kings the " _sin of Jeroboam_ " means idolatry, the worst kind of sin.

Conclusion

The search for a new form of leadership, begun already in the period of the Judges (Chapter 7), was resolved by the adoption of kingship. Both the northern and southern Tribes accepted kingship and they also accepted the principle of dynasty — a king was to be succeeded by his son. While both groups (north and south) accepted kingship and dynasty, they understood this form of leadership differently.

Judah (and Simeon) in the south accepted the kingship and the dynasty of David as willed by God himself. There was never any question in Judah that any king not of the House of David could legitimately rule. The 19 kings who ruled over Judah for some 425 years were all descendants of David. This gave Judah a stable form of government with a minimum of political unrest.

Israel, while it accepted kingship and the dynastic principle, never looked upon any king or his sons as divinely approved, forever. The northern Tribes, therefore, looked upon kings and their dynasties as human institutions tolerated by God, and by themselves. This notion of kingship made it possible for the northern Tribes to get rid of one dynasty after another. In a little over 200 years the kingship in Israel changed hands nine times, each time by the assassination of the king and his possible successors, and each time the throne was taken by the assassin (see chart in Appendix).

In contrast to Judah. Israel's history was marked by revolutions. Israel was subject to internal divisions and struggles for power. The most powerful, not necessarily the most capable, usually became king.

Except for the seventy years or so under David and Solomon, the Tribes were organized as two kingdoms, with tribal identities losing ground as time went on. In the south. Simeon became absorbed in Judah and was hardly ever referred to as a separate tribe again. In the north, tribal identity became less and less meaningful as the one Tribe, Ephraim, grew and absorbed the others around it.

Religiously, the People of the north and the south still held the ideal of a common faith and a common Covenant law, but the practice of faith and law was subject to many ups and downs. Israel had its main religious shrine in Bethel; Judah in Jerusalem. Both kingdoms were threatened by the danger of becoming swallowed up by Canaanite culture and religion. Both kingdoms had great theologians and prophets who fought for the true faith and for God's law, and did the best they could to lead the People away from the danger of becoming Canaanite in every way. There was also a priesthood in both kingdoms, which was supposed to foster true worship and true knowledge of the law.

Neither priest nor prophet, however, had the power to bring about serious reforms. That power was only in the hands of the kings. In Israel only one, at most two, kings could come near to being reformers. In Judah there were at least eight who could be called kings who attempted reforms in matters of faith and law, especially laws governing worship. Two of these Judaean kings (Hezekiah and Josiah) brought about sweeping reforms and are highly praised for doing so.

The sacred writers, in assessing the performance of the kings of Judah, always measure them against David. David is clearly the standard, the achievable ideal of kingship. When they assess the kings of Israel, the sacred writers judge them on the basis of whether they followed the " _sin of Jeroboam_ " or not. Since all the kings of Israel preserved the shrine at Bethel with its golden calf, all of them are condemned as idolatrous; only one receives some praise for getting rid of a particularly offensive fertility symbol (2 Kings 3:2).

Was the kingship a success or a failure? The question is really not fair. Kingship was the only option that was realistically available at the time. God certainly approved of kingship as it was lived by David. Some of the consequences of kingship have to be seen as good; the People survived for several centuries. Some other consequences were not good.

Under the kings after David, in both Judah and Israel a rich class of people developed, creating a growing number of poor people whose misery became more and more visible. The rich developed their own false theology to support their position and to explain away the poor. The rich financed the Temple and the shrines. Those who staffed these places of worship promoted theology and liturgy supportive of their patrons.

It took the great prophets to see and point out the fact that idolatry and social injustice go hand in hand and feed each other. These men of God sometimes whipped the People with their words, and sometimes gently pleaded with them for conversion, but always they were the ones who brought to the attention of the People the feelings and opinions of God about life as it was being lived under the kings. Chapters 11 to 15 will consider these prophets.

Appendix 4

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Chapter 11- Prophets in Israel

**Introductory Notes to Chapters Eleven to Fifteen**

Contents of the Chapters

Moses was the liberator of his people, their lawgiver, their mediator, their leader; but he was also a prophet. Without him it is not possible to explain the prophetic movement among the People of God. No doubt the descriptions of Moses in the Law were affected by the prophetic movement, but this only confirms the fact that Moses was, from the earliest times, seen as the model of that selfless dedication to the truth, at any cost, which was the foundation of true prophecy. Moses is the prophet par excellence (Num 12:6-8).

The Books of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings, called Early Prophets, show us a number of persons who merited the title prophet. There were Deborah, Samuel and Nathan, to mention a few. In the Books of Kings we have examples of some of the great early prophets, Elijah and Elisha. It is the presence of these and many other prophets which gave this collection of books its designation as prophetic.

The books which are called Later Prophets are those which bear the names of prophets who exercised their ministry from around 750 BC to the end of the Exile, and even for some time after the Exile.

Chapter Eleven will make the bridge between the Early Prophets and the Later Prophets. It will deal with Elijah (c. 850 BC) whose stories occur in the Books of Kings, and then consider the Books of Amos and Hosea.

Subsequent chapters will continue along an historical line, discussing principally Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the unnamed prophet to whom we refer as Second-Isaiah. This will take us to the end of the Exile (538 BC). (Chapter Sixteen will have a section on post-exilic prophecy.)

Orientation for the Chapters on the Prophets

There was a strange love-hate relationship between the People of God and their prophets. Some of the People would have been most happy to see the prophets silenced, jailed or even executed. Others feared the prophets and would not harm them but neither would they follow their advice. But there were others who, when they heard the prophets speak, heard the very words that expressed the thoughts and feelings which were in their own hearts, thoughts and feelings which they could not, or maybe dared not say aloud themselves. Indeed, the prophets did have followers who hung on to every word, relived every deed of their heroes.

In spite of the persecution which was usually their lot, the prophets never disowned their people, never deserted them. They never questioned their identification with the People of God, regardless of how sinful they saw the People to be. Jeremiah, who had good reason to disown his compatriots, only comes to the point of wishing he could take off to the desert and live as a hermit away from them all; but even as he expresses his wish he refers to the People as " _my people_ " (Jer 9:1).

The prophets could be gentle and tender when it was necessary and they could be harsh too. In fact there are many more hard, abrasive words than there are consoling ones. Their violent words need not lead us into thinking that they thought little of their people. If hatred is fundamentally expressed in indifference, then love is expressed in passionate feeling. Because they thought so highly of their people, because they were so convinced of the greatness, the nobility of the calling to be the People of God, the prophets expressed their feelings with the excesses typical of lovers.

The prophets were critical of the People, but the People were also critical of their prophets. It took many generations for the whole People to accept them completely and to regard them as inspired by God. For several hundred years the People hated. loved, tolerated and persecuted their prophets, but finally they raised them to sainthood. By accepting these prophets, the People of God show one of their greatest qualities, self-criticism. Seldom, if ever, was a people so consistently and intensely critical of its own behaviour.

The Books of the Prophets

The process by which the words and ministry of a prophet came to be in a book is somewhat complicated. In its simplest terms we can say that there were three stages in the development that led to the formation of the books of the prophets: the prophet himself, his disciples and finally, editors.

Most of the prophets were speakers. They pronounced their oracles in public. The words they used, usually highly poetic, were meant first of all to be heard. It is not possible for us to prove that prophets such as Amos and Hosea also wrote down what they had, to say, but we do know that Isaiah wrote, or at least had others write for him (Is 8:16; 30:8), and that Jeremiah had a secretary (Jer 36:6). Ezekiel no doubt spoke some of his prophecies, but his style shows him to be more of a writer than a speaker.

The prophets had followers (disciples) who collected the sayings of their masters, putting into writing what was still only oral, and sometimes making their own additions to the collection in order to bring their master's teachings up-to-date.

The final editors, working probably mostly during and after the Exile, collected the writings which had been preserved by the disciples of the prophets, arranged these materials in some kind of order, added editorial notes here and there, and even added some later prophecies which seemed to be related to the work of the original prophet.

This process explains why a book bearing a prophet's name very often contains materials from other people written at other times.

Note: The order in sections of some of the books is not very satisfactory. There is confusion in some of the manuscripts which were handed down to us. A few modern translations attempt to put order into the passages which are especially jumbled. It would be good for you to check a few of these so you will be able to recognize what translators have occasionally done. The Jerusalem Bible, for example, has placed Hosea 2:1 after Hosea 3:5, and Jer 12:6 has been placed between 11:18 and 11:19.

General Objectives for Chapters 11 to 15

The prophets were very much men of their own times. They responded to the events which affected the life of the People. They were also extraordinarily well informed about what was happening in the world at large. For this reason anyone studying the prophets should know the basic facts of history related to each prophet. This is not a difficult task, but it is one which will require a little effort. At the end of these five chapters you should be able to recall the basic dates and events related to Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Second-Isaiah.

The prophets, besides being people of their times, were also individuals with different gifts and sensitivities. It will not be possible in this short course to probe profoundly into all that these men said and did, but we will attempt to make clear the uniqueness of their messages. The second general objective for these five chapters, therefore, is to distinguish between the prophecies of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Second Isaiah.

The chapters will contain information on other prophets, but the general objectives will be limited to the six major prophets mentioned above.

In these chapters you will be asked to do some new types of things. The most important new objectives will be "to interpret" and "to analyze". These new objectives will allow you to use the knowledge you have acquired in Chapters One to Ten, whenever it applies. Also these new tasks will require that you use the information that is contained in the chapters you are doing. To help you accomplish the work of interpretation or analysis of a biblical text, we will give you guiding questions or principles. We believe that these new objectives will make your study more interesting and challenging.

##

Introduction to Chapter 11

Most religions at some point or other experience the phenomenon of prophecy. By prophecy here we simply mean the phenomenon of people claiming to speak for the divine, that is, for their god or gods. Most countries in the ancient Near East had such people. Very often these prophets lived in communities, forming brotherhoods or guilds of prophets. Usually they lived and functioned in connection with a shrine or place of worship. One of the principal ways in which these brotherhoods of prophets believed they could encounter their gods was through trances, or some experience of ecstasy. These trances were usually brought on by music, singing, dancing and ritual. Once in an ecstatic state they would utter oracles, as often as not, oracles in unintelligible sounds which had to be interpreted.

When the People entered Canaan they found just such groups of prophets. These prophetic groups could not simply be done away with in one stroke. The prophetic groups were very popular, very close to the people, and very powerful politically. The People had to learn to contend with them. The prophetic guilds were part and parcel of the culture of the land they had inherited. The People had adopted many features of the culture and religion of the Canaanites; there seemed no clear reason why the phenomenon of prophetic brotherhoods should be rejected untried.

It is not surprising, therefore, that we find the People of God absorbing and using the kind of prophecy which was present among the Canaanites. In the passage you are about to read, you will see Samuel, a great prophet, on very good terms with the prophetic band which is attached to the shrine of Gibeah. Note: Samuel functions as a " _seer_ " in this passage, one who has extraordinary powers of perception.

Reading 1 Samuel 10:1-16

The "prophesying" that is done in this passage by Saul and the others is not the communication of understandable messages, but the uttering of ecstatic sounds which are considered to be coming from God. While these prophets represent a primitive form of prophecy, there is no reason for us to believe that there was nothing good or redeemable in them. The People of God seem to have gone along with them, and even to have joined them, bringing to the prophetic groups the faith and traditions which they had from Moses. It is in the context of these prophetic groups that some of the great prophets of God appear to function: Elijah does not seem to be a member of the groups, but functions closely with them; Elisha is clearly a member of such a group. We are never told that Elijah used their methods of trances in order to prophesy, but we are told that Elisha called for a musician in order to help him prophesy (2 Kings 3:15).

The brotherhoods of prophets continued for along time. It is not clear exactly what became of them. It would seem that many of them became consultants to kings; it is quite possible that some were eventually absorbed into the role of Levites. Whatever the case, the Lord was doing a new thing among the brotherhoods, and outside of them: he was raising up the kind of prophet that no Canaanite or other nation had ever seen. A new and strange kind of person he was not nearly as religious as the prophetic groups, much more secular, more interested in the daily life of the People than in the promotion of exciting liturgy at the shrines.

## Chapter 11a Elijah

Jeroboam, the man whom Solomon had made head of forced labour, led the revolt which split the united kingdom. He set up a separate government in the north and designated shrines, particularly Bethel, as the official shrines of the northern Tribes. Jeroboam had intended to be the first king of a dynasty, but it was not to be so. His son was murdered within a year of becoming king. The instigator of the murder made himself king, appointing his son to rule after him. History repeated itself: within a year his son was assassinated, and the assassin proclaimed himself king — for seven days. An army commander then staged a coup and brought some order into the northern kingdom. This was Omri (885-874). (1 Kings 15:25-16:28)

By worldly standards Omri was a great king. He brought stability to the kingdom, improved its economic position by establishing strong ties with Phoenicia. This bond was expressed in the marriage of his son Ahab to Jezebel, the daughter of the king of Sidon. Omri also built the splendid royal city, Samaria, which was to remain the capital of the northern kingdom to the end.

When Omri died, the crown passed peacefully to his son Ahab who ruled for some twenty years (874-853). Jezebel, his Phoenician-Canaanite wife, was zealous in her devotion to the religion of her people. The Canaanites of Phoenicia were considered much more culturally advanced than the Israelites. By promoting the Phoenician brand of Canaanite religion, Jezebel was no doubt trying to raise the standards of her husband's backward people. (1 Kings 1 6:29-34)

During the reigns of Omri and Ahab there arose, inevitably, a class of aristocrats who, like the newly-rich of any age, wanted to be culturally "modern" and sophisticated. We can presume that, as usual, there were also those who worked hard to raise themselves up in the social ladder and had to show their broadmindedness in the process. We can also assume that there were large numbers of the poor, who longed to become wealthy themselves and to live the life of their oppressors. Jezebel's movement to promote Canaanite religion would find support in all of these layers of society. But there were exceptions at every level as well: high level officials (1 Kings 18:3-4), some of the brotherhoods of prophets (2 Kings 2) and a considerable number of ordinary people (1 Kings 19:18).

The leader of the opposition was a strange man from the backwoods, Elijah of Gilead. In him the old traditions were still alive. He was still moved by the great ideals given by the Lord in the Covenant and in the Law. He felt pain, indignant anger and rage at what he saw happening to his people. The nobility of their calling to be the People of God was being traded for an imitation of Canaanite culture, and the Lord God himself was being traded for the Canaanite baals.

Note: The word baal literally means lord, master, or sometimes husband. In itself it is simply an honorary title which could be applied in many different ways. It could have been used, and probably was used, of the Lord (YHWH) God of Israel. However, since it was used as a title of honour for Canaanite gods, the biblical writers do not use it as a title for the true God, but only for the gods of the Canaanites.

The Canaanites had many gods, male and female in character. The principal male god was called Hadad, though he could have other names. Hadad was the god of the storm, lightning, thunder and rain. Since storms brought the rain, Hadad was the god of fertility and therefore of prosperity. His female counterpart was Asherah (sometimes called Astarte in the Bible). To be fair to the people of Elijah's day, we have to admit that gods who promise prosperity are, in principle at least, more attractive than the God who demands justice first and promises only a modest living. Anyone in Elijah's day who longed to get rich would be seriously tempted to worship Baal Hadad, or at least to give him equal time with the Lord God of Israel. On the one hand, there was a definite disadvantage of worshipping the true God, for he required a rather strict code of ethics in daily life, a code of ethics which was not geared to making people rich. On the other hand, there were real advantages in worshipping Baal, who required no such strict sense of justice, and who was quite satisfied with the attention he got through liturgical worship, a worship made all the more attractive by its sexual fertility rites.

The next reading shows Elijah staging a contest between the true God and Baal. The story is full of irony and sarcasm: the prophets of Baal are unable to get the god of the storm to light the fire for their sacrifice, in spite of all their grotesque efforts to get his attention. Elijah, full of confidence, pours water on the wood of his sacrifice, prays very simply and lightning comes to light the fire. For our purposes here, the main points of the story are to be found in verses 21 and 39. These lines illustrate one of the main functions of the true prophet.

Reading 1 Kings 18:20-40

Comment

The true prophet reveals the real position of the People - they are shuffling from one foot to the other, worshipping both Baal and the Lord (vs 21). The first commandment prohibits the worship of any other god; Elijah is insisting that the People take a stand for the Lord, the God of Abraham. Isaac and Jacob (vs 36). Overwhelmed by the display of power, those present acknowledge the true God (vs 39). Elijah, and every prophet after him wants to make his people see clearly what their options are; he wants them to recognize that they are sitting on the fence, compromising, cheapening or violating their ideals. He also wants them to be converted, to acknowledge the true God.

Note: The gruesome ending of this highly dramatized story seems to indicate that there was a real battle going on between the Baal worshippers and the worshippers of the Lord. There was killing on both sides, but it appears from the next story that the forces of Baal and Jezebel were winning.

The story of Elijah's journey to the mountain of God is important for its teaching value. Through this beautifully poetic story we can discover further characteristics of the true prophet. Before reading the passage, it would be very helpful if you looked up the following passages: Exod 3:1-6; 19:18-19; 33:18-23.

Reading 1 Kings 19:1-18

Note: Horeb is another name for Sinai. Comment

This narrative also has its touch of irony: the prophet flees for his life, but wishes he were dead. Many, if not most prophets were persecuted, and at least one had moments when he regretted ever being born (Jer 20:14-18). Even in his struggle with despair, the prophet is fed and strengthened by God. The real food of the prophet is to be found on Horeb, the mountain of God, where God encountered Moses (Exod 3:1-6) and where he made the Covenant with his People (Exod 19-24). The point of teaching here is quite clear: the true prophet returns to the very sources of the faith and life of the People of God. The prophet gains his strength and insight by being seeped in the traditions of the People.

On Sinai (Horeb) the Lord had made his presence known in terrifying signs. Here Elijah experiences similar things, but discovers that the Lord is not present to him in lightning and earthquake as he was to his ancestors at Sinai. God is only present to Elijah in " _a quiet whisper_ ", " _a soft breeze_ ". For the prophets after Moses, gone are the days of spectacular displays of God's presence and will. (You can easily see how this story counterbalances the previous one.) Prophets now have to find the will of God in the " _quiet whisper_ " of the Lord speaking in and through their own consciences, their own insights. Neither can the prophet expect God to dramatically strike down his enemies. Since the Lord works subtly in the very processes of ordinary history, the prophet also has to work within the same processes, expecting no miraculous displays to support him. In verses 15 to -18 the Lord tells Elijah to work within the events of history. The rather terrible events in which Elijah (or his disciples) will participate clearly indicate that the " _gentle breeze_ " of vs 12 has nothing to do with the gentleness or mercy of God. (Sorry!)

The story of Elijah on Horeb is a much more mature presentation of prophecy than is the story of Carmel. Carmel represents more what many prophets would have liked to see happen; Horeb is more realistic, for it is much closer to the kind of prophecy which actually takes place in the centuries that follow Elijah. The true prophet must reach back to the very sources, the roots of the faith and tradition of his People. It is there that he will find his food, his strength and insight. The genuine prophet also cannot count on fantastic explosions of divine confirmation of his words and deeds. The prophet will have to keep his eyes focused on the events of history and attempt to read in these ordinary events, the will of his Lord.

The last Elijah story to be considered is a good example of the concerns of the genuine prophet - justice and obedience to the commandments of God. Ahab, coached by Jezebel, breaks the commandments against murder and theft, and in order to do so he brings others to break the commandment against false witness in a court of justice. In addition, Ahab violates the tradition whereby a person was considered to have a sacred right to keep the property which he had inherited from his ancestors.

Reading 1 Kings 21:1-29

Though Ahab's repentance wins him a reprieve, his corrupt reign will eventually lead to the bloodiest revolution in the history of the northern kingdom. Elijah and his disciple Elisha could see it coming and actually encouraged it.

The end of Elijah's life (2 Kings 2:1-18) reads like a parable on the meaning of the prophet's ministry. Elijah retraces the steps of the original entry into the land of Canaan, splits the waters of the Jordan (as Moses had split the waters of the sea), crosses the Jordan to end his days in the same general area where tradition held that Moses had died (Deut 34). In his parting, as in his life, Elijah is associated with Moses. It is also fitting that the man who called down fire on Carmel and who witnessed the fire and storm on Horeb, should be taken up in a chariot of fire.

Popular legends developed around Elijah. Since he had been "taken up" by God, it was believed that he was still alive, and therefore could come back to resume his ministry. His return would usher in the final messianic age. This belief is reflected in the last words of the Book of Malachi (3:23), and in several places in the Gospels (eg. Matt 16:14; Mark 15:33ff).

There are two aspects of the works of Elijah and Elisha as reported in the stories about them which we can only touch upon briefly: the first is their involvement in politics; the second is their miracles.

1 Elijah is said to have taken an active part in the political plotting of his times (1 Kings 19:15-18). Elisha is even more clearly presented as a kind of "guerilla prophet", con- doning assassination (2 Kings 8:7-15), and fomenting violent revolution (2 Kings 9-10). Such violence may well have been true of these prophets, but it is never again a part of the ministry of the prophets in the People of God.

2 The miracles of Elijah and Elisha are basically of three kinds: violent war-like miracles, eg. fire out of heaven destroying enemies (2 Kings 1:9-16); quasi-magical acts, eg. the replenishing jar (1 Kings 17:7-16); and the miracles of mercy, eg. the raising of the widow's son- (1 Kings 17:17-24), the feeding of the brotherhood of prophets (2 Kings 4:38-44), and the cure of Namaan the leper (2 Kings 5). The miracles of violence and the almost magical acts never occur again in the history of prophecy among the People of God. The miracles of mercy, however, return with the prophetic life of Jesus.

Elijah (c. 850) had predicted the downfall of the dynasty of Omri, and Elisha, his disciple, had encouraged the revolution which brought it to an end. 2 Kings 9-10 records the terrible blood bath with which Jehu, the leader of the uprising, had massacred Ahab's son, the queen mother Jezebel, all the possible successors to the throne of Omri, countless Baal worshippers, and even the king of Judah and his sons who happened to be visiting the northern kingdom at that time.

Jehu set up his own dynasty. He was followed by four of his descendants in succession. This was the longest dynasty in Israel, almost one hundred years. During this period of stability Israel became more and more prosperous. Jeroboam II, the great-grandson of Jehu, ruled Israel in its greatest period of splendour and strength. About one hundred years after Elijah, during the reign of Jeroboam II (783-743), Amos made his appearance in Israel (c. 750).

## Chapter 11b Amos

**Vocation and Message**

The first verse of the Book of Amos gives us the name, the profession, the place of origin of the prophet and the period of history in which he carried out his mission. The second verse sets the tone for the book.

Reading Amos 1:1-2

Commentary

Amos is a _shepherd_. The term does not necessarily mean that he was poor, or that he was simply a hired sheep-herder. The term could mean one who raises sheep. In 7:15 Amos tells us that he also looked after fruit trees. From the quality of his poetry, and the masterful way he handles words, it would seem that he was educated, or was especially gifted. Whatever his education, it is clear that he is a "layman", not a professionally trained prophet. Amos is from Tekoa, a town some ten miles south of Jerusalem, in an area which is rather rugged and bleak.

The _visions_ which Amos had are close to what we would call "insights". The insights of Amos come from the Lord, but they could be received through seeing deeply into the most ordinary things, a swarm of locusts, a plumb-line, a basket of ripe fruit (7:1-9; 8:1- 3). The Lord has opened his eyes to see what is really happening in history.

Amos, the man from Judah, is called to prophesy in the northern kingdom, Israel. Since the two kingdoms claimed to hold on to the same faith, profess the same Lord, there was nothing out of the ordinary in a southerner preaching to the north, or vice-versa. We see later in the book, however, that Amos was not welcome in the north, at least not by everyone.

Amos goes north during the reign of Jeroboam II (783-743). It appears that Amos did not stay long, probably not much over a year. He was very likely deported back to Judah. We usually date his prophecies around the year 750 BC. This was at the height of the prosperity of the northern kingdom. The people felt secure because they were certain that the great powers. Egypt and Assyria, were in no position to harm them. They were right about Egypt, for it was weak and would never really recover its former might. They were wrong about Assyria, but only Amos seemed to be aware of that.

We have no details about the vocation of Amos. We are simply told that he experienced the Lord telling him to " _go prophesy to my people Israel_ " (7:15). In 1:2 and in 3:3-8, we do get a sense of the way in which he experienced his vocation. It was like a mighty roar, a thundering from the Lord in the Temple in Jerusalem (Zion), that went from the pastures of the south to Mount Carmel in the north (1:2), causing wailings and a withering from fear. The voice of the Lord causes in Amos the same feeling of dread and terror which a shepherd feels when he hears the roar of a lion. Amos can do nothing but announce what he hears the Lord say (3:3-8).

In 1:3-2:1 6 we have a collection of poems which express God's judgment against the nations surrounding the People of God. The series comes to a climax in the oracle against Israel. As you read the first seven oracles, it would be helpful if you paid special attention to the "because" phrases; these indicate the reason(s) for which the nation is condemned.

Note: The poems on Tyre (1:9-1 0) and Edom (1:1 1-1 2) are probably the work of disciples applying the style and message of Amos to other guilty nations. The oracle against Judah (2:4-5) reflects the thinking of the editors. They use this poem to make clear that the People of God are judged by a standard which is different from the standard by which the nations are judged.

Reading Amos 1:3 - 2:4

Commentary

Amos uses a numerical expression, _"the three . . the four_ ," to emphasize that there are many, many crimes involved, but he only singles out one of them. It is clear that Amos believes the Lord is God of all nations, and that he will make all nations account for their actions. The nations are judged by the standard of what they themselves should recognize as humane behaviour. The hideous crimes they have committed against each other will be punished. Cruel wars (1:3c), selling people into slavery (1:6c), butchering pregnant women all for the sake of expanding their territories (1:1 3cd) and perpetrating base indignities on the body of a king, all of these are examples of violations of what could be called "natural law". Nations who behave in these ways will not escape the punishment they deserve.

When it comes to the People of God, the standard is higher, more is demanded of them. In the oracle against Judah, the editors make it clear that Judah (and Israel) is to be tried on the basis of the Law of the Lord (2:4c).

The final oracle, the one against Israel, is emphatic in every way. Amos breaks the poetic form and structure of the previous short oracles against the nations. The form explodes

four because phrases; images are piled one on top of the other to form a tightly written verdict (2:6-8). Then he moves to a recitation of sacred history and the response that Israel has made to it (2:9-1 2). Finally, he gives the sentence Israel will receive (2:1 3-1 6).

Reading Amos 2:6-16

Notes: " _Selling a person for silver_ :" unjust courts caused innocent people to be sold into slavery to pay debts which they probably did not owe. " _Sandals_ " were used as symbols in transfers of land ownership (Ruth 4:7-8). Amos is referring to crooked land deals whereby the rich took possession of the lands of the weak. " _Nazirites_ " were people who took vows to abstain from alcoholic beverages and from cutting their hair, which were generally respected and taken very seriously.

Commentary

The courts were controlled by the rich who manipulated justice for their own ends, causing innocent people to be reduced to slavery and to be deprived of their lands - all behind the facade of legality. Justice is the prime concern of Amos, especially justice for the poor (Exod 23:6-8). In vss 7-8 Amos combines injustice, perversity and idolatry: the fertility rites with their banquets were financed by the revenue from illegal pledges and fines.

The prophet then reminds them of the things which the Lord had done for them in history: he gave them the land they live in after having taken them out of Egypt and cared for them in the desert. He gave them prophets to keep his word alive among them, Nazirites to be signs of fidelity among them, but they have perverted both of these gifts and have no gratitude for the rest of God's deeds (vss 9-12), Severe punishment will be dealt out to them, punishment they will not be able to escape (vss 13-16).

If we allow ourselves to "listen" between the lines, we can hear the people laughing and jeering at Amos: "He's crazy, we've never had it so good. The Lord loves us and is making us prosper. We are his special people, chosen above all other nations. "He will not treat us severely. He is a forgiving God. .." Amos knows they are thinking and acting like people who are certain that they are privileged by God, and that God will never deal severely with them. To them God is like a spoiling parent, more interested in receiving the affection of the children than in risking their dislike by giving them the punishment they deserve and need. Amos, addressing "the whole family", that is all the Tribes of north and south, tells them what it really means to be chosen and favoured by God.

Reading Amos 3:1-2

Comment

Recalling the great saving act of the Exodus, and recognizing that God has indeed chosen this people as his own, Amos bluntly expresses the responsibility that they have as a result of their being chosen. Because they have been especially favoured above all other nations, they will be punished with special severity: more is expected of those to whom more has been given. God does not spoil his children.

In the passages read so far. Amos has not made clear what form this punishment will take. In the next passage, the one you will analyze in the practice question, he begins to make things clear.

Amos continues his prophecies, making even more clear what the punishment will involve: Bethel, the national shrine, will be destroyed, the extravagant summer and winter houses will be smashed to the ground (3:14-15). It is the Lord, God of Sabaoth, who will do this.

Note: The word " _sabaoth_ " refers literally to an army prepared for war. As a title for God it probably goes back to the days when the Ark of the Covenant was taken into battle with the armies of the People of God. It could also refer to God as the leader of the heavenly hosts, the stars or heavenly beings seen as God's vast armies. In any case, God of Sabaoth is a title emphasizing the great power and might of God.

The prophets do not usually single out women in their oracles. Amos and Isaiah are exceptions. In the next passage, Amos uses some of his most crude and bitter language on the rich women of Samaria. In the Bible the great women are pictured as being very much like God himself, the defenders of the poor. When they praise God it is as the defender of the defenceless that they praise him (Miriam. Exod 15; Deborah, Judges 5; Hannah, 1 Sam 2; Mary, Luke 1:46-55). To Amos, these women have lost the last trace of womanly concern for justice and the poor; they are perverse.

Reading Amos 4:1-3

Note: Bashan was an area with rich grazing lands. It had a reputation for producing huge, fat cattle. See Ps 22:12.

Comment

The image of the cows is carried through the poem: the women of the upper classes of Samaria will experience the fate of fat cattle-- the slaughterhouse. (Verses 2 and 3 have some difficult Hebrew words. Translations of these verses vary considerably.)

The rich feel that they can obtain God's favour by liturgical acts. In fact, they feel that they are the ones best able to satisfy fully the demands that are made by proper worship. They can afford the expensive sacrifices and tithes which worship at the shrines requires. They can even afford to offer more sacrifices than are required at the shrines of Bethel and Gilgal.

Reading Amos 4:4-5

Comment

Amos condemns their worship as evil, sinful. Liturgy is something which they like to do; it makes them feel good: " _For this is what you love_ ," says Amos, but it is not what the Lord loves.

The prophecies continue with a sad and somber list of the catastrophes which afflicted the country (4:6-12). None of these ever caused the wealthy to reflect, to come to their senses: " _you never came back to me._ " The famines, plagues, earthquakes never affected the rich; they had provisions enough to get by, and houses were strong enough to withstand shock, Nothing touched them. Amos warns them now: " _Prepare to meet your God_ " (4:12).

Amos sings a lament, a dirge over the fate of the northern kingdom (5:1-3). The nation will die without ever reaching the great fulfilment which God had in store for her, like a virgin dying without knowing the fulfilment of the marriage she was meant for. Her armies will be decimated, and she will be left alone with none to care for her, the way she cared for no one.

Against Upper Class Theology

Religion was still fashionable in Amos' time. The wealthy considered it important to take part in the liturgy and to support the shrines with generous donations (4:4). The shrines, especially Bethel, prospered and the priests prospered along with their sanctuaries. Little by little the priests, called to remember the history of the People of God and to proclaim the Law, adjusted their sermons and their ceremonies to suit the people who supported them.

In the passages which we are about to consider, Amos is not attacking false worship or heresy. He is severely critical of the interpretation of traditional, orthodox theology which the priests (and prophets) are preaching, and which their congregations love to hear. We must not think that these priests were consciously wicked men, warping the true message of the faith. It would appear that they believed that the liturgy should be beautiful, and that good preaching should be popular and acceptable to the People. The crowds who came to their shrines were made up of the most respectable and influential people in the country; what more proof did they need that their ministry was successful?

One by one. Amos takes the most popular subjects of sound, traditional teaching and shows what these truths really mean for a people whose lives are founded on injustice.

The People traditionally believed that the Lord was present among them, in the shrines and in the country. Those who went to the shrines expected to have this teaching reinforce and console them. In the liturgy they felt that they were being peacefully accepted by the Lord, thinking "God must approve of us because we approve of him and show him great respect". The following passage illustrates what Amos believes the presence of God really means for these people.

Reading Amos 5:14-17

Comment

Unless they found their lives on justice, God's presence will be a disaster for them. When God does "pass through" their midst, he will bring about catastrophe.

Another popular topic of teaching was " _the Day of the Lord_ ". This expression occurs here for the first time. It appears that it was based on ideas coming from the Exodus and from the battles in their early history when the Lord was considered as fighting with and for the People. The Day of the Lord was the day when God defeated his enemies. The People now consider the Day of the Lord as the day when the Lord will destroy all their enemies. The rich looked forward to the Day of the Lord, because then they would have opposition from no one.

Reading Amos 5:18-20

Comment

Amos refers to the Day of the Lord again in 8:9-10, where he brings to it the images of cosmic disaster which many other prophets used later.

Amos now turns to liturgical worship of the Lord. The people of the times firmly believed that the whole system of liturgical worship with its sacrifices, rituals and festivals, was unquestionably the will of God. The passage you are to analyze gives Amos' opinion on the matter.

The violent words which Amos uses to express God's disgust with the offerings of the worshippers were meant to shock and awaken. It is probable that Amos spoke these words in Bethel, possibly even in the shrine during the time of worship itself. (Prophets were often allowed to speak up during worship.)

The traditional faith of the People held that God had promised to make a great nation out of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Gen 12:1-4). Israel had become " _a great nation_ " and, therefore it was blessed by God. The wealth and prestige of Israel, it appears, was seen as the fulfilment of the promises made to the ancestors. Amos sees matters differently.

Reading Amos 6:1-7

Note: Vs 2 is almost incomprehensible in Hebrew. The passage makes good sense without commenting on it.

Comment

The rich offer stall-fattened cattle both to God (5:22) and to themselves (6:4); they sing and play music enthusiastically for the Lord (5:23) and for themselves (6:5). The Lord is as disgusted with their version of greatness as he is with their liturgy. The luxury of their lives has given these people a calloused skin, incapable of feeling the ruin of the country which they are bringing about. By his harsh words Amos wants to strip them of the toughened skin of their security so they will sense what is really happening.

The northern kingdom had a special devotion to the Exodus. In it they saw God's special favour on their behalf. The Exodus was proclaimed and celebrated at the shrines, and possibly also in the Passover celebrated in the homes of some of the People. It seems, however, that the Exodus was interpreted in ways which justified the life of the rich in the kingdom.

Reading Amos 9:7-8b

Comment

Amos is saying that the Exodus itself is nothing at all. All kinds of nations have had their "exodus" from one place to another. Since the Lord is the God of all nations, it was he who brought all these nations to the lands they occupied. What is so special about the Exodus of Israel? Nothing, in itself. The Exodus was an event which had to be interpreted in the light of the Covenant to which it was directed. To separate the Exodus from the obligations of Covenant law, was to warp the purposes for which God delivered Israel out of Egypt. He brought them out in order to make of them a new society in which the oppression of Egypt would not exist. Now, within his People there exists oppression. So God will do to the oppressors among his People what he did to the oppressors in Egypt.

Reading Amos 9:8c-10

Comment

Amos makes it clear that the punishment to come will affect the guilty (" _sinners_ ". vs. 10), that is , the wealthy. Amos knows that the normal practice of invaders is not to loot the huts and hovels of the poor, but the treasures of palaces (3:11). Amos also knows that the policy of the Assyrians is to deport the conquered to other parts of their empire, and that these deportations affect the ruling classes especially. The poor would not be affected in the same way. Amos does not say the lot of the poor will improve; misery is misery with or without invaders.

At some point during his ministry Amos had a confrontation with the chief priest of Bethel. The incident was considered significant enough to be preserved by the disciples of Amos and by the People. It is very possible that this encounter brought an end to the work of Amos in the northern kingdom.

The Book of Amos ends with an addition by the editors. This more hopeful passage (9:11-15) presumes that Jerusalem has been destroyed and that the royal line of David is in doubt (" _tottering_ ", vs 11). The passage reflects the hopes of the Judaean community of a later period. The prophecy relieves the gloominess of Amos' message and brings his prophecies up-to-date with developments which occurred in later prophets.

## Chapter 11c Hosea

Hosea's ministry covered a period of some 26 years (c. 750-724), in Israel. His work began during the reign of Jeroboam II when Amos spoke, and extended through the reigns of six other kings, four of whom were murdered. The violence of the times was due in great measure to the rise of Assyria.

In 745, Tiglath-Pileser III (called Pul in the Bible, 2 Kings 1 5:19) became king of Assyria. He was one of their most powerful and aggressive rulers. In 738 he forced the small kingdoms, including Israel, to pay tribute to him. A few years later, Israel refused to pay the tribute.

Israel joined forces with neighbouring kingdoms hoping to form a coalition strong enough to withstand Assyria. Judah would not join this coalition, so Israel and her allies attacked Judah. The king of Judah appealed to the Assyrians, who gladly came to his rescue. The Assyrians attacked Israel, conquering its northern territories and deporting some of the population. An Israelite called Hoshea (same name as the prophet), killed Israel's king, paid tribute to the Assyrians who called off their troops and allowed him to be their vassal king.

King Hoshea paid the tribute until Tiglath-Pileser died (727). Thinking the Assyrian empire would be in turmoil, the king of Israel refused to pay tribute. The new king of Assyria, Shalmanasar V, was no weakling. In 724 he invaded Israel, defeated her armies and took King Hoshea into exile. This much of the history of Israel is reflected in the prophecies of Hosea.

For understanding the prophet, it is not necessary to remember all the details of the period. It is enough to know that during his ministry, especially near the end of it, Hosea experienced the Assyrian threat; the Assyrians invaded twice while he was alive. They caused factions to be formed in Israel, some pro-Assyrian, others pro-Egyptian. These factions fought each other, murdering four kings in eleven years.

The Covenant

Hosea is heir to the work of Elijah; they show the same concern for true worship of the Lord, the same sensitivity to the inroads which were being made into the purity of the faith. While Hosea and Amos prophesied during the same period, saw the same things happening, the two prophets did not interpret the situation in exactly the same way. The inspiration which God gave them worked through the distinct characteristics of each man. In Amos, God worked through the prophet's sensitivity to the oppression of the poor. Amos had God's passion for justice. In Hosea, God worked through the prophet's sensitivity to love. Hosea discovered God and his will in the painful experience of love rejected.

Reading Hosea 1:2-9

Note: It is pointless to attempt to reconstruct Hosea's personal history from this passage. It is the work of a later editor who saw Hosea's ill-fated marriage as willed by God from the beginning. It is enough to say that Hosea fell in love with, and married a woman who was, or who became, openly unfaithful to him.

Comment

The painful experience of a marriage that failed became the channel of revelation. The love that Hosea felt for his wife became an image of God's love for his People; the infidelity of Hosea's wife, an image of the rebellion of Israel. The anguish of Hosea was like the anguish of God over the betrayal of his spouse, Israel. In his marriage Hosea had said to Gomer, " _You shall be my wife_ ", and she had said, " _You shall be my husband_." To Hosea marriage was an image of the Covenant between God and his People. In the Covenant God had said, " _You shall be my People_ ", and Israel had said, " _You shall be my God_ ". The history of the Covenant was, for Hosea, the same as the history of his marriage — love repeatedly rejected.

Hosea gave symbolic names to the children-born of Gomer: " _Jezreel_ " recalled the place where Jehu, the founder of the dynasty of the reigning king (Jeroboam II), had mercilessly massacred all his opponents (2 Kings 9-10); " _Unloved_ " suggests the death of the love which once existed between God and his People; " _No-People-of-Mine_ " is symbolic of the divorce, the end of the Covenant-marriage.

There is, in addition to his personal experience, a further explanation for Hosea's understanding of the relationship between God and the People as the relationship between man and woman — the Canaanite fertility cults. Baal was seen as the male principle in nature; he came riding on the storm-clouds, bringing rain which fertilized the earth, producing everything that grows: wheat, oil, flax, wine. The Canaanite liturgy involved rituals of sympathetic magic, imitating the intercourse of Baal with the earth. The Baal cult, with its promises of prosperity, was very attractive to many people, especially those who grasped at wealth, or had it and wanted to maintain it. The same people probably worshipped the Lord God as well, or, worse still, confused Baal and the Lord.

The following passage is a passionate statement aimed at making it clear that it was the Lord, not Baal, who provided for his People,

Reading Hosea 2:4-7, 10-15

Note: The verses have been rearranged in some translations.

Comment

The Lord will abandon his spouse; she will discover that Baal will not look after her, because he never did. The Lord's rejection of his spouse, however, is for a purpose.

Reading Hosea 2:8-9

Comment

The ''divorce" is only to bring the People to their senses. The Lord hopes that Israel will, in her deprivation, realize that the Baals, her lovers, do not provide for her, and that she would be better off with the true God, who is like a husband to her.

Chapter 3 briefly recounts Hosea's appeal to his wife to return to him, and it explains the symbolism of the marriage-separation-reunion. (Vs 5 is probably an addition by a later disciple or editor, who makes it clear that the real hope for the future of Israel lies in Judah and its Davidic line.)

Knowledge of God

Hosea, like Amos, saw the injustices, the deceit, the violence and cruelty which were so common among the People. Hosea, however, saw that something more than justice was missing among the People. In the following text he issues the accusations of the Lord against the People; both the crimes they commit and the virtue they lack are listed.

Reading Hosea 4:1-3.

Commentary

" _There is no fidelity_." The People lack the virtue of their God. To be faithful means to be reliable, consistent, true. A faithful person is one who stands by the word, the promises which he/she has made. The People cannot be trusted, they do not keep the word which was given in the Covenant. They do not observe the Commandments of the Law; perjury, lies, theft, adultery fill the country. God cannot trust them, and they do not trust each other. There is no fidelity.

_"No tenderness_ " (JB) The Hebrew is hesed, a word which is almost impossible to trans-late adequately. It expresses first of all a bond between two parties that was established freely. It is a bond (established by covenant, or marriage) which is meant to generate friendship, affection, the desire to be united. Hesed expresses the ideal that covenant relationships are meant to reach. Between husband and wife, hesed is fidelity which matures in mutual trust, affectionate love, tender admiration. Between the Lord and his People, hesed should achieve similar heights; they should have a tender, warm admiration, a love that is faithful and affectionate. But this hesed for God was meant to overflow in the relationships of the People among themselves. The fact that there is no hesed among them, proves that they have none for God. Hesed is variously translated as mercy, love, faithful love, kindness, tenderness, loyal love, and so on.

" _No knowledge of God_." This is the most significant word in the Book of Hosea. In Hebrew, knowledge is an act of the heart. To know is to experience. Feeling is involved in knowing a person, the feeling of being drawn to that person, of wanting to be united to that person. For this reason " _to know_ " can express sexual intercourse (Gen 4:1 reads " _the man knew his wife_ ").

To know a person is to accept that person. When knowledge is applied to the Lord, then if the People know him, they will accept him, be drawn to him, desire union with him. In effect, this means that knowledge of God will bring about acceptance of his Law. Since there is no knowledge of God, the People are not drawn to him, and do not obey his Law. The result is chaos in the land. They do not know the Lord, and do not follow his ways. (Vs. 3 refers to a drought and/or famine which occurred. Hosea sees it as a sign of the disharmony which lack of knowledge of God causes. Compare 2:20.)

Hosea does not stop at this analysis. He asks why there is no knowledge of God among the People.

Reading Hosea 4:4-11a

Comment

The priests are to blame. It was their responsibility to make God and his Law known to the People. The priests have forgotten the teaching (torah) of God (vs 6d) , and the People are perishing as a result. The prophets stumble along with the priests, sharing the blame, because they were to clarify the will of God for the People. The priesthood of the northern kingdom will come to an end as a result of its disservice.

There is a particularly pathetic statement in verse 8. The priests are becoming rich on the sins of the People. The priests had a share in the sacrifices which were offered for sin. The more the People sin, the more sacrifices they offer for sin, and the more wealthy the priests become. Sin was good business at the shrines.

Hosea turns from the priests and prophets to the king and all his henchmen judges.

Reading Hosea 5:1-4

Note: It is probably because some especially notorious unjust sentences were issued in Mizpah and Tabor that they are mentioned.

Comment

The administration of justice was the main duty of the king. Instead of promoting justice and making life safe for the People, the king and his judges are like hunters setting traps and flinging nets to catch their prey. The king and his men do not know the Lord (vs 4).

In 5:15, the Lord says that he will leave his People and return to heaven until they repent. What follows in 6:1-6 is a poem which is best understood if it is set in the context of a ritual of repentance at a shrine. The people have gathered to offer sacrifices for sins, and they utter a prayer of repentance (vss 1-3). The prophet, who is present, hears what they are saying and sees what they are doing. He gives God's reaction to the People's actions and words (vss 4-6).

Reading Hosea 6:1-6

The prayer of the congregation expresses a shallow sense of their sinfulness, and a superficial notion of the punishment they deserve. They are confident that God is only frightening them and that his anger will quickly go away and all will be well again.

God sees that the devotion which they are showing as they offer their sacrifices is about as long-lasting as the morning dew. Even though God has shaken them with the words of his prophets, the worshippers still believe that prayers and a few sacrifices will appease God. What God wants is hesed and knowledge, not sacrifices. No amount of ritual will make up for the lack of love and a sense of justice that shows knowledge of God (See Amos 5:21 ).

The Whirlwind

Hosea read the signs of the times accurately. He knew that the Assyrians would never tolerate the rebellions of the little kingdoms such as Israel. Yet, the leaders of Israel plotted and schemed with Egypt, with neighbouring kingdoms to resist Assyria. The country was filled with factions, some in favour of subjection to Assyria, at least for the time being, others violently against submitting to Assyrian rule. Neither side would listen to Hosea. They seemed bent on a suicidal course. They gave no obedience to the Lord.

The Assyrians were the whirlwind which Israel's behaviour had sown. A more terrible fate could hardly be imagined. The Assyrians made cruelty a policy. They skinned their captives alive, impaled them screaming on sharpened poles and beheaded entire armies, to mention a few atrocities. They counted on "advance publicity" to strike terror and panic in the kingdoms they were about to conquer. Hosea knows their cruelty; his descriptions of what is to happen are vividly terrible. Hosea believes that, if such things happen, they are in some way willed by the Lord, but in no way can the Lord desire or want them to occur. Hosea can make the distinction between what God wills and what God wants because he credits emotions to the Lord. How does God feel about the horrors to come? In answer, Hosea composed his most moving poem.

Reading Hosea 11:1-11

Commentary

Vss 1-4. The image is that of parent and child. The gestures and emotions expressed are motherly, though they could be said of a father who was particularly gentle and loving (See Deut 1:31). In spite of being cared for, the child refuses to recognize the parent who loves him and turns unnaturally to strangers for attention and help.

Vss 5-7. The child must bear the consequences of his choices. In his perversity, the child continues to believe that the strangers can save him. He ignores his parent, even though he is in a terrible state.

Vs8. The Lord cannot bear the thought of the total annihilation of his son, Israel. (Admah and Zeboilm were towns destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah.) The thought tears at him, horrifies him.

Vs 9. He cannot allow the total destruction that is deserved. An earthly father might possibly accept the just execution of his criminal son (Deut 21:18-21), but the Lord is not an earthly. father, he is God, the Holy One and has no desire to destroy.

Vss 10-11. Like a lion roaring for its young, the Lord will call his children home, after they have been punished. This time, his children will listen to him when he calls.

The collection of Hosea's prophecies ends with a prayer which God gives to his People to say (14:3-4) and God's response to this prayer. It forms a fine conclusion to the book.

Reading Hosea 14:2-9

The prayer must not have been taken to heart. King Hoshea refused to pay tribute to Assyria. In 724 Assyria arrived, took the king into exile, laid siege to Samaria for three years, letting the inhabitants suffer from hunger until they surrendered in 721. Assyrian historians record that 27,290 Israelites were deported. The Assyrians exiled them to different parts of the empire; some were settled in the north-west, in the area of Haran (Abraham's ancestral home), others in the south-east, the territory of the Persians (2 Kings 17:6). Amos and Hosea had read the direction of their times with dreadful accuracy.

The Assyrians then took conquered peoples from other parts of their empire and settled them in what was once Israel. This is recorded briefly in 2 Kings 17:5-6, 24-41. These foreigners mixed with the local Israelites and formed the people known eventually as the Samaritans.

In the final years of the kingdom of the north, it is very likely that many people escaped to Judah. Priests, prophets, possibly even Hosea himself, fled south. With them they took their traditions, the stories of the patriarchs of the Exodus, the Covenant, the Law and the words of their great prophets. The Elohist tradition mentioned in the first chapters probably came to Judah at this time. The fundamental laws later developed into the Book of Deuteronomy, which possibly was brought to the southern kingdom around this time with the refugees. The northern kingdom had come to an end, but not without making its extraordinary contribution to the revelation of God and to his Word.

"`````````````````````````"

##  

## Chapter 12- Prophets in Judah (1)

**Historical Background**

Four of the greatest prophets that were raised up by God among his People lived and prophesied in the same period of history: Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah all were called between 750 and 740 BC, Their prophecies indicate that these men felt many of the same things and pronounced, each in his own way, similar messages to the People. They experienced the same terrible period of history.

Isaiah and Micah both had long ministries, probably from 740 to about 690 BC. Much of what was said in Chapter 11 about history applies to their times. We will simply sum up briefly the major events,

The attack of the Israelite-Syrian coalition on Judah which took place around 734 had a very marked effect on Isaiah, especially. It became the occasion for some of his most powerful prophecies. The Assyrians were on the attack; Israel and Syria (Damascus) wanted to force Judah to join their anti-Assyrian coalition. Ahaz, the king of Judah, refused to join the coalition. So the armies of Israel and Syria attacked Judah and caused great damage until Ahaz called on Assyria to help him against his brother Israel and his neighbour Syria. Ahaz paid tribute to the Assyrians. The Assyrians came to the rescue. They overcame Damascus and tore a great part of the kingdom away from Israel. Death, destruction and deportation for the north was the result of Ahaz's call for help (2 Kings 16).

Isaiah also lived through the period of the fall of Samaria (724-721). The news of this cruel and thorough defeat of the brother kingdom filled Judah with horrified fear. Its kings were not about to rebel against Assyrian domination for a while (2 Kings 17: 1-6),

Some 20 years later, however, the decision to rebel, to refuse to pay tribute seemed sensible to Hezekiah, Ahaz's successor. The strength of Assyria had been underestimated; the troops came down, ravaged Judah, taking some 46 towns and a number of villages. The Assyrians, under their new King Sennacherib, came right to the walls of Jerusalem. How the destruction and conquest of Jerusalem was avoided is not clear. In any case, after receiving tribute from Hezekiah, the Assyrians mysteriously withdrew, leaving Jerusalem intact. This event was soon labelled miraculous and so it was. This attack and the saving of Jerusalem took place in 701 BC (2 Kings 18, 19).

These three events, the attack on Judah by Israel and Syria, the fall of Samaria and the attack on Judah by the Assyrians with the unexpected deliverance of Jerusalem are the three events which you need to remember to interpret many of the passages in the prophecies of Isaiah and Micah, his contemporary.

## Chapter 12a Isaiah

**Introduction**

In Elijah, we saw the prophet return to the scene of the original revelation to Moses. Horeb, the mountain of God. We saw Amos insisting on the rights which the ancient Law gave to the poor and defenceless. We saw Hosea reaching back into the distant past to base his prophecies on the Covenant between God and his People. The prophets were all basically "conservative," the kind of conservative who goes to the roots and comes back with a message which is vibrant with newness and which shows how the old applies to his times. The prophets were radical conservatives.

Isaiah was a conservative of the radical kind, In him, the old gift of the Law of God was Still a great gift from God, still full of great possibilities for the future. While Isaiah seldom uses traditional Covenant language, he bases much of his teaching on the notions that go back to the Covenant of God with the Tribes. Radical thinkers with creative minds do not merely repeat old ideas: they create a new vocabulary for the old ideas, introducing new images and thoughts and extending the old truths into new areas,. This is what Isaiah does consistently.

Isaiah was clearly a man from Judah, probably a man of Jerusalem. He was a man of great talent in poetry; he appears to have been well educated. He had, apparently, easy access to the court of the kings. It is not possible to say just what his profession was, that is, how he made a living. Given the traditionalist nature of the prophets and given that Isaiah was from Jerusalem, or at least from Judah, it is not surprising that he should in his prophecies reach back into the traditions of his Tribe, his city. At the very heart of the traditions of Judah stood the one man who ruled them better than all his successors, the man with whom the Lord had made a personal covenant. David. inseparably connected to David was the royal city, the Citadel of David. Jerusalem and the Temple of God. David, Jerusalem, the Temple were an essential part of the distinctiveness of his prophecies. As you might expect, Isaiah does not simply mouth the traditional teaching, but makes it new. In Chapters 1 to 4 we met another great writer from Judah, the Yahwist. As we study Isaiah, we discover that the Yahwist's way of viewing the life of the People of God is also reflected in Isaiah. (If you have forgotten the Yahwist, you might read again the brief statement of the Yahwist's interpretation of the Exodus. Chapter 4, pages 14- -15).

Whether the four prophets who were alive during these years actually got to know each other, we cannot say. It is very interesting, however, to notice how similar some of their ideas were and how they used some of the same images in their poetry. Since you have already studied both Amos and Hosea, you should be able, in the next practice question, to spot these similarities.

Even in translation, the power and majesty of Isaiah's oracles come through, He is, in the opinion of many people, the greatest of the prophets. His influence on prophets was felt for some three hundred years after him. He had disciples in his own lifetime (8:1 6) who preserved his message. The Book of Isaiah, in fact, is made up not only of Isaiah's own words, but includes prophecies by people who are simply known as Isaian Their names have not been remembered, but their work has been gathered together and placed in the same book as their master's, The Book of Isaiah contains prophecies made by Isaiah during his ministry (740-690), prophecies written after the Fall of Jerusalem (586), during the Exile (586-538) and after the Exile as late as 400 BC.

All of Isaiah's own prophecies are to be found in chapters 1 to 39. These chapters, however, also contain the work of his disciples. Our discussion in this chapter will generally limit itself to passages which are recognized as coming from Isaiah himself. In a few instances we shall use passages whose authorship is not certain; when this occurs we shall indicate it in our commentary. The work of later prophets is distinguished from that of Isaiah on the basis of historical references, style and vocabulary and the expression of theological positions which can be dated as coming later than Isaiah (eg, theological ideas which developed only after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple): Chapter 15 will deal with the work of Isaiah's greatest disciple, the unnamed prophet of the Exile (Chs 40-55) and also some of the lsaian prophecies written after the Exile (mostly Chs 56-66).

The City

Isaiah is a man of the city. While he uses images from agriculture and from nature like Amos and Hosea, his most original and personal prophecies relate to an urban setting. Jerusalem, often referred to as Zion, is the focus point of the history of Judah. Isaiah sees the beginnings of Jerusalem under David in the same idealistic way that Hosea saw the beginnings of the People in the desert (Hos 9:10). In the oracle on Jerusalem which you are to read, you will find the prophet speaking of the ideal past, the present chaos, the punishment that is coming and the final, ideal future that will come as a result of the punishment.

Reading Isaiah 1:21-26

Comment

Isaiah, using imagery which recalls Hosea, imagines Zion as a bride who once was faithful but has now become a harlot (vs 21). There is no justice for the poor in Jerusalem, the royal city, where kings were to administer justice according to the Law. Such gross injustice will bring on the wrath of God. As God had revealed himself to be the saviour of the oppressed in Egypt and had destroyed their oppressors, so God will now turn against his enemies in Jerusalem (vss 23-24). There will be a period of fiery purification which will result in a new Jerusalem, filled with just judges and counsellors. It will become the City of Integrity, where justice will be found in the courts; the City of Fidelity, where the trustworthiness of God himself will be mirrored in the administrators. The fidelity which the city (bride) had lost will be restored.

In the next passage (2:2-5), we have an expression of hope for Jerusalem which pushes the prophet's faith in the holy city to its ultimate conclusion. This same prophecy is found in the Book of Micah (4:1-3). lt is not possible to say who gave us this oracle, Isaiah. Micah, or even some third person unknown, What matters is the profound significance which Jerusalem acquires in this prophecy, it was considered important enough to he quoted in full in the books of two prophets.

The passage you have just considered (Isa 2:2-5) expresses a great hope for the function of Jerusalem in the future. A closer look at the passage reveals that it is not Jerusalem as a physical place made of stones and streets which is intended - but Jerusalem as the source of the Law and the Word of the Lord. The image is that of the Lord God himself as king, ruling all the nations. Since the Temple is the sign of God's presence and the Temple is in Jerusalem, then either one (the Temple or Jerusalem/Zion) can be the image of the centre of the universal peace which follows the rule of God throughout the world. This is one of the basic images which underlies the expressions, kingdom of God, or rule of God,

From the vision of ideal Jerusalem, we now turn to the real Jerusalem o Isaiah's time. Isaiah sees the pitiful incompetence and empty arrogance of its king, its princes and administrators, its wealthy women. The immaturity of leadership is, for Isaiah, a clear sign of God's punishment on the city.

Reading Isaiah 3:1-15

Comment

The worst accusation is reserved for the end of the oracle. Worse than pettiness, haughtiness and childish behaviour is the effect which comes about: these so-called leaders " _crush my people and grind the faces of the poor"_ (vs 15).

The next passage is a good example of the richness of Isaiah's poetry. The poem is best

understood in the context of the harvest festival, Feast of Tabernacles (Deut 16:13- 15). After the harvest, when the new wine was available, crowds came to Jerusalem to celebrate the harvest and to commemorate their history in the liturgy of the Temple. (What was commemorated on these occasions, it appears, was the election of the People, of David, and of Jerusalem as the site of the Temple.) This was a joyful week; the people built makeshift shelters for themselves and "camped out" for a week. There was much wine, singing and dancing. Isaiah contributed his own song.

On the surface, it is a song of a man complaining of the vineyard he worked hard on but from which he got nothing, The man decides to abandon it. The poem was not intended on this level, because the vineyard was a common expression for a man's wife (wife as vine, eg. Ps 128:1-3; as vineyard or garden, Cant 5:1). On this level the song is about his friend's unhappy marriage.

Reading Isaiah 5:1-7

Comment

If Isaiah sang this song during the harvest festival his audience would have enjoyed the song - there is always something humorous about someone singing of the misery of marriage during festivities. It is only in the last verse of the song (vs 7) that the application to the Lord and his People is made clear. Isaiah, through the image of the vineyard, is giving the same message as Hosea: the Lord is like a husband whose wife has given him no happiness, no satisfaction: he will abandon her.

In the first five chapters of the Book of Isaiah, the prophecies which we have judged to be from Isaiah himself present a message which has much in common with Amos, Hosea and Micah (whom we will discuss later in this chapter). All of these believe that God has pronounced his judgment on his People; they are to be punished for their many crimes. Isaiah hopes for conversion, like the others, but conversion will not avert the punishment; it will only assure the survival of a remnant (4:2-3). What we have singled out as unique to Isaiah in these chapters is his concentration on Jerusalem. Later on in this chapter, we shall return to other prophecies of Isaiah on this subject.

God-With-Us

Chapters 6 to 12 form a little booklet within the Book of Isaiah. The booklet is introduced by the vision of the prophet (Ch 6), followed by prophecies addressed mainly to the house of David (Cho 7-1 1) and concluded with a prayer (Ch 12). Apart from chapter 6, which might be dated at the beginning of his career, the remainder of the prophecies are situated in the crisis of 735-732, when Judah was being attacked by the coalition of Israel and Syria, in an attempt to get Judah to unite with them against the Assyrians.

Chapter 6 is the prophet's own account of a profound experience of the Lord, in which he received his vocation (or a clarification of his vocation). It is not possible to prove that this experience occurred at the very beginning of his ministry. What is quite clear, however, especially in 6:9-10, is that the account is written with the maturity which years of prophetic ministry have given to Isaiah. it would help your understanding of Ch 6 if you read it as Isaiah's account of his vision and vocation, written by him after years of experience had made it very clear what his vocation really meant from the beginning.

The vision is set in the Temple, but the experience of Isaiah is very much like the experience of Moses and Elijah on the mountain of God; the fire, the smoke and earthquake, and the voice which gives him his calling, recall the experiences of the ancient prophets (Exod 3; 19:9-25; 1 Kings 19).

Reading Isaiah 6:1-13

Note: Seraph means "flaming one". It is not clear what the seraphs looked like; possibly fiery winged creatures with human and/or animal features. Perhaps they reflected something of the cherubim over the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies. Whatever their exact appearance, they were meant to convey the image of the Lord surrounded by living, moving flame - the winged fire of his attendants.

Commentary

Isaiah sees the Lord enthroned as king in the Holy of Holies (debir), his regal robes overflowing into the sanctuary (hekal) of the Temple where Isaiah experiences himself to be. The adoring attendants cry out, _"Holy, holy, holy_ ." The Lord is the most holy, the source of all holiness. Holiness has many levels of meaning. As applied to God it means that he is totally different, unique, unlike anything known or imaginable. He is the God of mystery, revealed to his People but only through the smoke and cloud of limited human understanding. God is different, distinct from all of his creatures, especially from the human race, in that he, the Lord, has no sin, no flaws, no imperfection.

The holiness of God is made known through " _his glory_ ". The glory of God is the holiness which can be seen by humans. The glory of God fills the whole of creation and history. In the history of the People, God had made his holiness (that is himself) known in his acts and words. Though the glory is everywhere, the glory never fully reveals the holiness of God. By this experience of the holiness of God, Isaiah immediately becomes aware of the gulf that separates him and his people from their Lord. He is all holiness; they are wretchedly sinful. The contradiction within Isaiah's vision is in the meeting of the Holy One with the sinful. How can the sinful survive such an encounter? By purification. The sins of Isaiah are taken away; Isaiah not only can survive the encounter, he can now reflect the holiness of God himself, and serve him. Isaiah then volunteers his service in response to the Lord's question.

Verses 9 and 10, which describe the prophet's ministry, express his mature and realistic understanding of the mission which the Lord had given him. The terrible truth of his vocation was that he had been called to reveal the sinfulness of the People, urge them to conversion and healing, even though, right from the beginning, the Lord knew that it was too late; his ministry would not only fail, it would actually harden the People further. Isaiah was called to perform his ministry without hope of converting the very ones he would call to conversion. It is clear to the prophet that what the Lord wanted from him was his ministry, not success.

Isaiah asks how long it will be before the process of punishment is over. The Lord gives no date, He underlines the severity of the disasters that are coming, but assures Isaiah that the People will not be destroyed completely; at least a stump will be left (vs 13).

Chapters 7 and 8 are written with the threat to the Davidic kingship in the background. Israel and Syria, in their drive to force Judah to join them against Assyria, plan to conquer Jerusalem and replace Ahaz with a foreigner, Tabeel. If Israel and Syria succeed, Ahaz could well be the last of the kings of the line of David. The war is in progress, the coalition armies are approaching Jerusalem. Ahaz has gone to examine the water sup-. ply, preparing for the siege of Jerusalem. Isaiah, with his son, whose symbolic name means " _a remnant will return_ ", is sent to instruct Ahaz on what he should do. In essence Isaiah wants Ahaz to do nothing, except to be calm and have no fear (compare Exod 14:13).

Reading Isaiah 7:1,9

Comment

Isaiah tries to assure Ahaz that the future of the house of David is secure. The two kings who threaten it are about to be ruined and they will not succeed in replacing him with their puppet king, Tabeel. In a short while both Israel and Syria will capitulate to Assyria. What is required of Ahaz is trust in the Lord. All he need do is to have confidence that the Lord is the saviour of his People and will not abandon them. The Yahwist writer, in his narrative on the Exodus, had stated the requirement of trust in almost the same words: Moses said, " _Have no fear. Stand firm_ ", just when the Egyptians seemed to be winning. So Isaiah tells Ahaz that unless he has faith, unless he stands by the Lord, he will not be able to stand at all (vs 9b). The theme of faith, bordering on blind trust, is proposed as Isaiah's (and the Lord's) politics for the situation.

Wanting to provide Ahaz with some support for his faith, Isaiah tells him to ask for a sign of any kind. Ahaz, pretending piety, refuses to put the Lord to the test. Isaiah gives Ahaz a sign from the Lord, even if he does not want one.

Reading Isaiah 7:10-16

Commentary

" _A sign_ " of any kind is offered by Isaiah. In this case the sign is meant to be something, some event, which will confirm the truth of what the prophet is saying about the destruction of the enemies of Judah (the two attacking kings). The sign need not be a miracle. A symbolic action or an ordinary event can be given sign-value. What Isaiah offers Ahaz is more in line with the sign which the Lord offered to Moses in Exod 3:12, " _this is the sign by which you shall know that it is I who have sent you . After you have led the people out of Egypt, you are to offer worship to God on this mountain_ ". This is a sign which will establish, in the future, the truth of what God is saying to Moses now. In like manner. Isaiah is not offering an immediate miracle that will dispense Ahaz from making an act of faith. He is offering a sign which will shortly take place, but which still requires that Ahaz believe in the word of God coming from the prophet.

" _A young woman is with child_." The Hebrew word translated as " _young woman_ " here is almah; this word could mean a young woman who is married or unmarried. When the Jewish scholars of Alexandria in Egypt translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek (c. 250 BC), they translated almah by a Greek word which almost always means virgin. The Gospel writers used this Greek translation, as did most Christians. To them this text of Isaiah meant clearly _"a virgin shall conceive and give birth to a son_ ". in this translation the sign was the miraculous birth. It was applied to the Virgin birth of Christ without hesitation. In the original Hebrew, however, the sign most probably is not the miraculous birth, but the name of the child and the fact that before the child reaches the age of reason, the two attacking kings will themselves have been attacked and subdued by the Assyrians (vs 16).

" _Immanuel_ ". Isaiah had, like Hosea, given his children symbolic names. Here he gives a symbolic name to the son who is soon to be born of the unnamed young woman. There is no way of being Certain whether the woman Isaiah had in mind was one of the king's wives, or even the prophet's wife. It is more likely that he had a royal wife in mind, and that the son to be born was the one who came to rule after his father, Hezekiah. This king was a very good king in contrast to his father Ahaz. Whatever the case may be, the name Immanuel is what matters. Immanuel literally means God-with-us. The sign which Isaiah offers is the sign of God's presence with his People. This presence will bring about the defeat of the enemy kings, thereby guaranteeing that the House of David will stand. But the presence of God has further meaning for Isaiah, as it did for Amos, God's presence is a purifying presence. God will come in judgment both on his People and on their enemies; his judgment always purifies (See 1:25). (At the conclusion of this chapter we will discuss the messianic implications of this and other prophecies of Isaiah.)

Isaiah describes this purifying presence in the verses which follow (17-25). These verses are difficult to interpret. We offer the following interpretation. Before the child to be born reaches six, the people of Judah will suffer a great deal. Their country will be devastated, but not destroyed. The young child (probably the royal successor) will survive. He will be reduced to living like a nomad, on curds and honey, but this food will be plentiful and he will be able to endure the disaster. The disaster will come about as a result of the Assyrians ( .. the razor coming from beyond the river Euphrates-, vs 20). Ahaz has refused a sign which could have supported his faith; now Isaiah has given him a sign which will confirm the word of God he has been speaking: the House of David will survive, but not without severe purification at the hand of the Assyrians (whom Ahaz himself will invite to come to his rescue).

Reading Isaiah 7:17-25

Ahaz, in fact, did refuse the quiet waters of Shiloah and put his trust in the mighty waters of the River, the Assyrians. He invited the Assyrians to come to his rescue against Israel and Syria (2 Kings 16). The Assyrians came to the rescue, but not without Judah having to pay tribute and losing her independence. The prophecies of Isaiah proved only too true. In 8:16ff, Isaiah once again wants to be certain that his word is preserved authentically so no one can say he tampered with his prophecies to make them agree with the events which actually took place. Isaiah asks that his disciples conserve what he said. so that the word of the Lord will be proven right, against the idle prophecies of diviners and necromancers (8:19-20).

When the Assyrians came to the rescue, they attacked Israel's northern territories (Zebulon, Naphtali and other areas), conquered them and deported masses of the population. This happened around 732 BC. The capital of the north, Samaria, was left with a greatly reduced kingdom which was now a vassal of Assyria. This tragedy, brought on in good part by Ahaz, horrifies Isaiah. His heart is not only with Judah but with all of God's People. The times were times of darkness. The prophet cannot believe that this is all there is to the future of his brothers in the north. Typical of the prophets, the worst of times provokes the greatest hopes.

Reading Isaiah 8:23 -9:6 (in some translations, 9:1-7)

The passage is introduced by a prose reference to the fate of the northern Tribes. The poem that follows is a hymn; " _you_ " is the Lord. Isaiah does not believe that the recent tragedy is the last word on the future of the People of God. Light will shine through the present darkness. The Lord will turn their sorrow into great joy, greater than the joy of victory in battle. The Lord will break the yoke of their present oppressors, as he broke the oppression of the Midianites in the time of Gideon (Judges 7), and every sign of war will be consumed by fire. The Lord will do this, because he is faithful to the promises he made to David.

" _A child is born to us_ " refers to the coronation of a Davidic king. At his enthronement, the Davidic king was considered to be " _born"_ as the Lord's adopted son (Ps 2:7, " _You are my son, this day I have become your father_ "). The sceptre (" _dominion_ ") was placed on his shoulders as part of the coronation ceremony. Also in the ritual of enthronement, the king received his royal name, or names. Here, the greatest imaginable titles are given to the future Davidic ruler.

" _Wonder-counsellor_ ": he will be one so filled with the wisdom of God that he will not have to rely on mere human counsellors. He will have wisdom enough to rule without faulty human wisdom. He will have more wisdom than Solomon could even dream of having.

" _Mighty-God_ ": The title " _God_ " (elohim) could be applied to angels and even to humans (See Exod 4:16, where Moses is described as called to be " _the god inspiring_ " Aaron). Here it refers to the king as the representative of the Lord God on earth. The future king will truly fulfill the function that kings were meant to fulfill, to rule as God himself would rule (See the same usage in Ps 45:6).

" _Eternal-Father_ ": As the Lord is a father to the king (Ps 89:26f), so the king will be a father to his people. Since he is God's representative on earth, he will care for God's People in God's own way, and forever,

" _Peace without end_ " will result from the rule of this descendant of David's, because he will rule with justice and integrity. (See the same thoughts in Ps 72.) All of this will happen because the Lord has promised to do it.

At a time when there seemed to be no hope whatsoever, Isaiah dares to hope, not cheap or modest hopes, but hopes that bring to their fullest possible dimensions the promises made by the Lord in his covenant with David (2 Sam 7).

Isaiah has given us still another extraordinary prophecy on the future of the House of David. This prophecy (10:33-11:9) is set against the background of the Assyrian invasion of 701. Isaiah describes the terrible invasion as an act of God, but not an act without hope. Through the Assyrians, God will come to the very gates of Jerusalem, laying everything waste like a forest chopped and torn to pieces; but out of the destruction comes hope.

" _But a shoot shall sprout from the stump of Jesse_.." (Isa 11:1)

The passage on the ideal ruler of the future that you just worked on ends with the reference to " _the knowledge of God_ " filling the country. Isaiah, using an idea which recalls Hosea, believes that peace will occur when God is known. This knowledge of God, as stated in the Answer Key, is not simply knowledge of God's qualities, but knowledge of his will, that is, his Law. When the country will know God and obey (" _fear_ ") him, there will be total peace. This same idea was expressed earlier in Isaiah 2:2-5.

We will be omitting a commentary on chapters 13 to 27. These chapters contain many oracles against the nations and a number of passages written by disciples and later writers. A few of these passages will be considered in later chapters. We would like to point out chapter 22:19-23, which is used in the Sunday liturgy, The passage refers to the prophecy concerning the dismissal of a high official of the royal court in favour of another who will carry out his function properly. Eliakim, the new official, was considered as a type of the Messiah by the early Christians (Rev 3:7). The image of the keys was also used by Jesus to describe the function of Peter, the high official in the new People of God (Matt 16.19).

The Foundation of Faith

In human terms, the advice which Isaiah gave to Ahaz could not possibly appear to be sensible. When the Israelite-Syrian coalition was attacking Judah, Isaiah would have had Ahaz do nothing at all, neither join the coalition, nor fight against it, nor appeal to Assyria for help, Isaiah wanted Ahaz to trust in the Lord, to stand firm and be calm as the waters of Shiloah. According to usual human politics his appeal to Assyria would probably be seen as prudent- but it cost Ahaz his money and his freedom (2 Kings 16). The king of Assyria not only collected all the treasure he could get from Ahaz, but he also insisted that alterations be made in the Temple in Jerusalem to indicate clearly that he, not Ahaz, was king of Judah. Ahaz may have been humanly prudent, but he was not wise in the ways of the Lord. His lack of trust in God was not only seen in politics. He was one who worshipped pagan gods, even to the point of offering his own son as a human sacrifice (2 Kings 16:3). To Isaiah, Ahaz and all his counsellors (the supposedly wise men of Jerusalem) were worshippers of false gods ritually, and worshippers of lies politically. They made themselves believe whatever they wished.

In the next passage we have some of Isaiah's words about the advisors of the king, In the middle of this tirade against false counsellors, there is a short oracle on the future Jerusalem. This seems to deliberately interrupt the poem on the advisors in order to provide the striking contrast, going from what Jerusalem is built on, to what it should be built on, then back to the actual state of wisdom in Jerusalem.

Reading Isaiah 28:14-22

Note: In vss 15 and 18, " _Mot_ " in the JB would be better read as " _death_ " " _Sheol_ " is the place of the dead. Isaiah is speaking contemptuously of the advisors, saying that they behave as though they had made a bargain with death which gave them a long lease on life.

Comment

Isaiah states again that the devastation is coming and it is coming as a result of the incredible stupidity and haughty pride of the advisors to the king. in the midst of this oracle and standing in contrast to it, is another which speaks not of destruction, hut of Construction. Even in the anxiety and chaos of his day, Isaiah says that the Lord is even now laying a new foundation for the city - a foundation stone that is strong, hard, immovable, a cornerstone on which the new Jerusalem is to be securely built. On this cornerstone there will be an inscription which will read: " _the believer will not stumble_ ". In the building of this new city the plumb line which will assure that it is built straight will be the plumb line of integrity, and the ruler used in construction will be justice. The ideal city of the Lord will be founded on faith, built up according to the demands of the Lord's own justice, a city of integrity.

It is clear from this that Isaiah's notion of faith is not simply blind trust in God's providence. Faith is not imaginable without the acts which follow from it - justice, integrity.

Isaiah would have had the king and the citizens of Jerusalem base themselves on faith. He wanted them to place all their trust in the Lord, assured that while he would punish them, he would also save them and purify them through the punishment. What Jerusalem had to do was believe in the Lord and live the life dictated by faith, the life of justice in all their dealings with one another. For Isaiah, the life of faith lived out in justice was the only guarantee of a real future for his generation. The return to faith would assure them, not only of survival, but survival as the remnant.

In chapter 30:8-18 we have what is often called the testament of Isaiah. Isaiah once again asks that his words be written down and preserved. He describes the perversion of the People who prefer illusions to reality, lies to truth. In verse 15 we have what the prophet saw as the real hope for his country.

Reading Isaiah 3[:8_18

Comment

Verse 15 admirably sums up the attitude which was praised so highly in Abraham, complete trust; it also harks back to the theme of the Exodus when Moses told the frightened slaves to stand firm and be still. God had mysteriously fulfilled his promises to Abraham, against all odds, and in the same way he had rescued their forefathers from the power of the Egyptians. Now, too, the power of God would be called down on them if they turned to him with the faith of Abraham and Moses. Instead, horses and chariots are what they believe in. Isaiah sadly reminds them of the consequences: all that will be left of them is a tattered flag on a hill marking the spot where their army once stood. Vs 18, probably an addition by a later writer, adds the reminder that through all of this terror God is unchanged in his disposition to save his People; he is waiting to be merciful.

The last passage to be considered is one where the prophet uses a mixture of images to describe the action of God on behalf of Jerusalem: the Lord is like a lion, like a flock of protecting birds.

Reading Isaiah 31:4-9

Comment

There is, in this passage, the conviction that Jerusalem will be attacked, but that it will not be taken. The Lord will protect the city from the Assyrians who will be like a band of shepherds shouting at a lion who is defending his prey. In fact, it is the Assyrians themselves who will be routed, not by some clever bit of human scheming, not by strength of military arms, but by the hand of the Lord himself, the " _the sword that is more than human_ " (vs 8). It is not clear when Isaiah uttered this prophecy, but it would seem to fit best near or during the attack on Judah during the reign of Hezekiah.

Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, was as good a king as Ahaz was bad. He brought about many reforms which must have pleased Isaiah (2 Kings 1-8). During most of his reign he submitted to the Assyrians, but he managed to have enough freedom to bring about many significant changes. At one point, when he believed that the power of the Assyrians was weakening, Hezekiah declared his independence from them. His judgment was wrong. The Assyrians attacked Judah, devoured many towns, and came to the very gates of Jerusalem. Hezekiah had to bend. He paid the tribute and the Assyrians, strangely, left Judah without conquering Jerusalem or causing any damage to it. (There is a great deal of confusion in the Biblical information about this event. The notices in 2 Kings and in the Book of Isaiah do not agree with each other completely. Furthermore, neither of the biblical accounts agree with the records of the Assyrians. Was there one attack by the Assyrians? Two attacks? How was Jerusalem saved? There is no certain answer to these questions. They are better left aside for our purposes here).

The fact that Jerusalem was saved from destruction on this occasion, however it happened. strengthened Isaiah's teachings: if the People had faith in God he would defend them in his own mysterious way; Jerusalem was a privileged city, under God's very special protection.

Summary

Isaiah's message is rich and full. The brief sketch given here only suggests some of the highlights. Isaiah was every bit a man of Judah and Jerusalem. He held to the traditions which were especially precious to his Tribe. In common with Amos and Hosea, however. we find him insistent on the Law of God. While he seldom uses the word Law, his writing is full of words which speak of it: justice, integrity, righteousness; all refer to life lived in accordance with the will of God as revealed in the Law. Though he does not stress the Exodus the way Hosea does, he is very insistent on God's election of his People. God's choices in history do not stop with the election of the People in the Covenant on Sinai; for Isaiah, the choices that God has made extend to his election of David as king and to Jerusalem as the city of his presence. The Law, election, David and Jerusalem: these are the main pillars of the theology of Isaiah.

## Chapter 12b Micah

Note: Passages, such as 7:8-20, which are from disciples or later prophets are not treated here.

Micah was a contemporary of Isaiah. His ministry covered about the same period of history (c. 740-690 BC). Since his prophecies are rather general in nature, it is difficult to date them with any accuracy. As you read the passages from Micah, it will become very clear that he is much like another prophet we have considered. Micah's message is basically the proclamation of the punishment that Judah and Israel deserve for their crimes. Micah is the poor man's prophet; his language is rough but powerful. His sensitivity to injustice perpetrated by the upper classes at the expense of the poor reflects the insight of those who have been deprived of their rights. He knows well that the concentration of power is in the capital cities and there, too, is the concentration of injustice. He puts these on trial.

Reading Micah 1:2-7

Comment

The royal cities, which were meant to be the centre for the administration of justice for all in the kingdoms, have become the centres of crime. They are to be destroyed. In this prophecy, Samaria is singled out especially as doomed.

Like Isaiah, his countryman and contemporary, Micah is especially enraged by the development of large land holdings by the rich. Isaiah had cursed " _those who add house to house, field to field_ " (Isa 5:8) and Micah does the same.

Reading Micah 2:1-5

Comment

As the wealthy stay awake nights plotting how they will get someone's land, under the cloak of legality, so now the Lord will plot against them to bring to ruin all that they have acquired at the expense of their brothers.

In the next passage it becomes very clear that Micah is the "soul-brother" of Amos.

Reading Micah 2:6-

Comment

The illusions which the rich love are that the Lord is merciful and kind, forgiving, patient. Like Amos, Micah strips them of their illusions. They tell the prophet to stop his raving; he tells them that all they want are prophets who will prophesy good times, times of wine and whiskey (vs 1 1). Micah, again like Amos, is violent with indignation at the innocent victims of the greed and lust for power of the upper classes: people left without anything, women robbed of their homes, children deprived of their dignity, the freedom God intended for every one of his children. The wealthy have become God's enemies and he will treat them as such (vss 8-10).

Micah loathes the prophets who make their living at their trade. Like Amos, Micah in no way wants to be identified with them. He ridicules their venality, declares their destiny and contrasts his vocation to theirs.

Reading Micah 3:5

Comment

Justice is Micah's passion; it is this which gives him strength and courage to declare to his people the gravity of their sins. Professional prophets are doomed with the wealthy who support their flattering words.

Micah is the first, but not the last prophet to dare to say that Jerusalem and even her Temple, would be utterly destroyed. These words of Micah must have caused considerable commotion; they certainly were remembered. Later, when Jeremiah was put on trial for saying the same thing. Micah's terrible words are quoted as evidence that a prophet can say such a thing and still not be a traitor to his country (Jer 26:18).

Micah does not place his hopes in Jerusalem; he does not share Isaiah's views on this matter. He does have a position similar to Isaiah's on another subject. The setting is possibly the invasion of Judah by the Assyrians in 701.

**Reading Micah 4:14 - 5:4a (or 5:1-5a, in some translations** )

Note: This text is not well preserved in the manuscripts. The passage also shows signs of having been added to and/or altered by editors. Translations can vary as a result.

Comment

_At a time when tile king was being humiliated, "struck on the cheek_ ", Micah looks to the past and the future of the kingship. He refers to the king as " _the judge_ ", recalling the period of the Judges when God raised up great leaders who defended the People of God and reminding his hearers that to bring justice is the primary function of the king. Micah brings us back to the origins of the kingship in Judah -- back to Ephrathah, the tribal home of the ancestors of David. Micah is not saying necessarily that a new descendant of David's line will come, but that God will have to start all over again from the beginning, as he once did when he chose David. It is possible that Micah was making an allusion to the prophecy of Isaiah, " _a maiden shall conceive"_ (Isa 7:14). After a time of abandonment, God will raise up a new leader who will reunite the tribes, as David had once done. He will shepherd the flock of God as David did, bringing peace and security for his people. Out of a time of great misery. Micah posits hope for the future.

In the next passage. Micah again brings the People to trial, calling on all of creation to bear witness. The Lord recites what he has done for his People (vss 3-5); the People reply with words that show they do not know their God (vss 6-7). They believe that all he wants is more liturgical attention, whether orthodox or not. In vs 8, Micah gives what the Lord really wants from them.

Reading Micah 6:1-8

Note: The Hebrew text is not clear, especially in vs 5. Balak was a Moabite king who attempted to have the non-Israelite prophet Balaam curse the People of God. Balaam blessed them instead (Num 22-24).

Comment

The pleading of the Lord, used in our liturgy for Good Friday, recalls Isaiah's song of the vineyard, " _What more could I have done ._ ." (Isa 5:4). The People treat the Lord as though he were Baal wanting more sacrifices, precious, numerous, even human sacrifices of their own children. This last suggestion could reflect the terrible act of Ahaz who did offer his son in sacrifice (2 Kings 16:3). In answer to God's question to them, the People seem to be saying 'What more do you want from us? More sacrifices? What kind?' The Lord's answer demands sacrifice, but not the kind that can be carried out on some thing outside themselves; he wants the sacrifice of their self-will. In the spirit of all the prophets of his time, Micah makes it clear that the Lord only wants one thing from them, and it is not more liturgy.

" _To act justly_ " refers to lives conducted with fidelity to the will of God as revealed in his Law. Justice is the foundation of all acceptable living in the eyes of the Lord. This is the 'liturgy" he requires.

" _To love mercy" actually reads "to love hesed_ " and is variously translated as " _to love tenderly_ ", " _to love loyally_ ", " _to love kindness_ ". Hesed is all of these. It is based on justice and cannot exist without justice, but it goes beyond justice to the point of creating a bond of love, tenderness, gentleness, each other's needs, needs which go beyond the needs that are met in the practice of strict justice, Hesed is especially needed where justice has failed and the victims of injustice are present. The duty to show mercy 'to those who are suffering from other peoples' injustices is underlined by the requirement of hesed.

" _To walk humbly with your God_." The word translated " _humbly_ " in this phrase is a rare one in the Bible. Where it is used, it refers to an attitude of consideration towards another; it does not mean self-effacement. When two people are walking together, humility requires that one not break away in this or that direction without considering the person one is walking with. It is the type of behaviour one expects from friends, from people that are loved or appreciated. Only an impetuous child or an inconsiderate adult would behave otherwise. What is described by the phrase reflects the relationship of two adults who respect each other. lt does not mean that humans should be abjectly prostrate at the feet of God.

In this short passage Micah sums up what the prophets of his day were saying, each in his own way. The emphasis on justice recalls Amos; the mention of hesed brings Hosea to mind; and walking humbly with God suggests the peaceful, tranquil relationship of trust which Isaiah preached again and again. The eighth century had these four great prophets. Amos and Hosea prophesied in the northern kingdom. Isaiah and Micah in Judah. Their messages inter-twine on many levels, but each has his own emphasis, his own point of view, It would be some time before prophets of their stature would arise again among the People of God. Some fifty years would elapse after the ministry of Isaiah and Micah before Jeremiah would be called to deliver the word of God to the People.

Reflections on Prophets and Prophecy

Now that we have had a look at several of them, it is possible to make some general remarks about the prophets of the Lord in the People of God.

Our English word "prophet" comes from the Greek and means "one who speaks for" another. This is a good, basic meaning for us to use. The prophets spoke, and they spoke for the Lord. The prophets saw themselves as God's messengers, his spokesmen; this is why they so very often introduce or conclude their prophecies with the expression " _says the Lord_ ", or. something similar.

Their encounter with the Lord

How did the prophets come to know what God wanted them to communicate? We must consider their personal encounters with the Lord, but before doing that we must see the prophets as members of God's People. The prophets were convinced that God had already spoken to his People; he had already made himself known to them in the past. As members of the People, they had heard the Word of God in the recounting of the traditions of the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; they had come to know the Lord in the Exodus and the Covenant, the wandering in the desert, the life of Moses and in his choice of David. God's words and deeds in the past spoke powerfully to them. Immersed in their past, the prophets, like Elijah, were fed at the sources of their faith. By discovering God there, they knew him to be real to them, their contemporary.

The prophets were not philosophers, contemplating reality and uttering universal truths; nor were they mystics of the sort whose meditations lift them above the ordinary events of life. Theirs was not the discovery of noble truths, or of an euphoric state of prayer, but a meeting with the Lord as he had revealed himself. The Lord is he who saved them out of Egypt, called them to greatness by the partnership of the Covenant, gave them good laws, great leaders and a good land He was not a generality, but an individual with a name. He was not the subject of philosophical discussions, hut the Lord whose. emotions they shared To Amos, the emotion was indignant anger at the outrageous injustices among his People. To Hosea, the feeling of a child held, a wife embraced, the agony of rejection, was an experience of the Lord. By attributing human emotions to God, the prophets communicate not an abstract Being but the Lord, aware, concerned, involved, the living God.

Their experience of God was not of God isolated in eternity, but immersed in time in the great possibility of true peace which he had revealed. The Exodus, the Covenant, the ideal of kingship symbolized in David, all expressed this possibility of harmony between God, people and the earth. The prophets speak as much about the relationships between people and about the use of the goods of the earth as they do about the relationship between God and people. All the relationships are themselves inter-related; it is not possible to break one without breaking the others. The prophets, in fact, are hardest on those who isolate and give greatest importance to their relationship to God, at the expense of the other relationships. Such people, the prophets believe, understand God as the supremely selfish Being who will overlook what the worshipper does to people, as long as his insatiable appetite for ritual and liturgical attention is satisfied. Such a god is Baal, not the Lord God of Israel.

If the prophets speak a great deal about the Lord, it is to bring the People to realize that he is not like them, selfish, self-centered and greedy. It is God as he revealed himself that they preach; God who served them by saving them out of Egypt, by raising them up to be a new people with dignity and humaneness as their marks of distinction. He called them to share his distinctiveness, his holiness, so that they could be a blessing to the nations. The prophets were convinced of the nobility of the calling which the Lord had given his People. They felt called to measure the performance of the People against the vocation God had given them.

The Future

It was because they thought so highly of this vocation, that the prophets could be so sensitive to the failures. Their rage is the anger of bitter disappointment. They could not allow the People simply to drift into being "not-his-people" without doing something drastic, desperate. They saw their nation becoming so like other nations that its future could well be the same as their future. The prophets sense the terrible truth of the Covenant: if the People ceased to be truly the distinctive People of the Lord, there was no reason for their continued existence. The faith of the prophets would not allow them to sit back and have this threat become a reality.

Theirs was a vocation to save the People, first by pointing out, in ways as disturbing as possible, the sins from which the People had to turn away. Conversion was their goal, at least for the prophets we have considered so far. They then announced the punishment which was inevitably corning in the immediate future. This took the form of a disaster, or disasters, brought about through world politics and allowed by God for his purposes. The prophets wanted to make certain that the People did not misunderstand the reason for the devastation which was certainly coming. They did not want a merely human explanation to be given to their misery. They did not want the Assyrian invasion to be seen as the result of inevitable political forces, nor the result of bad political and military strategy. The prophets wanted no purely human explanation of their fate. Their becoming victims of war was to be seen as the result of their sinful failure to live up to the calling which the Lord had given them. No other explanation would do, because no other explanation offered the hope of conversion. A human explanation would have allowed for human solutions which would encourage the People to seek survival and revival on the same old basis of corrupt, power-minded leadership with its reliance on horses and chariots and political intrigue, built on a basis of injustice. The only survival that was worth having, according to the prophets, was the revival of the People as God's own, distinctive People, revealing in their way of life the greatness of their unique vocation.

To help bring this revival about, the prophets spoke of the ultimate future. They knew, or at least they feared the possibility, that the ultimate future might be the total destruction of the People. The reality which we call was sensed by the prophets as an historical possibility. This was not something which they liked to speak of or even envisage. They always fell short of saying "this is the end". The prophets of the 8th century whom we have discussed all hoped that some conversion was possible and that the ultimate evil future would be avoided. Later prophets, however, even gave up the hope of conversion coming from the People.

What is unique among the prophets of the People of God is not their forecasts of doom and their incisive analyses of what was wrong. What sets them apart from all other prophets and makes them the measure of all prophets is their stubborn hope. It seems the deeper their disappointment, the greater and more exalted their expectations. For most people, the finding of faults, sins, failings in other people or in communities and institutions leads to discouragement, or giving up. The prophets are never blinded to the future good by their awareness of the present evils. Even if the People deserve to fall under the curses of the Covenant, somehow blessings can and will come even through the curses. Their faith erupts into hope at times when most of their compatriots despaired.

The good future, the bad future,are proclaimed for the sake of the survival and revival of the People. The prophets never predict the future for the sake of satisfying curiosity about future events. Predicting the future for its own sake, even with accuracy, is a certain sign of a false prophet. The prophets of the 8th century whom we have seen, all saw the future as conditional upon human choices. The saying of Isaiah seems to stand over them all:

'If you are willing to obey,

you shall eat the good things of the earth. But if you persist in rebellion,

the sword shall eat you instead."

(Isaiah 1:19-20, JB)

Hope Against Hope

The ultimate good future which the prophets hoped for was seen by some to be the age that would be inaugurated and presided over by the Messiah. The word Messiah, already explained in Chapter 9, p.9, means anointed one and refers first of all to the promises made to David. However, in speaking of this "ultimate good future" the prophets saw much more than the fulfillment of the Davidic promise. In Hosea's vision is found the promise of a covenant based on love and fidelity; in Isaiah's vision the new City of Integrity. Later prophets added the vision of a new type of Law, a new Temple. The wonder of it all is this: in spite of the fact that Isaiah's new Jerusalem and Hosea's new covenant never materialized, the People preserved these hopes, treasured them as the ultimate goal of their history. If for no other reason, the People of God have to be distinguished from all the nations of the earth as the people of stubborn hope, a quality inherited from the prophets.

It is not possible to deal with all of these hopes in detail in this course. What needs to be said here is that the expectations of the prophets, far from becoming more modest in the light of the failures of the People, actually become greater and more extraordinary as time goes on.

While we hold that Jesus is the fulfillment of these hopes and expectations, we do not believe that he fulfilled them in such a way as to make the hopes of the prophets things of the past. In his life, death and resurrection Jesus fulfilled in himself the hopes of the People of God. But Jesus marks the beginning of the ultimate good future of which the prophets spoke. For this reason the hopes of the prophets, which Jesus embodied, remain our hopes today, for we still await the consummation of the new covenant for ourselves and the world; we still look forward to the new and everlasting Jerusalem. Until the final ultimate good is revealed bringing history to perfection, the People of God still stand with all the prophets in the hope of the good which the Lord intends for his People and for all peoples and for creation itself (Romans 8:18-25).

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

## Chapter 13- Prophets In Judah (2)

**History**

Hezekiah was the king in Judah when Isaiah finished his ministry. This king was greatly praised for his reformation of the worship and for his honesty and integrity. He was considered the best king since David (2 Kings 18). He was followed by his son.

Manasseh was as bad as his father was good. He brought back the idolatrous worship his• father had banned. He cooperated with the Assyrians, even though there were signs that the Assyrians were beginning to lose their grip on the middle eastern kingdoms. His son succeeded him (2 Kings 21),

Amon was like his father, but did not rule for long. Part of the military staged a coup against him. He was murdered. The common people revolted against the military and managed to get their choice of king on the throne, a descendant of David's line (2 Kings 21).

Josiah was brought to the throne by this popular movement, but he was only eight years old. He was clearly under the guidance of the priests and prophets of Jerusalem. As a young man in his mid-twenties he inaugurated the most massive reform the kingdom of Judah had ever known (2 Kings 22-23). In the course of repairs to the Temple, an ancient book was found which contained a covenant renewal ceremony, the like of which the People seem never to have known. It was read to the king, who was so moved by what it said that he ordered its laws put into effect. (It is believed that the book discovered in the Temple was the core of what we now know as Deuteronomy. The document was probably brought to Jerusalem and stored in the Temple by exiles from the northern kingdom at the time of the destruction of Samaria. Now, a hundred years later, the book comes to light and is taken seriously by young Josiah.) The most extraordinary prescription of this book was that all shrines, whether orthodox or not, were to be destroyed and abandoned and Jerusalem was to be the one and only place of worship for all the People of God. Josiah also brought a greater sense of justice into the kingdom; Jeremiah refers to him as a man of honesty and integrity. Josiah, taking advantage of the weakening of the Assyrian empire, regained control of part of the ancient northern kingdom of Israel. There was great hope in the land; it seemed that Josiah was a new David indeed. This covenant renewal took place around 622 BC.

The Assyrians were by then in serious trouble. The Babylonians were gaining strength at a frightening pace. in 612, Nineveh, the capital of the Assyrians, fell to the Babylonians. The Assyrians retreated, tried to recoup their forces and prepared for a battle against the Babylonians. In 609 the battle took place. The Egyptians, by now more frightened of Babylon than Assyria, decided to join forces with the Assyrians to defeat the Babylonians. The old enemies, Assyria and Egypt, were forming one army for the showdown battle against the new power, Babylon. Josiah wanted to prevent the Egyptians from joining up with the Assyrians. So he tried to stop the Egyptians by engaging them in battle as they were crossing his territory to join Assyria, Josiah lost the battle and was killed. At 39 the great reforming king, the hope of Judah, was dead. The people of Jerusalem quickly anointed his son Jehoahaz as king, but Egypt would have none of that. They took Jehoahaz with them to Egypt and appointed another son of Josiah as their puppet king.

Jehoiakim was this puppet of the Egyptians. Jeremiah thought the best this man deserved was " _the funeral of an ass_ " (Jer 22:19). He ruled for eleven years and he ruled as though the world were not at all in a state of turmoil. He seemed to want to rival Solomon. He rebuilt his palace luxuriously, imposed heavy taxes on the kingdom, drafted forced labour, reintroduced all the foreign and Canaanite worship that Josiah had banned and generally ruled like a cruel petty tyrant. The Egyptians lost control over him. He thought he could also be independent of the Babylonians. He refused to submit to their demands. In the year that he died, the Babylonians were at the gates of Jerusalem. His son followed him (See 2 Kings 24).

Jehoiachin did not rule for long. To use Jeremiah's words, he was a " _shoddy broken pot_ " of a man. After three months as king. Jerusalem was captured (but not destroyed) and the king with thousands of the leading citizens were taken into Exile in Babylon. This was the first stage of the Exile. Among the people who were driven away was a man who would become a great prophet in exile (Ezekiel). The Babylonians appointed their own puppet king to rule over what was left of Jerusalem and Judah.

Zedekiah, still a man of the line of David, was a good-natured man, with good intentions, but without the strength and courage to follow through. He befriended and defended Jeremiah, but did not have the power to resist the influence of the anti-Babylonian nationalists who were left in Jerusalem. These talked him into refusing tribute to the Babylonians. It was not long before the Babylonians were at the gates of Jerusalem for a second time. This time there would be no mercy. The city was surrounded, the walls were finally broken down, the soldiers streamed through the city, killing, burning, destroying. After seizing all its treasures, the Temple too was razed to the ground. Zedekiah and a large number of citizens were led off into exile. The Babylonians placed a governor over what was left of Judah. He was Gedeliah. He was murdered by some opportunists. Many of the citizens of Judah who remained were terrified that the Babylonians would come back. They fled to Egypt for refuge and forced Jeremiah to go with them (2 Kings 24:18- 25:30).

## Chapter 13a Jeremiah a His Times

Jeremiah was called to his ministry around 627 BC, before the great reform of 622 which king Josiah promoted. The first five years or so of Jeremiah's preaching is preserved for us in chapters 1 to 6 of his book. Here the prophecies are general. Jeremiah was certain that an invader would come, but since Assyria was on the decline and Babylon was not yet clearly the new world power, the prophet did not name the invader, but simply referred to it as _"the North_ ".

Jeremiah was a very young man when he was called, possibly not yet twenty years old. It appears from his prophecies that he approved of the great reform of Josiah when the Law of Moses as found in Deuteronomy was preached and the Covenant was renewed. It is very likely that Jeremiah agreed with the goal of the reform which Josiah undertook; the renewal of the Covenant and the purification of worship must have met with his approval. It is doubtful, however, that Jeremiah would have approved the methods which Josiah used. The king's reform was imposed by military force and carried out with violence. The massacre of the priests who staffed the high places would hardly have met with the prophet's approval. For reasons unknown, Jeremiah seems to have interrupted his ministry. We have no oracles or sermons which can be clearly dated between 622 and 609.

After king Josiah was killed in battle against the Egyptians and Jehoiakim became king, Jeremiah resumed his work with a passion. Jehoiakim was out to undo everything that Josiah had done. It is probable that most of his prophecies were given in the eleven years of this king, Jehoiakim (609-598). Now it was clear who the new world power was and it was also clear that it would not stop at anything short of complete domination of the near eastern kingdoms. Jeremiah saw this as the work of God. The Babylonians would take over the empire of the Assyrians, and Jerusalem and Judah would be part of that empire, like it or not.

Jeremiah's politics were similar to Isaiah's the People had to learn to accept the inevitable and to see in it both punishment for sin and an occasion for purification. Resistance to the Babylonians would only make matters worse, Jeremiah also knew his People well enough to know that they would not listen to him; they would try to resist and they would, therefore, suffer not only domination by the Babylonians but the destruction of their city and the inevitable exile. (The Babylonians adopted the policy of the Assyrians.) And Jeremiah was right.

His teaching that the rule of the Babylonians should be accepted, that there was no point in resisting them was seen as treason by the proud nationalists. He was jailed several times, his life was threatened. Had it not been that Jeremiah had friends among the king's advisors, he would have been executed as a traitor.

When Jehoiakim resisted the Babylonians, they invaded Judah and forced the surrender of Jerusalem. This brought about the first stage in the Exile. The thousands taken away on this occasion (598) caused a change in Jeremiah's teaching. He now felt that the real hope for the future lay with those who had gone into exile. The exiles had to know the reason why they were in exile; it was to be a time of suffering for their sins and a time of purification. They had to accept the fact that the Exile would last a long time. This did not endear him to the exiles, especially when they had some prophets among them who said the Exile would only last a very short time. The exiles protested Jeremiah's letters to them; he told them to settle down and to work for the " _peace of Babylon_ ". This, too, sounded like treason. Jeremiah felt that if things went well for Babylon, then the exiles would have a better time of it and would come out, eventually, stronger than they went in.

As we look back on those days, we cannot help thinking how stupid the king and princes must have been to act the way they did. After the first wave of destruction and exile, we would think that they would take Jeremiah seriously. But they didn't. Not ten years after the first invasion, they rebelled against Babylon again. Once again the Babylonians came rushing in. As the siege was taking place, Jeremiah was encouraging the king and the soldiers and the people of Jerusalem to desert, to give themselves up in order to avoid the destruction of the city and the famine and killing that would take place if they continued to resist. Again they would not listen. Instead, Jeremiah was thrown into a well, to die, but was rescued on order from Zedekiah, the king.

The worst happened. Everything Jeremiah had foreseen took place. The Babylonians broke through the walls and took the city and exiled more of the population. The Babylonians, of course, had heard of Jeremiah's prophecies and considered him one of their co-operators. Jeremiah, who hated the Babylonians with a passion, was treated as a free man by his enemies. He was given the choice of staying in Jerusalem or of going with his compatriots into exile. He chose to stay. During a short suspension in the siege of Jerusalem when the Babylonians had to leave to do battle with the Egyptians, Jeremiah had gone out to purchase a field which was part of his family's inheritance. Jeremiah bought the field as an act of hope in the future of ,Judah and Jerusalem. He wanted to show that he was ready to invest in that future. He firmly believed that after the period of exile, the People would return and a new period in their history would begin. So he stayed behind.

The Babylonians appointed a governor over Judah. This was Gedeliah. Jeremiah hoped that those who were left behind could also form a nucleus of hope for the future. Tragedy struck again. Gedeliah was murdered, along with some Babylonian soldiers. The people of Judah were terrified of what the Babylonians would do this time in revenge. They decided to escape to Egypt. Jeremiah told them not to escape, but to stay in Judah. They would not listen to him. They escaped to Egypt, taking Jeremiah with them by force. He died in Egypt, still prophesying.

The Book of Jeremiah

It is almost impossible to write briefly about Jeremiah. The reason is that we have more information about him, his times, his personal experiences than we have about any other person in the Old Testament, possibly in the whole Bible. His is the longest book of the Bible and most of it was written during his own lifetime. Large parts were actually dictated by Jeremiah to his faithful disciple and secretary, Baruch. There are, of course, parts of the book which were added later by editors, but these passages are rather few and not too difficult to identify.

The real problem with the Book of Jeremiah is the disorder that is evident in large parts of it. The chapters of the Hebrew version of Jeremiah appear to have been jumbled some-where along the line. The Greek version (LXX) of Jeremiah is much shorter and is in better order than the Hebrew. The English translations follow the Hebrew version, even though it is less logical than the Greek.

Our treatment of Jeremiah will follow this outline:

To tear up: chapters 1 to 6, representing the years from 627 to 622

To knock down: chapters 7 to 20, representing the years from 609 to 598.

To build: chapters 21 to 45, representing the years from 598 to 586.

Note: This is, in fact, an over-simplification of the Book of Jeremiah. There are passages in each section which were written at other times. For example, chapters 30 and 31, in the third section, were probably written early in Jeremiah's career when king Josiah was regaining the territory of the northern Tribes, giving Jeremiah hope for the reunification of all the Tribes. We have chosen to deal with these chapters at the end of this chapter, in order to end the chapter on a more positive note.

The Vocation of Jeremiah

Introductions to books are normally written after all or most of the book has been written. The account of the vocation of Jeremiah, which serves as an introduction to the book, appears to be no exception. Just as the vocation narrative of Isaiah was written by the prophet after years of experience had given him deeper insight into what his calling meant from the beginning, so also with the vocation of Jeremiah in chapter one. The account is not the account of the young prophet, hut of the prophet matured through suffering.

Reading Jeremiah 1:4-10

Commentary

" _Before I formed you in the womb I knew you_ ". Jeremiah experiences his vocation as an experience of total and complete absorption by the Lord. His whole existence, even before it began to take life in his mother's womb, was known by God. To be known by

God is to be united to him for his purposes. To be known by the Lord is to experience being loved by him, wanted by him, called to his service. This verse expresses the depth of the relationship between Jeremiah and the Lord, so profound that Jeremiah could never forget it, never reject it, even if he tried (and he did try!).

" _I am only a child_ " (vs 6). Jeremiah must have been very young. He prophesied for over forty years (between 627 and 585, approximately). Though he felt so deeply bound to his Lord. Jeremiah was not the willing prophet that Isaiah was. On many occasions during his ministry Jeremiah wished he had never been called to such a miserable vocation. His protest at the time of his call expresses the reluctance which was part of his ministry.

_"Do not be afraid. . , I am with you_ " (vs 8). Jeremiah expresses his vocation in terms very similar to the vocation of Moses. Moses also protests that he is not fit for the task (Exod 4:10); but the Lord assures Moses that he himself will be with him (Exod 3:12).

" _I am putting my words into your mouth_ " (vs 9). Later Jeremiah would write what this experience was like: he was ecstatic with joy; he devoured the words of the Lord (15:16). Jeremiah had a message to give which was from the Lord, not from himself. In fact, though it caused him great happiness at first, Jeremiah soon learnt just how bitter it was to be the bearer of the words of the Lord. Jeremiah did not like the message he had to give; he would have preferred a more gentle, loving message. Jeremiah was called to give the Lord's word, not his own.

_"I am setting you over nations_ " (vs 10), Jeremiah was to be the interpreter of world history. He spoke many prophecies about the nations outside the People of God (Chs 46- 51). and many more showing how the history of the People of God was related to the actions of the nations, especially Babylon. In the history of the human race thousands, even millions of nations, cities, towns, villages have been devastated by wars. During the lifetime of Jeremiah hundreds of villages and cities fell under the cruel hand of the Babylonians. But there were no interpreters of these events, except the prophets. Others would see these disasters as the natural course of history, the result of the expansionist policy of Babylon, or of the poor planning and lack of cooperation among the smaller kingdoms. The prophets, such as Jeremiah, would not allow their people to see these events in such a way. Of all the tragedies of history, those which affected the People of God would not go by without being used by the prophets to teach the People of God something about the Lord and something about their responsibility. The calamities that crushed the Lord's People would not be wasted as most calamities are.

_"To tear up and knock down_ " (vs 10). Most of his ministry would concern the tearing up and the knocking down of his own people. There are four verbs of destruction mentioned in this description of his purpose as a prophet. Jeremiah refers to these verbs many times. He was called to interpret the tragic uprooting of his countrymen in both deportations, the first in 598 and the second in 587/6. He had to show the meaning of what was happening, so that the People would not only survive, but would come out of it stronger and better than before.

" _To build and to plant_ " - only two verbs, as against four of destruction. This rather accurately describes what his ministry actually was. Most of his life was spent proclaiming doom and its purifying purpose; but a part of his ministry had to do with what came after the purification. This was clearly the part which Jeremiah preferred. His dreams of what is to come are at once more realistic and idealistic than any other prophet before him. He does not promise a kind of paradise on earth, but a return to normal peace that is possible on earth. What is radical and most idealistic in his vision of the future is the way in which this normal peace will be accomplished. (This will be discussed when we consider his version of the new covenant in Ch 31.)

" _As the clay is in the potter's hand, so you are in mine, House of Israel." Jer 18:1-6_

To Tear Up

From the vocation account we move immediately into some of the earliest oracles of Jeremiah. Through seeing very ordinary things (an almond tree, a pot boiling over, tilting southward) Jeremiah comes to understand that the Lord is watching over what is happening in history and that a conqueror (or conquerors; it is not clear yet to Jeremiah whether it is one or several) is about to overrun Judah and Jerusalem (1 :1 1-16). The Lord, knowing how hesitant and vulnerable Jeremiah really is, assures Jeremiah that he will protect him as he gives this terrifying message (1:17-19).

Reading Jeremiah 1:11-19

Comment

Jeremiah, the super-sensitive poet and lover of his people, is to be made into a " _wall bronze_ "! Jeremiah's message is to everyone in the country, kings, princes, priests and ordinary peasants. The invader from the north would affect not only the upper classes, but everyone.

Chapter 2 is lengthy, but it is not difficult. Here Jeremiah speaks very much in the language of the prophetic tradition. Jeremiah was from a town in the Tribe of Benjamin, officially a northern Tribe. His connections with the northern tradition of the prophets is quite clear in this chapter.

It is quite clear that Jeremiah knew the prophecies of Hosea; he might even be called Hosea's greatest disciple. It is with the same pathetic sadness we find in Hosea, that Jeremiah presents the oracle about divorce. You will notice in this passage that Jeremiah also uses the image of parent-child which we saw in Hosea 11.

Reading Jeremiah 3:1-5, 19-20

Note: This poem is interrupted by two prose passages which will be referred o a

Comment

The Law did not allow a man to take his wife back after he had divorced her (Deut 24:1ff). If the Lord divorces his People, can he take them back again? Jeremiah does not answer the question here, but later he makes it clear that the Lord, in fact, never really divorced his People and even if he did he would take them back, in spite of the Law. The phrases " _you did not cry to me, My father_ " and " _I had thought you would call me: My father_ " (vss 4,19), express sad disappointment. Jeremiah understood what God wanted of his People: " _I intended you to be my people, my glory, my honour, my boast"_ (Jer 13:11). As parents want nothing more than to be proud of their children, so it was with the Lord and his People. But the People wanted to be much less than the glory of their God; therein the sadness.

When we read Amos, we get little or no sense of the prophet's personal pain caused by the terrible threats he must announce. Isaiah is a man who does his job without letting his personal feelings show through. (Only once does he break down a little and say, " _Turn your eyes away. . . let me weep bitterly_ ". (Isa 22:4.) For Jeremiah, this kind of almost impersonal preaching of doom is impossible. He is torn to pieces himself at the horrible things he has to announce. In the next reading, the suffering of Jeremiah over what he sees will happen to Jerusalem is clear.

Reading Jeremiah 4:13-31

The poem ends with the pathetic image of Jerusalem, a conquered woman on the ground, arms outstretched, pleading for her life. The questions which come to Jeremiah's mind have probably been on your mind in these last several chapters: Why? What use is all this suffering? Does punishment really purify? These are the questions which are involved in the next passage, Jeremiah, it seems, has been pleading with the Lord to have Jerusalem pardoned. The Lord answers (5:1), Jeremiah protests (5:2-5), the Lord answers again (5:7, " _Why should I pardon you?_ "), Jeremiah finally admits that they deserve the punishment they will get (5:12-17).

Reading Jeremiah 5:1-17

Comment

When Abraham pleaded with God for the sinners of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 18:16- 33), he did not dare to go lower than ten just men as a basis for saving the sinners of the cities. Here the Lord himself defies Jeremiah to find even one just person in Jerusalem. If such could be found, Jerusalem could be saved. Jeremiah protests that even though the people have been crushed and beaten, they have learnt nothing (vs 3b). It is no use punishing them. Jeremiah, however, searches through the city, among the common people and among the leaders of the people, but he can find no one to take up the Lord's offer of pardon (vss 4-5). It appears that the Lord is going to allow the People to be destroyed, simply because they are so unrepentant. The Lord wants them to be purified through the suffering they will endure; but this does not seem to work.

Reading Jeremiah 6:27-30

When silver ore is purified, it is combined with molten lead. The impurity (dross) in the silver should separate from the silver and attach itself to the lead, resulting in pure silver. The smelting of the People has failed; the result has been impure silver (People), rejected. Can the Lord do such a thing? If so, why? These questions torment Jeremiah and he returns to them again.

The oracles in these first six chapters were very likely Jeremiah's early statements, given between 627 and 622. It appears that around this time he stopped prophesying for a while

To Knock Down

Jeremiah not only had to announce the destruction which was about to come, he also had to reveal to the People the implications of this destruction and what it meant. This involved him in the most scathing denunciations of his career; it brought him to attack what the People held most sacred, the very things which they were certain pleased the Lord and made them acceptable to him.

Reading Jeremiah 7:1-15

Comment

Chapter 26 of the Book of Jeremiah gives us a more detailed account of this sermon and adds information about the consequences. Jeremiah was put on trial, charged with an act of treachery punishable by death. On the argument that Micah, the prophet who had said the same thing, had not been executed for saying it, Jeremiah was allowed to go free; but another prophet who had said similar things actually was killed (26:23) Jeremiah was attacking false confidence in the presence of God in the Temple; he reminded the people of what happened to Shiloh where the Ark of God had been kept. That place had been destroyed; so would this one if the People did not repent. (Jesus quoted from this sermon when he cleansed the Temple. See Mark 11:1 7.)

Jeremiah does not stop at predicting the destruction of the Temple; he also attacks the system of sacrifices which were being offered there,

Reading Jeremiah 7:21-23

Comment

His words are very similar to those spoken by Amos over a hundred years before (Amos 5:25). Amos, however, was speaking to the people at the shrine of Bethel; Jeremiah is speaking to the people offering sacrifices in the true, authentic place of worship, the Temple of Jerusalem. He questions the system itself, claiming that it has done nothing to assure their obedience to the demands of the Covenant.

When Jeremiah, later on in his ministry, dreams of the future of Jerusalem, he speaks of it as the Throne of the Lord, to which nations will come to learn obedience to the Lord. He does not speak of a new Temple. In fact, he claims that the Ark of the Covenant itself will not be there (Jer 3:1 6-17).

Jeremiah does not leave many things unquestioned - the Temple, the Ark of the Covenant, and now, the very Law itself.

Reading Jeremiah 8:8-9

Comment

It is not the Law which Jeremiah belittles; it is the false confidence and the arrogance of those who feel that possession of the Law gives them the right to special consideration. Jeremiah also points out how easily the Law itself can be falsified and is falsified by the priests, to give people comfort that is unfounded. The scholarly Priests (scribes) do not take the " _word_ " of God seriously (that is, the word of God coming from the prophets); therefore, their wisdom shall be undone.

In spite of his courage, in spite of his having the audacity to say what he had to say and announce the terrible events which were to take place, Jeremiah was never the cold hard spokesman, the wall of bronze he might have been. He loved his people, loved Jerusalem. He took no delight in the disasters he predicted.

Reading Jeremiah 8:18b-23

Note: Gilead was noted for producing healing ointments.

In 9:22-23, Jeremiah makes a short, precise statement of what the Lord wants of his People. You will recognize that he is summing up the traditional teaching of the prophets before him,

Reading Jeremiah 9:22-23

It is not sacrifice, not the Temple itself, not even being learned in the Law that the Lord wants. The only thing worth boasting about is knowledge of the Lord himself, this knowledge of experience and intimacy which draws the two together. Knowing the Lord is made clear, not by ritual and prayers, but by a life which demonstrates the kindness (hesed), the justice, the integrity of the Lord himself. Knowledge of the Lord is shown in the way the People treat each other in everyday life, not in the way they treat the Lord in the Temple.

In spite of the guilt of his people, in spite of knowing that they deserve the punishment that is coming, Jeremiah prays for their pardon. He offers excuses for them in a short, but moving prayer.

Reading Jeremiah 10:23-24

Comment

Surely the Lord knows, says Jeremiah, that people are not in control of everything they do, or everything that happens to them, everything that might lead them astray. He may be overstepping the bounds as he prays, but he is saying something that people do experience, People are free; they are therefore responsible. But are they so free that they can be held totally responsible for everything? Surely there are grounds for mercy. (The prophets had no knowledge of the devil, which could have been used to diminish the burden of man's guilt).

In spite of his devotion to his people, his prayers on their behalf, Jeremiah has many more enemies than friends. Even his own townspeople turn against him, possibly even some of his own family. (Jeremiah was from a priestly family of Anathoth, 1:1. Jeremiah supported king Josiah's reform which involved the centralization of ail worship in Jerusalem. This meant the priests of the local shrines, such as there would have been in Anathoth, would be out of a job. This is possibly one motive for the townspeople's wanting to kill Jeremiah.)

Reading Jeremiah 11:18; 12:6; 11:19-23

(12:6 appears to belong between 1 1:18 and 11:19)

Comment

Jeremiah is hurt, threatened, enraged in turn, by the fact that his own people are out to kill him. Jeremiah wants to see justice done. The Lord knows that he should be judged innocent and his fellow townsmen should be judged guilty. Jeremiah predicts that they will be justly punished for the crime they intend to commit. Jeremiah says, " _Let me see the vengeance you will take on them._ " It was very important for Jeremiah to see justice done, because Jeremiah and his contemporaries did not yet know clearly anything about reward and punishment in the life to come. To them all punishment and all reward had to take place in this life, here on earth. (It would be a very long time before there was any notion of the resurrection of the dead, with reward and punishment in the after-life. The first clear signs of this faith occur in texts of the Bible written in the second and first centuries before Christ.)

"I for my part was like a trustful lamb being led to the slaughterhouse, not knowing the schemes they were plotting against me." (Jer 11:19)

Jeremiah feels " _like a lamb being led to the slaughter-house_." Innocent and without defences against those who are plotting to kill him, Jeremiah can only protest to the Lord about what is happening to him. (It is noteworthy that it never seems to occur to Jeremiah to plot against his enemies or to seek to have them killed. He is too law-abiding for that. He places all his trust in the Lord.) The just man, victimized by evildoers, described as a lamb being led to slaughter, is an image which will be used again later, in both Old Testament and New Testament books.

The problem of suffering has always plagued the reflective person. Various answers were offered by various people. Among the People of God certain explanations were popular for a while; they were often challenged, some were discarded and new solutions proposed. Even the new solutions came to be discarded as well.

The most popular basic answer and the oldest one, was that suffering was a punishment for sin. The prophets used this one very frequently. This explanation was understood in the communal mentality of the day: a person could be punished or rewarded in his own lifetime, or in the lifetime of his descendants. In practice this meant that if a father was good, but did not enjoy a long life full of good things, then his children, or his children's children, would enjoy the good gifts of God as a reward for their predecessor, If a man sinned, but enjoyed prosperity in his life, then his children or their children would suffer for his sins. There is truth, of course, in the theory; people can suffer or benefit from the actions of their parents and grandparents, great-grandparents and so on. It is clear to any reflective person that this theory does not explain everything. In fact, the idea of children suffering for what they never did seems to border on the unjust.

Many thinking people in Jeremiah's day pondered these questions. So did Jeremiah. He debates with God about justice on this earth.

There are five passages which are commonly called the Confessions of Jeremiah: 12:1- 5; 15:10-21; 17:14-18; 18:19-23 and 20:7-18. These are very personal prayers of the prophet, They are addressed to the Lord, and do not appear to have been meant for the general public at the time they were written. Nowhere in the Bible do we have such material on an historical person. These prayers reveal the agony of the interior life of a just and honest man who is seriously attempting to do all that the Lord wants of him. But he is not a machine, mindlessly doing what it is programmed to do. He is a sensitive, reflective person who does not hesitate to tell the Lord what he is going through in carrying out his mission. Many psalms were written in exactly this vein, probably influenced by these prayers of Jeremiah.

Reading Jeremiah 12:1-5

Note: Verse 4a should be omitted; it was added by an editor, but is out of context.

Comment

To Jeremiah, God's justice should show itself in this life. He wants to see it with his own eyes before he dies, and not have to simply believe that sometime in the future the offspring of the wicked will suffer for the sins committed now. Why do these oppressors prosper, grow rich, enjoy comfort and security, when people like himself who are doing all they can to be faithful to God suffer no end? Jeremiah had none of the naiveté so often expressed by those who say the rich are miserable, deep-down. The sinful rich are clearly enjoying life. God is blessing them in spite of their sins; in fact, they claim that God really does not seem to mind their sins, " _He does not see_ " (vs 4b).

Jeremiah is expected to remain faithful even with all his questions unanswered. Jeremiah's only " _answer_ " lies in his conviction that the Lord knows him, experiences him, understands him through and through: " _You know me.. . see me . . probe my heart_ " (vs 3). Jeremiah is not ashamed to have even his doubts known by the Lord. It is as though Jeremiah were saying to God, " _You know I am with you, but l'm not sure where I stand_."

Jeremiah questions the Lord on many things. He wonders why the Lord punishes, since punishment seems to produce no good effect (5:2-3); he wonders about God's sense of justice (12:1-5). He wonders whether the People are even capable of the conversion which the Lord wants of them. " _Can a leopard change his spots?"_ he asks, implying that the People are about as capable of conversion as a leopard is capable of changing his skin (13:23).

Yet Jeremiah leads the People in prayers for forgiveness. He pleads with the Lord to be merciful. Chapter 14;1 to 15:4 is a dialogue between the People (with Jeremiah) and the Lord. The Lord is adamant; there is no way of having the terror of the future turned away. It is simply too late; conversion, even if it were genuinely possible, is too late. -Even if Moses and Samuel" _were pleading in God's presence, he still would not relent_ (15:1). To use a modern image, once the bomb has been dropped, the conversion of the bomber will not prevent its explosion when it hits the ground.

Jeremiah had been prophesying disaster for many years and nothing had taken place. People began to laugh at him, make fun of his oracles of doom. Some, such as king Jehoiakim, treated his prophecies with contempt. Jehoiakim burnt the scroll which Jeremiah had written, page by page as it was read to him (Ch 36). Others took him more seriously, had him beaten, thrown in jail, or made attempts on his life (Chs 37-38). Enraged by this treatment, confused at the apparent injustice of God who allows his servant to suffer and his enemies to prosper. Jeremiah protests to the Lord.

_"Jeremiah found himself in an under-ground cell. And there for a long time he stayed_." Jer 37:16

Reading Jeremiah 15:10-21

Note: Omit vss 12-14. They are misplaced here. See 17:1-4, where they seem to belong.

Commentary

The prayer you have just read (15:10-21) shows the prophet more concerned for his own justification and his own safety than for the terrible times that are coming on his people. In fact he seems to be urging the Lord to bring the disaster that he has been promising, so that he (Jeremiah) can witness it, and be vindicated (vss 10-11, 15). He reminds the Lord how the words he had received from him gave him great delight at first (vs 16), and how he scrupulously tried to avoid the company of those who defied the Lord. In spite of all his efforts at fidelity, Jeremiah has had nothing but suffering.

Where are the promises of _"I will be with you_ "? Jeremiah asks the Lord if he intends to be a treacherous stream, one which has water in the rainy season when it is not needed, but goes dry in the dry season when water is needed (vs 18). it appears that this prayer represents a time in the prophet's life when he seriously considered quitting his job of prophesying; he may even have stopped giving the oracles of the Lord for a time. This is what is implied by the Lord's words: " _If you come back_ " (vs 19).

The vocation of Jeremiah is renewed, but conditionally: " _if you speak noble thoughts and reject despicable ones_ " (vs 19). It is not completely clear what the despicable thoughts are. The self-pity of this prayer? The desire for personal vengeance on his persecutors? The doubt that the Lord can be faithful to his promises of support? Probably all of these together are the vile thoughts the Lord wants Jeremiah to reject. Using the words of the vocation narrative in Ch 1, the Lord confirms that he will stand by Jeremiah and will not let him be overcome by his enemies (vs 20). This is the only instance where a true prophet is reproached by the Lord. (The Book of Jonah will take up a similar theme.)

When Jeremiah was first called to serve the Lord as a prophet, he experienced great joy in receiving the word of God. He felt himself drawn to the Lord. His experience since that time has been different; he has felt overcome by the Lord, overpowered, obliged to do and say what he abhorred. At the beginning of his ministry Jeremiah felt like a "bride " _I was called by your name_ " (15:16); but now he feels more like a woman who has been raped.

Reading Jeremiah 20:7-18

Commentary

Verse 7a should actually be translated, " _You have seduced me, and I am seduced; you have raped me, and I am overpowered_ ". This language seems too blunt for us, but it expresses Jeremiah's experience very well. Jeremiah describes his efforts at repressing the word of God within him. In spite of his desperate attempts to be silent about the Lord, to avoid even thinking about him, the " _fire burning in his heart_ " and in his very bones could not be put out. The effort to resist was too much for him; it was less painful and tiring to speak the word of God and take the consequences than to hold everything inside him. Jeremiah feels overpowered by the Lord (vs 9).

Jeremiah describes his fate: he is the object of scorn and derision; people plot against him, try to trip him up on his words. His prayer ranges from violent outbursts of anger and cries for vengeance to prayers of confidence and praise. In vss 10-13 we hear a man torn apart by the terror of his vocation and his love of the Lord who gave him the vocation.

The prayer concludes with sentiments which border on despair. With no knowledge of the resurrection of the dead and the possibility of a fully human life in the presence of the Lord. Jeremiah wishes he had never been born to live a life so full of contradictions, so empty of satisfaction and of justice. (A similar curse is used in the Book of Job, Ch 3).

To Plant

The pain and suffering of the disasters which Jeremiah predicted and which he saw take place before his eyes was not simply a punishment for sins, a getting-even by God. In his poetry Jeremiah often uses an image which expresses the agony of the times and the meaning of that pain: " _anguish like that of a woman giving birth_ " (eg. 4:31; 6:24). Why all the suffering? Surely it was not simply because they deserved it on account of their sins. Jeremiah had entertained doubts about that meaning and purpose of suffering for a long time (See 5:2f). The destruction of Jerusalem and the deportation was an act of giving birth. It could have been simply a death - the end of the People of God. Many other kingdoms conquered by the Assyrians and the Babylonians never recovered their identity because of the deportation practices of these conquerors. Judah and Jerusalem would not disappear into the oblivion of history. The People of God would not simply melt into their new surroundings in Babylon, and the reason they would survive is that the Lord had sent prophets such as Jeremiah to show them that their agony was an agony of giving birth, not the grief of death. It was the conviction of Jeremiah and the other prophets of his day that the only future for the People of God lay through this gate of terror: the destruction of all they held precious and their removal from their native land and all its institutions, customs and structures. The land, the Temple, the liturgy, the courts of law, all had become what we might call " _proximate occasions of mortal sin_ " for the People. They had to be removed from all of these in order to find a way to new life. It was not out of hate that the Lord allowed them to go through this; it was the only way in which they could possibly survive as his People.

To tear down, to destroy, to knock down, to overthrow - all of this had to be done in order to bring about the planting and the building. Jeremiah must have wanted to do much more planting and building than he actually got a chance to do. But he did give his people hope, a hope that sprang from the roots of their faith.

_"He is like a tree by the waterside that thrusts its roots to the stream._ .. ." Jer 1 7:7-8

He promised them a new king who would rule over all the Tribes, reunited as in the days •

of David.

Reading Jeremiah 23:1-6

Comment

" _The Branch would become a name for the future ideal king_ "(Zech 3.8). He would rule, as kings were meant to rule, with integrity and justice. Both Judah and Israel would enjoy security, as when David gave them peace. His royal name, _"the Lord-our-integrity_ " would describe him perfectly.

On the subject of the future ruler, Jeremiah has another prophecy, one which expresses a new and even shocking aspect of God's " _anointed one_ ": to rule as God himself would rule, the king will have to lay down his life in pledge.

Note: The NEB translation does not yield this meaning clearly. The RSV, NAB and JB do give the sense which we are commenting on in vs 21.

Reading Jeremiah 30:18-21

Comment

Through his own personal experience Jeremiah knows what is involved in being drawn close to God and in doing his will - suffering, To be drawn near to God is to risk one's life. The new king, if he is truly to fulfill his vocation, will be drawn near to the Lord and will, therefore, have to be willing to lay down his life as a pledge of his sincerity in the service of the Lord. Kings in the past were more interested in their own well-being than they were in serving the Lord and his People; the new king will have to be selfless enough to lay down his life before the Lord.

In the next passage we read one of Jeremiah's letters to the exiles. The People who had been driven away from Judah and Jerusalem in 598 and 586 were settled in Babylon, but were expecting to be able to return to Jerusalem in a very short while. Jeremiah sees things differently. His hopes are with the exiles, but only if they willingly accept the Exile and find in it the punishment which they deserve. It is only through the Exile itself that a new life can be created for the People, The letter you are about to read caused anger in many of the exiles.

Reading Jeremiah 29:4-14a

Commentary

_'Settle in the land of Babylon'_. Jeremiah tells them, 'live a normal life, for you will be there a long time.' The prophets who were giving the People what they wanted to hear were saying that the Exile would last only a few years (28:11) Jeremiah says it will last the lifetime of a normal person (70 yrs). " _Work for the welfare of the country, them cities where you live_." This would sound like treacherous talk from one whom the Babylonians considered their friend (39:11-12), Jeremiah sees the guiding hand of God, now turned to healing, to giving new life for his People through the experience of the Exile. The welfare of the People is now tied up with the welfare of their enemy, the Babylonians. The Lord has in mind for his People " _a future full of hope_ ", a hope that would never have been possible without the Exile.

In vss 12-13, Jeremiah expresses the new and revolutionary idea that the Lord can be found outside the Land of Promise, outside Jerusalem, outside of the Temple. " _When you seek me you shall find me, when you seek me with all your heart; will let you find me._ " Amos had said in God's name, " _Seek me, seek not Bethel_ "; Jeremiah had told them not to seek the Temple, but to seek the Lord himself. Now that they were without Bethel, without the Temple, without all the things which had encouraged their superficial attitudes, now, at last, they could seek the Lord himself, since there was nothing left to support their illusions. In exile they could find the Lord, and they would find him in their hearts, at the centre of their being and not in the centre of a building outside of themselves.

Jeremiah put his hope in the ones who had gone into exile. The people of Judah and Jerusalem, however, were not the only ones who had suffered the fate of devastation and exile.

_"They had left in tears, will comfort them as I lead them back,_ " Jer 31:9

Jeremiah's hope was not that the exiles would stay there, but that they would all return eventually. The country would be populated again, the cities rebuilt and the fields planted. His vision of the return to the land is not extravagant and splendid; it is simply a return to normalcy, with the great difference that the People would have found their Lord in seeking him.

Chapters 30 and 31 of the Book of Jeremiah were likely written early in his ministry. These chapters show the prophet's love and concern for the northern Tribes who had been driven into exile almost a hundred years before his time. Hope in these exiles was probably aroused when king Josiah regained control of some of the territory of the former kingdom of Israel (2 Kings 23:15) Jeremiah was from the Tribe of Benjamin, which always considered itself part of the north, though it bordered on Judah and was some-. times considered part of the south (See map in Chapter 7, page 8). It is not surprising that Jeremiah felt like a northerner; he knew the prophecies of Hosea, the greatest prophet of the north, and he also was influenced by the thinking found in Deuteronomy, a tradition originating in the northern kingdom.

We have reserved selections from chapter 31 to the last, not because they were written last, but because they form a good conclusion to his work. They show the prophet at his best. Jeremiah is planting and building, as you will see in the next readings.

Reading Jeremiah 31:27-30

Commentary

The problem of suffering, of punishment for sins, returns again. Here t is made clear that Jeremiah no longer believes in the old theory that said a person could be punished in his children. Jeremiah quotes a popular proverb and says this is not the way t will be " _when that day comes_ ". Jeremiah senses the injustice, the inadequacy of the old explanation of reward and punishment, Jeremiah did not have any knowledge of reward and punishment after death. What he hopes for in the future is a time on earth when no one will suffer for the crimes of others, What he is looking forward to is a day of total and evident justice on this earth. Jeremiah's hopes are not unreal, filled with heavenly bliss, with every tear wiped away; he is only looking forward to a day when there will be no more injustice in the way suffering is meted out on this earth. the day when people will suffer only for what they have brought on themselves by their own personal sins. Jeremiah is looking for a reform in God's way of dealing with people. (What Jeremiah is not aware of is that the advance he is bringing into the problem of suffering will cause further, even more complicated problems later for the writer of the Book of Job.)

Having stated his hope for a change in the management of the earth, Jeremiah turns to the fundamental issue of the relationship between the Lord and his People, the Covenant. On Mount Sinai the Covenant had been made through Moses; he received the word of God and brought it to the People. The People accepted it, The Law (Torah) was written on stone tablets. As time passed the Covenant was renewed periodically. Joshua renewed it at Shechem (Jos 24) and king Josiah had the Covenant renewed during the lifetime of Jeremiah (2 Kings 22-23). The result of the Covenant was the formation of God's own People, called to be his glory, his boast among all the nations of the earth (Jer 13:11), called to walk with dignity, heads held high (Lev 26:13). In spite of its greatness something had gone wrong; something indeed was wrong with the Covenant. The People had disobeyed the Law repeatedly.

Was there something wrong with the Law? The Law was not unreasonable, nor did it require anything impossible; it was constantly brought up-to-date so the People could have guidance suited to their times, There was nothing wrong with the Law in itself, but t was not obeyed. Was there something wrong with God? God from the beginning had shown himself to be a caring father: he carried them on eagle's wings, bore them in his arms like a father, was patient with them and all their disobedience for centuries and centuries (Exod 19:3f; Deut 1:31; Ps 103:8-18). Was there something wrong with the People? There certainly was something wrong with the People, no question about that, They disobeyed consistently - that was one thing they could be trusted to do faithfully. But still, God knew they were like that; he had made a Covenant with ordinary weak human beings. Why did the Covenant fail? To say the Covenant failed because the People disobeyed is no explanation at all; that is like saying it broke because it was broken. Why was the Covenant breakable? That was Jeremiah's problem, But how could a covenant be unbreakable and still leave the human beings involved free?

Reading Jeremiah 31:31-34

Commentary

" _I will make a new covenant_ ". This is the only time in the Old Testament that the expression new is applied to the Covenant. Does Jeremiah mean that the old covenant was finished and a completely new, unrelated covenant would be made? It does not seem so. The new covenant proposed in this passage still has the same elements as the old covenant - there is still the same Lord, the same Law, the same creation of God's People from the same descendants of Abraham. What is radically new is the way in which this covenant will be established and observed.

" _They broke that covenant of mine, and I had to show myself their master_ " (vs 32). (This verse is translated in different ways; we are following the interpretation given in the JB and NAB.) God had wanted to be their father; he wanted his People to relate to him as children to a loving father. but they would not let him be himself. They broke their promises, rejected his love and he had to show himself to be a master, a disciplinarian (Jer 3:4,19)

_"I will plant my law within them and write it on their hearts_ " (vs 33). The law here is not the Torah as a set of rules and prescriptions; it is the law as the will of God revealed, The sense of the passage is that God will place knowledge of his will within the hearts of the People. The heart is the seat of knowledge in semitic thought. As has been said before, to know is to be drawn to what is known; to know profoundly is to be united to what is known, When the law of God is placed in the heart of the People, there is union between the People and the will of God. In other words, Jeremiah is saying that the new covenant will abolish the division between the People and the law. The law (will) of God will no longer be experienced as something "out there", separate from the People, something outside of them that they have to measure up to. The law will be inside them, in their hearts; obedience will flow naturally and freely from within them. There will be no need for God to be their master, goading them, threatening them, cursing them for breaking the covenant. He will be able to be their father, for they will behave as children who know their father from the heart.

Jeremiah is clearly influenced by the thought of Deuteronomy which urges the love of the Lord with all one's heart, soul and strength (Deut 6:4-9). He shares the same concern for a life of obedience that springs from the centre of people, the same abhorrence of a purely external obedience that has no "heart" behind it. (See Chapter 6, pages 6 & 7.)

" _I will be their God and they shall be my people_ " The covenant-marriage formula is used once again. This time the union between God and his People will be like an unbreakable marriage, a union that cannot be broken because it is perfect,

_"There will be no need . . to teach , . or say, 'Learn to know the Lord'_." This is the most radical consequence which follows from the new covenant, In the old covenant, the People had to have mediators. Moses had to transmit the knowledge of God and his will to the People; after him priests and prophets and wise men had to teach the People the knowledge of God (Hosea 4:1-6). The new covenant will do away with all institutions of learning and teaching about the Lord. Since the Lord will put the law into their hearts, the People will know the Lord from within themselves; there will be no need to rely on the fallible preachers and teachers to communicate knowledge of the Lord. As a result, " _they will all know me, the least as well as the greatest_ " (vs 34).

" _Since l will forgive their evildoing and never call their sins to mind_ " (vs 34). The new covenant will not depend on human conversion. It had become clear to Jeremiah that if renewal were to depend on the People's efforts to convert themselves, the renewal would never happen. It had also become clear to the prophet that no real new life could come of God's insisting on the People paying for their sins. No atonement of itself would do any good, no punishment could really create the new People of God. Any truly new covenant would have to be based on the free, unconditional forgiveness of God. The gulf created by sin would have to be eliminated completely, in order that the union between God and his People be complete.

This revelation given through Jeremiah is probably the most radical and profound to be given through any prophet. It was not forgotten. The exiles heard of it and were struck by its depth. Ezekiel, the prophet among the exiles, heard of it and probed it even further. The vision of perfect union with God that it contains was perfectly fulfilled in the person of Jesus. This is our faith (Hebrews 8). Jesus established the new covenant (Luke 22:19-- 20). But we still await its perfect fulfilment in ourselves, and in this sense, we still stand in hope with Jeremiah, though our hope is strengthened by the faith we have in Jesus the Lord.

The next short passage asserts emphatically that the Lord can never reject his People; he is bound to them as surely as he is bound to creation itself.

Reading Jeremiah 31:35-37

The Lord who sustains all of creation, who is Lord of all that exists, he is the one who stands by his People. Heaven and earth would have to pass away before the Lord could reject his People; the mystery of creation would have to disappear before he could forget the People he loves. By this comparison with the whole of creation, Jeremiah seems to be hinting at the universal significance of the People of God in the new covenant.

The final reading from the Book of Jeremiah presents one of his great acts of hope. Jeremiah demonstrates his conviction that the People will return,

Reading :Jeremiah 32:6-15

Symbolic acts had all the power and certainty about them that the words of the prophets did. By purchasing the field and preserving the deed of purchase, Jeremiah was assuring the People that there was indeed a future full of hope for them back in their own country when the Lord brought them home.

In his lifetime Jeremiah had disciples and supporters, but the majority rejected his message and his person as well. He was taken, against his will, to Egypt with the group who feared the reprisals of the Babylonians after Gedeliah, the governor, was killed. There he ended his days, separated from all of those in whom he hoped, separated from the land and the city which he knew would one day come back to life with a renewed People. Legend has it that he was stoned to death by his people in Egypt. This legend is not reported in the Bible, but it is not at all unlikely.

Jeremiah's prophecies, his words and his actions, make him one of the great persons in the history of the People of God. As great as his sayings and deeds are, however, they were not as remarkably prophetic as the person of Jeremiah himself. Wthout his knowing it, his sufferings, his struggle, his agony, born of the love he had for the Lord and for the People, became his major prophetic contribution to the history of our faith. Jeremiah interceded for the People, suffered on account of their sins; though he himself was obedient to the Lord" he suffered for the sins of others, " _like a lamb led to the slaughter_ ".

The problem of human suffering which so plagued Jeremiah during his lifetime would be given a whole new meaning by a prophet who was born in Exile probably a few years before Jeremiah died, If this great prophet (known only as Second Isaiah) was able to enter more deeply into the problem of suffering, it was because he had the life of Jeremiah to meditate upon.

## Chapter 13b -Zephania

Jeremiah was not the only prophet whom the Lord had sent to his People in those difficult days. There were many true prophets. We know of Huldah the prophetess, whom Josiah considered more important than all the others, since he would not act without consulting her (2 Kings 22:14-20). There was also the prophet Uriah who spoke the same message as Jeremiah. He had to escape to Egypt for his life, but the king had him brought back and executed (Jer 26:20-24). We also have the writings of four prophets who were active during Jeremiah's lifetime: Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Nahum and Ezekiel, who was called to minister in the Exile. (Ezekiel will be considered in Chapter 14,) Habakkuk and Nahum proclaimed the same doom as did Jeremiah; their message is very brief and contains no insights which cannot also be found in Jeremiah. Zephaniah, however, does have something which is quite new.

The prophets from Elijah to Jeremiah all preached to the leaders of the People of God. The kings, princes. priests, prophets, the wealthy landowners and business people came in for their sharpest criticism. If these were the ones to be most severely blamed for what went wrong, the implication was that conversion of these people would bring about the renewal that was needed. Zephaniah attacks the rich and powerful, but he does not seem to place his hopes in them

Reading Zephaniah 3:11-13

Comment

The poor were always the object of the Lord's special concern. In the Law they are mentioned time and time again. The prophets speaking in the name of God, condemn all those who take advantage of the poor. The needy, the stranger, the orphan, the widow were always the touchstone of the People's fidelity to the way of the Lord. All of the prophets were defenders of the rights of the oppressed. Somehow with all this attention given to the poor, something of the truth of the Exodus had not been appreciated: God had made a people out of the poor. T he ragged band of slaves were not merely the object of God's pity; they were the object of his hope. He saw a future for them. It was not because they were great, powerful, influential, brilliant that they became God's People. t was because, lacking all hope, all means of saving themselves, of relying on their own resources, they were able to look to the Lord and receive his help. They were capable of doing nothing more than to " _be still_ " and wait for the salvation of the Lord (Exod 14:13). Zephaniah re-discovers this ancient truth and applies it to his times.

Zephaniah strikes out at the rich, all those " _near the throne_ ", those with wealth, silver and gold; there is no hope in these for they are doomed (Zeph 1:8-9). What is left? The simple poor. In these there is hope. For Zephaniah, however, poverty and its consequences \- unimportance, lack of influence, powerlessness - brought about, or was more likely to bring about, that very attitude which makes one more responsive to the Lord, that is, humility. Those in whom there is hope are the " _humble and lowly people_ "(3:1 2); these are the ones who will seek refuge in the Lord, the ones who will be the true remnant of the People, Zephaniah urges the downcast, the oppressed of his times: " _Seek the Lord, all you poor of the earth, who obey his commands. Seek integrity, seek humility and it may be that you will find shelter on the day of the Lord's anger_ "(Zeph 2:3).

Moses had been presented as the humblest man on earth (Num 12:3). Zephaniah praises this virtue as the quality without which there is no hope, no future for the People of God. When Jesus made his first major sermon, he began where Zephaniah thought he should begin, with the poor: " _Blessed are the poor in spirit_ ". (Matt 5:3 _"In spirit_ " means thoroughly, through and through, to the very soul,) The only chance for the rich and the powerful to enter into hope is for them genuinely to experience the helplessness and uselessness of the poor. The chances of that happening are very slim, but miracles are possible (Mark 10:23-27).

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 14 Prophets in Exile (1)
## Chapter 14a Exile in Babylon

The number of people exiled in the two deportations (598 and 587 BC) is difficult to estimate. From the figures given in the Bible, the combined total could be as low as ten thousand and as high as fifty thousand, depending on whether the numbers given include or do not include women and children (2 Kings 24:14-16; Jeremiah 52:28ff). It is not possible to be exact. Whatever the number, the fact is that the leaders (the royalty, the wealthy, the intellectuals) and the skilled craftsmen were all taken away, leaving only the poor in the cities and the peasants in the country.

The exiles were settled in areas around Babylon, the capital city of the empire. This is significant: the exiles from Judah were not scattered in different parts of the empire, as the exiles of Samaria had been. The fact that the exiles from Judah and Jerusalem were settled in roughly the same area made it possible for them to live some sort of community life while in exile. They were able to meet, communicate with each other and support one another.

The conditions under which they lived do not seem to nave been severe. They were made to farm lands, rebuild and use the intricate irrigation canals that were used to divert the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates, and were even allowed to go into business. There is evidence in ancient documents outside the Bible that some became rather wealthy. They do not seem to have been reduced to cruel slavery and imprisonment, except for those who might have fomented revolt against the Babylonians. (There is some evidence that they did on one occasion, but this is not clear. See 2 Kings 25:27-30, where the "pardon" of the king is not explained.)

They were not forced to worship the Babylonians' gods, as far as can be deduced from the writings available. They were allowed to worship in their own way and to absent themselves from the official worship of the empire. Without their Temple, they could not offer any formal worship, such as sacrifices and the rituals which required the Temple. As we will see in the Book of Ezekiel, they did meet together to worship in ways which suggest the beginning of the synagogue style -, prayer, readings from the sacred books and teachings. The fact that they were not obliged to worship the gods of the Babylonians makes it all the more distressing that some of the exiles, because they wanted to get ahead in Babylonian society, or because they had lost their faith in the Lord, went over to the worship of Babylonian gods.

The mood of the exiles varied and changed over the years. The crushing defeat they had suffered at the hands of their enemy, the personal tragedy of the loss of family and friends in the siege of Jerusalem, the loss of home and income, all of this caused great suffering. Being exiled from their homeland was itself a humiliation and a degradation. Mourning for the dead, homesickness and the pain of defeat were feelings shared by all. In the first years of the Exile there were those who were sure the Exile would last only a short while. God would very soon take them back to their land, they thought (Jer 29:24-28). Their hope proved groundless. As the years passed and it became clear that the

Exile would not end soon, a feeling of depression bordering on despair came upon many of the exiles.

The ones who had had great trust in the belief that Jerusalem could never be destroyed and that the Temple was inviolable, had their faith severely shaken by the destruction of both in 587 BC. The mood of these is well expressed in the next selection from the Book of Lamentations.

The message of the prophets had been accepted. The writer of Lamentations accepted the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple as an act of God. While Lamentations is full of pain and sorrow, it does not show absolute despair; God is still present, even if his presence is in the act of punishment. Better his wrath than his absence. There is hope that he can renew his People.

Reading Lamentations 2:1-8

Note: " _Footstool_ " in vs 1 refers to the Temple.

There were others who had fled into exile in other countries rather than be forced into exile by the Babylonians. We know of the group who went into Egypt, taking Jeremiah with them (Jer 43:4-7). It is quite likely that many more went into Egypt and that some fled to other countries besides Egypt. This is the beginning of what will later be called the diaspora, a word which means " _the scattered_ " and refers to the People of God living outside Palestine.

Jerusalem and Judah were not re-populated by foreigners from other parts of the Babylonian empire. The Assyrians had brought foreigners into Samaria after 721 BC, but the Babylonians did not move people into Jerusalem and Judah. This meant that those left behind did not have to contend with influences from foreign peoples.

## Chapter 14b Ezekiel

**Introduction**

You are about to study parts of an extraordinary book. The contents of the Book of Ezekiel are such that some scholars have suggested Ezekiel must have been seriously disturbed psychologically. Ezekiel has sometimes been called a hard and crude fanatic, sometimes a mystic with poetic genius, sometimes simply a practical organizer of a religious movement. It is fair to say that Ezekiel was not an ordinary, everyday type of per-son. He felt deeply, probed matters profoundly, experienced the Lord powerfully, and yet he had the no-nonsense touch of the pastor who knows his people must be properly organized if they are to survive disaster. Ezekiel combines creative imagination and a love of order, he unites the driving force of spirit with the discipline of law. He brings together the courage to say harsh, hurtful truths and the compassion of a good shepherd. He is both idealistic and practical. Ezekiel is a hard man to fit into one category.

There is disagreement among scholars on almost every issue concerning Ezekiel. Where did Ezekiel prophesy? Some say in Babylonia; others say only in Palestine. Still others say both in Palestine and in Babylonia. To whom did he prophesy? Some say only to the exiles; others say to the people in Judah before the fall of Jerusalem in 587 and then to the exiles after that is the whole Book of Ezekiel written by him? Some say most of the book is by Ezekiel and others hold that only parts are by Ezekiel, the rest by disciples and editors. Is there good order in the Book of Ezekiel? Once again there is disagreement.

In this chapter we take the following positions, knowing full-well that some scholars at least would not agree: Ezekiel prophesied in Babylonia from about 594 to about 570 BC. We hold that this is the most likely opinion. According to this view. Ezekiel was among those of the first deportation (598 BC). As a young man he lived in Jerusalem, functioning probably as a priest-in-training. He received his vocation as a prophet in Babylonia, after he and the first exiles had settled there. He addressed prophecies to both the exiles and the people who were left behind in Jerusalem. We follow the opinion that most of the Book of Ezekiel was written by the prophet himself. The selections which have been chosen for this chapter are, in our judgment, mostly from the prophet himself. As for the order of the book, we accept the position that it has an introduction (1:1-3:27) and four major sections:

1.Oracles of destruction (4:1-24:27)

2.Oracles against the nations (25:1-32:32)

3.Oracles of renewal (33:1-39:29)

4.Oracles of the new People (40:1-48:35)

Ezekiel is a scholar, an intellectual with a vast store of knowledge. He has accurate and detailed information of the history of his people (eg. Ch 16); he can speak of shipbuilding (27:1ff), the ancient stories of Eden (28:11ff), Noah, Daniel and Job (14:12ff). He can argue like a theologian with a strict legal mind (Ch 18). He is also a writer. He very seldom use the short poetic oracles which were used in speaking the word of God by other prophets: in place of these are the much longer prose passages which were originally intended to be read, riot spoken from memory.

Ezekiel is a scholar and a writer who is also a trained priest. Born and raised in a priestly family in Jerusalem, Ezekiel as a young man must have been trained to take on the responsibilities of the priesthood in the Temple of Jerusalem. Throughout his prophecies we can hear the concerns of the priests for good worship. His love of the Temple, its liturgy and the purity of the worshipping assembly is central to his thought. This scholar, writer, priest receives the vocation of a prophet. In the exercise of his prophetic ministry, he uses all his talents and all his priestly training. As a young man training for the priesthood, he heard Jeremiah preaching in Jerusalem. This prophet must have impressed him profoundly because Ezekiel used some of Jeremiah's thoughts and images, and tackles some of the same problems. When he was driven into exile in 598, Ezekiel could hardly have avoided the conclusion that Jeremiah had been right all along. Once in exile Ezekiel himself received the vocation to prophesy. His prophetic vocation is modified by a pastoral concern for the People, both as a group and individually. He is concerned about the practical requirements of the community after it has returned to the land of the fathers; but he is also concerned for the conversion of each individual in the community. All in all, a most extraordinary person, this Ezekiel!

The Vision of Glory

The difficulties of the Book of Ezekiel are clearly seen in the very first lines (1:1-3). If you read these verses carefully you will notice that they are quite confusing: vs 1 is in the first person, " _I was among the exiles . . . I saw visions from God_ ". Vss 2-3, however, are in the third person, "the priest Ezekiel". In vs 1 the " _thirtieth year_ " is not explained (30th year of whose reign?). From vs 2 we learn it was the fifth year of exile for king Jehoiachin, 594 BC.

Ezekiel is given a vision for the People who are in exile with him. The majority of the People in exile felt that if they had been defeated by the Babylonians, this meant that the Lord their God had also been defeated. (It was common to hold that the fate of a people is the fate of their gods.) The victory of the Babylonians meant the victory of the Babylonian gods. Those among the People who had taken the message of the prophets seriously knew that this was not so; the Lord had foretold the defeat of his People and had tried to warn them about it through his messengers, the prophets. The Exile, to all who believed in the word coming from the prophets, was a proof of God's strength, not his weakness.

It was also commonly held that the Lord was tied to his Temple and to the land of his People. The People in Babylonia, some thought, were far away from the Lord their God, who was anchored in Jerusalem. Ezekiel does not believe that God is so small as to be defeated, nor does he hold that the Lord is so small as to be bound by his Temple and the land of his People.

Many of the People in exile were overwhelmed by the beauty, the splendour of the capital city, Babylon, and of the magnificent ceremonies which the Babylonians carried out in honour of their gods. Babylon had great, handsome walls and gates covered with bright colourful ceramic bricks forming pictures of animals. The temples and the liturgy were even more impressive. The People felt inferior, and, what is worse, began to feel the Lord their God was inferior. Because Ezekiel was so sensitive to the needs of his community in exile, God was able to show himself to Ezekiel in a way that is beyond description. (In the reading which follows, do not attempt to figure out what the total vision looked like; it is best to let the vision move through your imagination without stopping to understand each and every symbol. Somewhat as in a movie, the images blend into each other, fade and return, reaching a peak of beauty and power in the last verses.)

Reading Ezekiel 1:4-28

Commentary

We will make no attempt to explain each and every image. The prophet uses the fire, lightning and cloud of the vision of God on Sinai (Exod 19:16ff), but he adds the images from the world of animals, birds and the world of fine metals and precious jewels; the sounds of rushing water, wings in flight, thunder, the noise of a crowded camp; and colours, colours everywhere, every colour of the rainbow. Through all of this, one thing comes through more than all else - movement, The cherubim-like animals have wings and move (vss 11-12); fire darts between the animals (vs 13); wheels, wheels within wheels (vss 14ff). Then in vss 19ff the whole, moving fiery vision leaves the ground and rises to the vault of heaven. (See Gen 1:6. The vault was seen as that firm shell in heaven which kept the waters above it from falling on the earth. Refer to the diagram in Chapter One, page 10.) Following the vision as it ascends to the vault of heaven which was opened to the prophet (1:1), he hears the roaring of the waters above the heavens, and then, he sees into the very presence of the Lord God who is enthroned above the waters above the heavens.

In these last verses there is no noise; only visual images are used: sapphire, bronze, fire, light, the colours of the rainbow. And at the heart of it all " _one who looked like a human being_ " (vs 26). The climax of the vision is the likeness of the human form. Made in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26ff), humanity somehow suggests God himself. The human form, shining like polished bronze, in a blaze of flames, surrounded by all the colours of the rainbow, " _looked like the glory of the Lord_ " (vs 28). (if the Lord God is exalted and shown to be magnificent in this vision, so also is humanity.) The prophet can do nothing but prostrate himself to the ground.

Many, many things could be said of this extraordinary vision. We will limit our comments to the points which seem most important:

1.The true dwelling place of God is above the vault of heaven: he is enthroned above all creation.

2.The Lord is the God of all creation; all things on earth from minerals to humanity reflect him, but are beneath him.

3.The Lord God is not static, immovable, lifeless; he is dynamic, living, full of movement. While his presence is in the Temple, he is not in any way limited to his earthly residence; he can be present where he wills. He can leave the Temple if he chooses.

4.The Lord God is power itself, power that is full of beauty and life.

This mighty vision would have been like healing ointment to the exiles wounded by the depression of defeat.

The Call of the Prophet

From the midst of the vision the prophet hears a voice speaking to him. The prophet does not dare say that the voice is that of the Lord himself, nor does he dare to say that the hand that reaches out to him is the hand of the Lord. The greatness of God, his magnificence, so affects the prophet that he cannot use such blunt images at this point, The prophet is addressed simply as " _son of man_ ", an expression which simply means, human being, a mortal who experiences birth and death. While " _son of man_ " expresses the great distance between humanity and God, it should not be forgotten that at the centre of the vision of what looked like the glory of God there was the likeness of the human form.

Reading Ezekiel 2:1 - 3:3

Commentary

The " _Israelites_ " to whom the prophet is to he sent are all the People of God, those in exile and those still in Palestine. God refers to the People as a " _set of rebels_ "; they are like rebellious subjects of a king. The prophet is told to speak whatever the Lord gives him to say. Whether they _"listen or not_ ", the People must know that the Lord has given them a message through his prophet. For Ezekiel, as for Isaiah, success is not the point; it is the message which God wants delivered that matters. The prophet is told not to be afraid of the taunts and threats of the People.

In his experience of being called to prophesy. Ezekiel receives a written scroll which he consumes. This image is probably meant to reflect the prophetic ministry which will be done largely in writing. He eats the scroll which is full of lamentations and woes and it tastes _"as sweet as honey"_. Though the message is bitter and harsh. Ezekiel finds it easy enough to accept the task of delivering it.

Ezekiel makes frequent references to _"the spirit_ " (vs. 2). In the vision of God the spirit is present, and now in his vocation experience the spirit lifts him into the presence of God (3:12-14). The spirit is the breath of the life of God himself; it is creative, life-giving power from God (Ps 104:29f). Though Ezekiel experiences himself as weak, small and powerless in the presence of the Lord, the spirit fills him with life and makes bold courage possible. The prophet is to deliver his message, regardless of the People's response. If he speaks the word of God to the People and the People fail to turn to the Lord, the prophet himself will not be held responsible. However, if he fails to speak the word of God to the People and the People fail to turn to the Lord, the prophet himself will be held responsible.

Reading Ezekiel 3:16-21

Comment

The prophet is a watchman, a sentry on guard over his People. His watch is not simply over the People in general, but over the individuals the community. The sense of oneness, of community, was much stronger among the People of God then, than it is now People could very easily accept that what God wanted was the conversion of the whole People, but it was not so clear that (whether the People as a whole were converted or not) each individual in the People of God had a personal responsibility. If a person were a sinner, that person was called to change his ways; if another were a just person, he was personally called to persevere in his justice. Ezekiel is sent to each individual. If Ezekiel fails to warn each individual, then Ezekiel will be held responsible. If Ezekiel warns each individual, then whether that individual responds properly or not, Ezekiel has fulfilled his mission and will not be held responsible.

_"So I spread the corner of my cloak over you . . you became mine, says the Lord God."_ _(Ezekiel 1 6:8b)_

Message about Jerusalem

In the passages which follow the vocation of Ezekiel we are given the dreaded message: Jerusalem and Judah will be ravaged and the rest of the notables will be taken into exile. (These prophecies were given after the first deportation in 598 and before the final destruction of Jerusalem in 587). For Ezekiel there is no hope in Jerusalem as it is. In fact the only hope lies with the People in exile. To express this most forcibly, Ezekiel shares his vision of the " _glory of the Lord_ " leaving the Temple, leaving Jerusalem and going into exile with his People (10:18-22; 11:22-25).

Reading Ezekiel 11:22-25

(In the NAB, these verses occur after 10:19.)

Comment

The Lord God leaves the Temple and Jerusalem behind and comes to the exiles in Babylon (Chaldea is another name for Babylonia.) He is not fixed in the Temple, The departure from Jerusalem, however is ominous the Lord has left Jerusalem, then there is no hope that that city will be saved. In the following symbolic action Ezekiel makes this point clear.

Reading Ezekiel 12:1-14

Comment

The Lord has left Jerusalem, left Judah and gone to the exiles in Babylonia; the rest of the inhabitants of the city will follow into exile. The king and his court, the citizens of Jerusalem must come into exile.

What is the Lord's justification for these events? In a powerful sermon (Oh 16), at once beautiful and shocking, Ezekiel lays out before the People the chapter that must be learnt from their history. This sermon is an allegory, that is, a story in which the various characters and images represent something. In this case the young girl is the People of God and the events that are given represent events in the history of God's dealings with his People.

Reading Ezekiel 16:1-22

Comment

The images speak fairly clearly: God saved them from death when they were just barely born (Exodus), cared for them when they were in the desert, raised them to maturity with beauty and dignity (David and Solomon), but they paid no attention to what the Lord was asking of them. They ignored their true saviour and ran after other lovers. They learned to do horrible things, such as sacrifice their own children (vs 21 ). Only a most thorough purification can change things.

The situation, however, s not without hope.

Reading Ezekiel 16:59-63

Comment

The People have broken their " _marriage vows_ ", the Covenant, but the Lord will not break his vows to them. He will allow them to undergo the purification which has become necessary, but after that he will forgive their sins and renew the Covenant with them in an unbreakable way. What is called for in the People for the moment is the admission that their sins have merited the punishment that is upon them.

" _I will remember the covenant that I made with you when you were a girl . ." (Ezek el 1 6:60)_

From the recitation of their sinful history in chapter 16, it would be easy to conclude that the present generation is having to pay for the sins of their ancestors. Ezekiel is well aware that this belief in inherited guilt is still around and that it is dangerous. Like Jeremiah before him. Ezekiel wants the People to know that each one of them will be judged personally and individually and not simply as a member of the whole People of God.

Reading Ezekiel 18:1-9

Comment

It is clear that Ezekiel believes that each person will be judged on the basis of personal choices. The good or bad behaviour of past generations does not matter for the present generation. What is happening to the People now is due to the present generation. Each individual will be judged by the behaviour shown at the time of his encounter with God; a person's good or bad behaviour in the past will have no bearing on the moment of judgment.

" _The upright_ " (virtuous, righteous) person is described (vss 6ff). As in the case of the other prophets, the just person is the one who obeys the commandments of the Law. Ezekiel does not give a full list of the commandments; he gives the most important ones only. He reminds the community in exile that the first commandment is the most important: the just person worships the Lord God alone and does not worship in high places (" _eat on the mountains_ ") or pray to idols. The commandment against adultery is combined with a new prohibition which forbids sexual relations with a woman in her menstrual period This prohibition is probably related to the notion that blood is life. and life is sacred. Intercourse during the menstrual period was seen as a kind of desecration. This is quite clearly a ritual prohibition and not a moral one. A man who had intercourse with his wife during her period was not so much committing a sin as making himself unclean, unfit to take part in the rituals of the worshipping community.

The other commandments relate to the laws which regulate property and loans and demand honesty in the courts. It is noteworthy that Ezekiel goes beyond the strict observance of the laws and urges generosity towards the poor and needy (vs 7). He presents the same sensitivity to the demands of caring for the poor as Deuteronomy does, especially in Deut 15.

We should note, therefore, that a person is just, not simply by strictly following the commandments, but by going beyond the commandments and striving to attain the purpose of the commandments. The purpose of the commandments generally was the creation of a new society, a society that was brotherly, free of oppression, and even tree of poverty and misery. The sacred writers of Deuteronomy were aware that laws alone could not make this new society real; people had to identify with the goal of the commandments and even go beyond them in their effort to create the true People of God.

The People must have objected to Ezekiel's teaching: how can the Lord judge each indvidual separately according to his behaviour at each moment?

Comment

The protest which Ezekiel records, the Lord is unjust'', is refuted. It is not death that the Lord wants, but life. This message about individual judgment is a sign of the Lord's sense of justice: he does not condemn or justify the People as though they were all the same, but assesses each individual. No one, therefore, can say " _it doesn't matter what I do, we are all doomed together_ ".

In the next reading we are confronted with a pathetic scene: Ezekiel's wife dies and her death becomes the medium of the Lord's most disturbing message. Ezekiel's wife was the " _joy of his eyes_ "; he seems to go into shock, unable to speak, not only because his wife has died, but because this loss is symbolic of another terrible loss.

Reading Ezekiel 24:15-27

Comment

The Temple. the pride and delight of the People, is about to be destroyed. The People are to accept this " _death_ " in the same way that Ezekiel accepted the death of his wife without lamentation and the signs of mourning. It would be better for them to groan over their sins which brought about the end of the Temple (vs 23). Jerusalem is to be brought down, members of the families of the exiles will be killed in the siege of the city, The People have been told that this would happen if they did not change their ways. Now that it is about to happen, they are to accept it as David accepted the death of his son (2 Sam 1 2:20-23). By the time a fugitive from Jerusalem arrives to tell them of the disaster, it will already he over and done; the time of mourning will already be over.

Reading Ezekiel 33:21-22

Comment

According to the date given, the fugitive arrived to tell the exiles sometime in December of 586 or January 585, a full year and a half after the fall of Jerusalem in June or July of 587. It is possible that the date given in 33:21 was mistaken, for a year and a half seems a very long time for the news to travel from ,Jerusalem to Babylon. Whether the date is accurate or not, what matters is that the prophecy which Ezekiel made before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was in fact fulfilled. The prophet had foretold what would happen. For the prophet the time of terror is now over, the worst has happened. It is not time for mourning, but for beginning the process of reviving the battered People.

The Foundations of the Future

Now that the terrible events have taken place, no time can be lost in preparing for the future. Ezekiel only looks to the past to understand better what went wrong, and why it went wrong, in order to prevent the same things from happening again in the future. He turns first to the leaders of the People- the shepherds. The term " _shepherd_ " applied first of all to the kings; but the way in which Ezekiel uses the word it means all the leaders, the upper classes who ruled the People of God. In much the same way as Amos. Isaiah and Micah. Ezekiel condemns the upper classes for the ruthless, selfish way they ruled: feeding off the People whom they should have been serving, shearing the sheep, devouring them, never caring for them.

Reading Ezekiel 34:110

Comment

The selfish, greedy leaders of the People have shown no care for the weak, the sick, the wounded, the lost. They have, in fact, made matters even worse for the flock by causing them to be scattered. The leaders have caused division among the People, the flock has been scattered, unity has been lost. The People strayed into false worship on high hills, because there was no leadership to guide there. The blame being laid squarely on the shoulders of the upper classes; the tragic events were brought on by their behaviour. (See Matt 18: 12ff; Luke 15:4U.) The Lord now vows that the leadership will be taken away from the former ruling classes (vs 10); a new leadership will have to be formed. These ten verses are a severe criticism of the leadership provided by both the kings of the House of David and all the nobility and rich citizens of Jerusalem. Ezekiel judges that their day is over. Where will the leadership come from in the future?

Reading Ezekiel 34:11-16

Comment

" _I myself will shepherd them_ ", says the Lord. He will gather the scattered sheep; he will bring them back from the Exile, back from the various countries to which they have fled. He will feed them, give them rest. He will find the lost, bring back the stray, bandage the wounded, strengthen the weak and take good care of the sheep who are strong. None will be neglected. (See John 10; 21:15-17.) It is not the former leaders who will restore the People of God, the flock, after the Exile; it will be God himself who will restore the People, bring them back home, and heal them. The former leaders will not be able to take any credit for the restoration.

Ezekiel was not so simple as to believe that all the fault lay with the upper classes. There was fault among the " _sheep_ " themselves. Those who did not belong to the upper classes, those who were used and abused by the leaders, were themselves not so good to each other. In the next section of chapter 34, the Lord turns to the flock itself.

Reading Ezekiel 34:17-22

Comment

It is a very common thing among those who are on the bottom of the social and economic system to do violence to each other; since they cannot direct their attack against the ruling classes who are hurting them, the poor often turn on each other. This "horizontal" violence is often the only outlet for the sense of frustration and helplessness among the lower classes. The poor also tend to absorb the values of their rich oppressors, and so, whenever the opportunity presents itself they will take advantage of one another. The poor are not equal; there are the fat and the lean among them. The stronger " _trample the grass, muddy the waters_ " for the weaker. Ezekiel shows here the insight of a true pastor; he has seen not only the crimes of the leaders, but also the offences of the common people. Each will he judged according to his behaviour. (See Matt 25:31-46.)

Ezekiel now turns to the traditional source of hope, the House of David. After having rejected the former leadership, which certainly included the kings of the House of David (vss 1-10), it seems very strange that Ezekiel should come back to it at the end of his prophecy.

Reading Ezekiel 34:23-31

Comment

" _My servant David shall be their ruler"-_ (vs 23). It is interesting to note that the new David is not called King, but prince or ruler. The title " _king"_ is reserved for God alone. Later in this chapter we shall see that the prophet saw the leadership of the future to be in the hands of the priests. What then is the role of the House of David in the future? There is no clear agreement among scholars. We offer one possible answer to the question. According to Ezekiel, there is still hope in the House of David. The Lord's promises to David still stand (2 Sam 7), and should produce fruit in the future. Ezekiel believes that the Lord will raise up another ruler, even better than David himself. But this new ruler will not be a king in the traditional way that kings ruled. The new leader of the future will be a true shepherd, selflessly caring for the flock, never using or abusing the People. The new David will not claim the centre of attention for himself, but will make it clear that it is the Lord who is pasturing his flock. While Ezekiel says that the new David will rule (vs 23), he concludes the passages with the words of the Lord: " _I shall pasture my flock"_ (vs 31). It would seem that Ezekiel is hoping for a genuine "son of David _" who will be truly_ "God-with-us- (Isa 7:14).

The next passage (36:{6-2g) to be considered is probably the most important in the whole Book of Ezekiel; if he had written nothing else he would have been remembered always. As you will notice. Ezekiel is dependent on Jeremiah for the central thought on the renewal of the Covenant (Jer 31 :31ff); but Ezekiel goes beyond Jeremiah and brings new insights to the subject of the Covenant.

Self-pity was understandably part of the life of the People during the Exile; they had been punished for their sins. They were desperately lonely for their homeland, their great city and its Temple. It was normal, we might say, for the People to be centred on themselves and to forget what the destruction of Jerusalem and the Exile itself meant to the Lord their God, their partner in the Covenant. If the Exile was terrible for the People, it was even more terrible for God. Jeremiah had already hinted at what this whole dismal period of history meant for God when he said that the Lord had wanted to be a father to his People, but had been forced to behave as a stern punisher (Jer 3:19f; 31:32). Now Ezekiel pushes the matter further and makes it even more clear what these acts of destruction have meant to God himself.

Reading Ezekiel 36:16-23

Commentary

The Lord explains what has really happened: the behaviour of the People while they lived in their land was so evil that it made the whole country unclean, unfit for the Lord to live in and unfit for his People to live in. So he had to disperse them, rid the land of them so that it might become clean again. Having exiled his People, the Lord has had to endure a most insulting thing, the profanation of his name: the nations are saying in ridicule, " _These are the people of the Lord, they have been exiled from his land"_ (vs 20). God had intended to make himself, his true self, known among the nations. It was through his own People that he had wanted to have himself revealed as the God of life, the saving God who should be known for his mercy, his forgiveness, his gentle kindness; the God, as the Yahwist had said, who does not kill sinners but is patient and even defends sinners such as Cain (Gen 4:13-16). Now the destruction of Jerusalem, the Exile, have shown him to the nations to he a God who punishes, and punishes cruelly.

What is more, the Lord God who is all-powerful, who is the creator of the whole universe, who is enthroned over all of creation, is seen by the nations as being weak, even helpless to prevent the destruction of his city, his Temple and too weak to keep control of the land he had given to his People. Knowledge of the genuine character of the Lord has been misted and warped in the eyes of the nations. They now see him as weak, and what is worse, if the nations believe that the Lord himself has brought all this on his own People, the nations believe that the Lord is vengeful and pitiless. God's reputation has been ruined, " _profaned" among the nations_ ".

The People of God (then as now) were called to be the means whereby God makes him-self known to all the nations of the world. The People of God are the instrument of revelation. Through the People God's holiness is to be manifest; his uniqueness, his greatness is meant to shine out from his People. The People of God are to hallow the Name among the nations (Matt 6:9). (The " _name_ " is God himself as he is known on earth.)

God will now act, " _not for your sake . . . but for the sake of my holy name_ " (vs 22). This is a fundamental point of theology. God is bound to save his People, bound to bring salvation to the world, not simply by any promise he has made, but by virtue of his own nature. God is bound to himself; he has an obligation to be faithful to his true self; he cannot help but save. To paraphrase, we might say that the Lord is not going to save the People from their fate in exile because of their virtue, their conversion, nor even because he especially wants to save them. It is for his own sake, that is, in order to be true to his very nature, and to be known therefore for the God he truly is, that he is going to save them. By being true to himself, he will save them, and he will show his holiness to the nations (vs 23). (See Num 14:10-19, where Moses uses a very similar argument to avert the Lord's wrath from the sinful People.) Ezekiel then proceeds to describe what the Lord is going to do.

Reading Ezekiel 36:24-28

Commentary

_"I shall . . bring you home"_ (vs 24). This is the first aspect of the act of salvation which the Lord will do in order to be true to his own nature. When Ezekiel wrote this passage, it truly was an extraordinary prophecy. It is not possible to date it exactly, but it was written before 570 BC, several years before there was any sign that Babylon would fall to a new empire which would send the People of God home. The Lord must be true to his promises; this prophecy must be fulfilled.

_"I shall pour clean water over you"_ (vs 25). More important than bringing his People home is the renewal that the Lord will bring about. First the Lord will cleanse them of their sins. Cleansing with water (See Ps 51:7) was probably a ritual action used in the liturgy of the Temple. Here, however, it is more than a mere ritual; it signifies that the Lord will forgive the sins of his People completely. To forgive is to release from the past and to offer a new future, God will release his People from their sins, cancel their guilt and give them a new future, freed from their deadening past.

_"I shall give you a new heart"_ (vs 26). As in Jeremiah's vision of the new Covenant (Jer 31:31), the heart is the centre of man's understanding. Jeremiah had said that the Lord would write his Law on their hearts, so that the People would no longer experience God and his Law as something outside themselves, something foreign to them. Here Ezekiel pushes the image further saying that the Lord would give them a " _new heart_ ". The core, the centre of each member of the People would be changed, made new.

_"and put a new spirit in you_ " (vs 26). Ezekiel uses the spirit as the force that activates, moves people to action, brings them to decisions. The spirit which had been in the People was a spirit of rebellion, bringing the People to evil actions, evil decisions. This old spirit will be changed to a new spirit.

_"I shall remove your heart of stone_ " (vs 26). Heart and spirit are very closely related here. The heart is the centre of a person's understanding and feeling; the spirit is the power which brings that understanding into action. Both heart and spirit must be changed. The heart which the People had was a heart of stone. Ezekiel is putting his finger on the most commonly felt experience of the prophets: the People have no feelings, no sensitivity either for the Lord, or for each other. (Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel is very close to the ideal as found in Deut 6:4-9. See Chapter Six, pp 6-7). This hardness, this lack of warmth and good emotions must go.

_"I shall . . . give you a heart of flesh_ " (vs 26). The heart of stone will be replaced by a heart of flesh, a heart that feels, senses. Here Ezekiel places emphasis on the aspect of understanding which involves feelings. A merely intellectual, abstract understanding will not do; the new understanding must be one which affects the whole person. As Deuteronomy would say, the understanding which is needed is the kind which expresses itself in love, springing from all one's heart, soul and strength (Deut 6:4-9). To have this happen, a new heart must be given, a heart of flesh, to replace the heart of stone.

" _I shall put my spirit within you_ \- (vs 27). This is the key expression of the passage. The Covenant will be renewed at the profound level of the spirit. It will be a marriage of the spirit of the Lord with the People's spirit. God will place his own power of action, his own life-giving creative strength within the members of his People. That way they will be inwardly united to their Lord and will be able freely to obey his laws. The union with the Lord and his will is to be profoundly realized at the level of heart and spirit, not merely at the level of mechanical, external obedience.

The passage ends with the traditional Covenant-marriage formula: " _You shall be my people and I will be your God"_ (vs 28). The marriage will become permanent, unbreakable.

In the verses which follow this passage (36:29-38), Ezekiel describes the external signs of this renewed Covenant: abundance will return and the land which the Lord has given them will be like a garden of Eden.

The miracle of the Lord giving new life to his People through the destruction of Jerusalem and the Exile is vividly symbolized by the next passage.

Reading Ezekiel 37:

Comment

it is through death that new life comes. Dramatically the vision expresses the miracle of new life coming out of death. Ezekiel is saying that the Lord can bring new life even to the People who are like so many graves full of bones. Through the experience of death and burial, which was the destruction of their home and the Exile, the People will be brought back to life again. This theme of life coming out of death, with its illustration of dry bones being transformed into living bodies would one day be expressed in a clear teaching on the resurrection of the body after death (2 Macc 7:9).

The New Order

In chapters 40 to 48 Ezekiel goes into the new organization of the People of God. He describes the new order of things, starting from a detailed description of the new Temple which they are to build when they return to their land (Chs: 40-42), The prophet goes into many details about the building but when his instructions are studied closely it becomes clear that he is presenting an ideal and not a real blueprint for architects to use. The Temple is to be splendid and worthy of the Presence which it will symbolize. Though Ezekiel is clearly an organizer, he does not lose sight of the central truth; the most important aspect of the new order of things is the fact that the Lord will return to live among his People. In the next passage Ezekiel describes the vision of the " _glory_ ", which had left Jerusalem (11:22-25), returning to take possession of the new Temple.

Reading Ezekiel 43:1-9

Comment

Ezekiel sees " _the glory of the Lord fill the Temple_ " (vs 5), and hears a voice saying that this time the Lord will never again leave his People (vss 7,9). (See Matt 28:20.) In the words which follow it becomes clear that the Temple will occupy all of the eastern hill of Jerusalem; the palace of the king will no longer be joined to the Temple, but placed separately in another part of Jerusalem. The kings will no longer defile the living presence of the Lord with the burial places for the dead bones of kings. The kings will no longer have a place of honour alongside the Temple; that way, even if the future kings should turn to idolatry, they would not defile the Temple with their " _pillars_ " (idolatrous objects).

Scholars do not agree on the author of all the detailed rules and regulations in chapters 44-46; some accept them as all coming from Ezekiel himself, while others hold that many, if not most of the rules are from his disciples. Those who believe these verses to be written by disciples say that the regulations are too severe and cover material too trivial for a prophet such as Ezekiel; they believe that Ezekiel would not stoop to telling priests how to cut their hair, and not to wear wool (44:17-20). What is to be noticed is that in chapter 44 we are given various rules and regulations indicating a tendency which probably began with Ezekiel: a tendency towards detailed regulations, and a concern for ritual purity for priests. Ritual purity involved a variety of rules to be observed which would keep a person fit to be involved in the worship in the -Temple. Ritual impurity is not to be confused with sin. For example, if a priest touched a dead person not closely related to him (44:25), the priest would become impure, not fit to be part of official worship until a set time of purification had been observed. This rule seems to have had as its basis the conviction that the Lord, the living God, was not to be worshipped by persons who had had direct contact with death. (There may even have been a primitive form of concern for hygiene involved here: the priest as a public figure involved in sacrifices, many of which were to be eaten, should not have had contact with a dead person immediately before performing the liturgy.)

In our judgment the following points in chapters 44-46 probably reflect the teaching of the prophet Ezekiel:

1.Ezekiel was the first to clearly forbid the aliens (foreigners), who were circumcised neither in heart nor in body (44:7), from taking part in the official worship of the Temple. It is interesting that the prophet writes " _heart and body_ ". A foreigner who had come to believe in the Lord of Israel and had come to accept him from the heart, would therefore accept physical circumcision and become a member of the People of God. In 47:22 Ezekiel makes it clear that aliens who live among the People of God are to he considered members or citizens of Israel. As far as Ezekiel is concerned the distinction between alien and citizen is not based on blood alone, but on circumcision of heart and body.

2.The prince (king) is demoted to a position beneath that of the priests. Special regulations are given to limit the activity of the prince: he is to live separately from the Temple area (43:7-8). He is to have a special section of land given to him, which he is not to expand. This is in order to make sure that future princes do not oppress the People of God again (45:7-8). The prince is commanded to practice justice and integrity and never to crush my people with taxation again (45:9). The prince will have his own lands and will not depend on taxation of the People. The prince is given instructions on how he is to be involved in the worship, He is to have certain offerings made in his name on certain occasions; but he is clearly not to occupy the centre of the liturgy. It appears that he is to be counted as one of the People, coming in when the People do and going out when they do (46:10). In special cases the priests, not the prince, will decide judicial cases (44:24).

3.The priests who are descendants of Zadok (one of the priests appointed by David to serve in the Tent of the Ark, 2 Sam 8:17) are the only ones to be actually involved in the services of worship in the Temple. All the other former priests and Levites who served shrines outside Jerusalem are reduced to being simple workmen around the Temple (44:10-15).

The Book of Ezekiel gives further rules in chapters 44-46, but these do not concern us directly here. In 47:1-12, we return to what is clearly the writing of Ezekiel. Using water, the symbol of life, the prophet describes the meaning of the presence of the Lord in the Temple in Jerusalem: the Lord is the source of all life, and abundant life, for his People. You will recall how in the Yahwist's description of Eden the waters of all the rivers of creation flowed out of the garden (Gen 2:10-14). Ezekiel uses the same image of the Temple.

Reading Ezekiel 47:1-12

Comment

The Lord who will bring his People out of death into new life, will give them life in the fullest sense. The Lord is living water for his People (See John 4:1ff; 7:37f; Rev 7:16f; 22:17).

Ezekiel 47:13-48:29 gives an idealistic and completely unrealistic description of the new boundaries of the Twelve Tribes. Each is to have a portion of land running straight across the country from east to west (the Jordan to the Mediterranean), without regard for the contours of the land. It is hardly likely that this vision is to be taken at face value. What is probably meant is that each Tribe will have a clearly demarcated territory which is to be permanently respected by all the Tribes, with no Tribe attempting to take over the territory of another. Whatever the exact meaning, what is clear is that order, clear and indisputable order, is to reign in the country when it is renewed by the presence of the life-giving Lord.

The last verses of the Book of Ezekiel give us a description of the city of Jerusalem. Each of the twelve gates of the city is to be named after one of the twelve Tribes of the People. In this way the prophet makes clear that the city of Jerusalem is not the city of the king, the royal city, but the possession of each and every Tribe of the People.

Reading Ezekiel 48:30-35

Comment

The name of the city is to be _"the Lord is there_ " (vs 35). This is the most significant thing about Jerusalem — it is the city of the Lord's presence among his People. The image of the city as the dwelling place of God came into the life of the People when David brought the Ark into Jerusalem: it was confirmed by the building of the Temple. In the New Testament the city becomes an image of the People of God, the city built on the hilltop (Matt 5:14) and the image for the final arid complete triumph of the Lord, the new and eternal Jerusalem (Rev 21-22).

Summary

In this brief treatment of the message of Ezekiel we have seen how the prophet, like the prophets before him, foretold the punishment which the sins of the People were bound to bring upon them. He warned them of the final destruction of Jerusalem and tried to prepare them for the Exile. As in the case of the other prophets, these events in history were not a sign of the weakness of God, but of his supreme dominion over all history. The People had to accept these events and come to see that through them the Lord meant to bring about a new and more vital People.

More than anything else, however. Ezekiel will be remembered for his overwhelming sense of the greatness of the Lord. His vision of the " _glory_ " of the Lord dominates his book from beginning to end. The Lord is holy, beyond all imagining, and he rules the universe from above the waters above the heavens. He chooses to make himself present in a special way among his People. He is not anchored in the Temple; he can return to his place above all creation, he can move with his People into exile, he can return to the new Temple. He is free.

The Lord, however, is also committed. He is first of all committed to his own integrity; he must be true to himself. That is why he will save his People and renew the Covenant with them in a firm, permanent way. He will put a new heart in them, give them his own spirit, so that they will be one with him.

The result of this new union will be visible in the clear and beautiful new order in the life of the People of God when they return to their homeland. The Temple will once again be the place of his presence on earth. The land will yield its fruit, the People will be organized around the presence of the Lord in the Temple and all of life will reflect the order and beauty of the liturgy. The whole of life will be like an act of solemn worship.

## Chapter 14c Changes in the Life of the People in Exile

(This section of the chapter does not involve any new readings. We will make a number of observations on what was beginning to take place in the life of the People, without giving many details at this point. Most of the points made here will be referred to again in Chapter Sixteen.)

During the Exile the People were forced to live without a Temple, that is, without any official worship. For some fifty years they lived without the traditional sacrifices offered in the Temple. It seems that the exiles had come to accept the ruling of the Book of Deuteronomy, which king Josiah had put into effect, that no formal worship was to be offered outside of the Temple in Jerusalem. This meant that the exiles could not offer sacrifices in Babylonia; nor could they have sacrifices offered for them in Jerusalem until the Temple was rebuilt. it is difficult for us today to imagine how this must have affected the People. The Lord himself was making the traditional worship of him impossible. They were stripped of the only legitimate way of worship which they knew. Yet the prophets, such as Ezekiel, preached that the Lord was to be the centre of their lives. The People were forced into a situation where they could only keep the Lord at the centre of their lives by personal conversion to him in prayer and in obedience to those commands which still applied in exile. (The commands. to worship him with sacrifices, of course, could not be observed.)

Uprooted from their land and deprived of institutions such as kingship, which had given them national identity, the People had to focus on the other factors which gave them identity. Every people which is uprooted against its will, will search out and preserve everything about their past which can support their sense of being a distinct people. So it was with the People of God. During the Exile they sought out and preserved everything they could find of their traditions. They put into writing what was not yet in writing; they developed the materials which were not developed enough. Everything from traditional songs, stories and folklore to court histories, law codes and genealogies were collected. The People were beginning to seek their identity in their unique history, their history with the Lord. It is to many, many unknown persons of great devotion and talent who lived during the Exile that we owe the overall composition of the Pentateuch; to them we owe the preservation of much of the writings of the prophets, the final editing of much of the Books of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings. The People of God were beginning to rely on writing; this is a new, significant development.

The sense of their identity as God's own specially chosen People made them conscious that they were called to be different from the pagans around them. During the Exile they began to place more and more importance on the things which distinguished them from other peoples not specially chosen by God. It was inevitable that they should begin to stress separation from pagans by the use of external signs and practices. Circumcision of the males became a much more important sign of belonging to the Covenant People than it had ever been before. By this sign each male was permanently marked out as belonging to the Covenant People. Most probably it was during the Exile that stress began to he laid on clean and unclean foods. There is hardly a more effective way of keeping people from associating with others on a social level than regulations about foods which can or cannot be eaten. There was another, even more demanding observance which rose to prominence. during the Exile, the Sabbath. While the Sabbath rest was not new, it had not taken on as much importance as it did at this time. The rest on the seventh day, not observed by the Babylonians as far as we can determine, set the People of God apart from their pagan neighbours. The Sabbath would have been almost impossible to observe if the People had not enjoyed a certain independence in the Exile. It would appear that the Sabbath could be observed, possibly with some difficulty, or the prophet Ezekiel could not have insisted upon it as he appears to have done (Ezekiel 20:16-26). (It was during this time that the great Creation Hymn of Genesis 1, with its emphasis on the seventh day, reached its final form.)

The Exile saw the rise of the importance of the Law itself. The prophets had always insisted on the Law and the great sense of justice and brotherhood which it promoted. This Law had been broken again and again. Now in the time of purification the People began to take the Law much more seriously. The Ten Commandments and the various laws which regulated justice and the proper relationship among the People could all be observed in exile; only the laws on formal Temple worship had to be suspended until they had returned to their land and rebuilt the Temple.

The People could not help measuring themselves against this Law; and they could not help developing a great sense of what sin really was. The study of the Law, combined with the reverence which they only now began to give to the prophets, such as Jeremiah, made them see just how sinful and how guilty they had been. A great consciousness of sin and a deep sense of guilt began to be felt during the Exile. Prayers composed at this time reveal how profoundly the message of the prophets had touched many of the exiles (eg. Ps 78).

As was said at the beginning of this chapter, the exiles lived fairly close to each other. It seems they enjoyed considerable independence from the Babylonians. In the Book of Ezekiel we see that the exilic community was beginning to develop some sort of organization. We see " _elders_ " gathering around Ezekiel on many occasions (eg. 8:1). It would appear from the psalms, which were likely written during the Exile, that the People came together to pray, and possibly to study the Law or listen to the words of prophets, both living and dead. In a way the People of God were beginning to discover that God could be worshipped in new ways, ways which did not involve the Temple. While it cannot be proven, it would appear that the roots of the synagogue go back to the experience of the Exile. Both in its organization and in its type of non-temple worship, the exilic community was laying the foundations for communities of the People of God who would eventually find it possible to live outside the Promised Land as true members of the Covenant.

Conclusion

There were other things going on during the Exile. Other problems were being raised, some for the first time: Do other gods really exist? Can the suffering of the exiles be completely explained by punishment and purification? What is the relationship which the People should have to the pagan nations? Is it enough to say that the People are called to be different from the pagans and to separate themselves from them? There were other pastoral issues also, which had to be attended to: What of the great feeling of depression which so many felt? What of those who were being tempted to abandon their faith and slip into Babylonian life? What of the weariness, the plain fatigue of the People as they waited and waited for fifty years for the Lord to rescue them?

During the Exile the Lord raised up another great prophet, one whose name we do not even know. This great prophet, whom we call Second Isaiah, rose to answer these and other questions. We turn to his word (Isa 40-55) in the next Chapter.

## Appendix 5 -Some Discoveries Affecting OT Studies

_Mesopotamia._ ln the last hundred years or so a very large number of excavations have uncovered cities, innumerable objects and valuable texts. Some of these texts (eg. **Enuma** **Elish** **and** **The** **Epic** **of** **Gilgamesh** ) throw much light on our understanding of Genesis 1-11, especially the Flood. The law codes that were discovered (eg. Code of Hammurabi, 1728-1686 BC) help us understand better the background of the Law in the Pentateuch. The ancient languages in which these texts are written help scholars to understand biblical Hebrew.

ln two campaigns between 1933 and 1954 at Mari, on the middle Euphrates, important discoveries were made. The royal archives yielded some 20,000 written clay tablets, bringing to light much that was previously unknown about the 3rd and 2nd millenium in the near east. These discoveries have helped us understand the stories of the patriarchs in the Book of Genesis.

_Egypt._ The Rosetta Stone (a stone slab with the same text carved in two Egyptian scripts and in Greek) was discovered in 1799 and deciphered in 1822. The wealth of Egyptian written material began to be translated. This has made an understanding of Egypt's history and culture possible and has opened up a new source for understanding Israel's history, which was so influenced by Egypt. Some Egyptian texts relate directly to material in the Bible (eg. Wisdom of Amen-em-Ope and the Book of Proverbs).

_Northern_ _Syria_ (Ras Shamra). An accidental discovery by a farmer in 1928, followed by extensive excavations, brought a major city (Ugarit) to light. Many objects and hundreds of texts were found in a temple library. These texts (c. 15th century BC) offer innumerable insights into Canaanite religion and into customs reflected in the stories of the patriarchs in Gen. 12-50. The language now called Ugaritic is closely related to Hebrew; scholars use it to probe many difficult Hebrew texts in the Bible.

_Boghazkoy,_ east of Ankara, Turkey, was the site of the ancient capital of the Hittites, a people often mentioned in the Bible. Weil over 10,000 clay tablets, written in Akkadian and Hittite were found in the excavations which began in 1906. They belong to the 2nd millennium, BC. Deciphering began in 1915. These texts and other Hittite documents shed light on the patriarchs in Genesis. Hittite treaty texts have led to a better understanding of the notion of Covenant in the OT.

_Qumran._ Beginning in 1947, caves near the northwest shore of the Dead Sea have yielded manuscripts and countless fragments; parts of most of the books of the Hebrew Bible are represented. These manuscripts, dating between 150 BC and 70 A.D., are about 1,000 years older than the Hebrew manuscripts used till now to establish the Hebrew text of the Bible. The Qumran manuscripts agree, for the most part, with the later manuscripts, thus confirming the accuracy of the transmission of Hebrew manuscripts. (The Qumran discoveries relate more to the New Testament and will be referred to in the New Testament course.)

_Ebla._ Excavations (1964-1975) between Hama and Aleppo in Syria have uncovered the city of Ebla. The royal archives were found. They date between 2400-2500 BC and consist of over 15,000 clay tablets. it is too early to assess these discoveries, but the first studies of these materials show that they will figure highly in OT studies in the future.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 15 Prophets in Exile (2)

**Introduction**

_Chapters 40 to 55 of the Book of Isaiah_ , because they are part of the collection of writings under the name of Isaiah (Isa 1:1), were considered for many centuries to have been written by the prophet Isaiah, son of Amoz, who worked in Jerusalem between 740 and 690 BC. Some 800 years ago a rabbi called Ibn Ezra doubted that Isaiah of Jerusalem could have written these chapters. In the last hundred years or so, after very careful word by word studies of Isaiah 40 to 55, scholars have come to the firm conclusion that these chapters were not written by Isaiah the prophet of Jerusalem in the eighth century. As you study these chapters, you will notice that the author is in the Exile, knows about Babylon, about Cyrus the Persian and that this author has a style, a vocabulary and a message which is very different from Isaiah. There is every sign that the writer of chapters 40 to 55 of the Book of Isaiah wrote between 550 and 530 BC, some two hundred years after Isaiah of Jerusalem. Yet there are resemblances between this author and Isaiah. It would seem that he is a disciple of the first Isaiah, writing many generations later under the influence of the great prophet.

If it was not Isaiah, son of Amoz, of Jerusalem, who then wrote these chapters? No one knows who gave us these extraordinarily fine poems. No name is given anywhere. For lack of anything better, the author is usually called Second or Deutero Isaiah (Deutero=Second), because his writings are found in the second major section of the Book of Isaiah. The prophet who wrote these poems was probably a man, though the many feminine insights and expressions found in the prophecies make it possible that it was a woman.

We have no convincing explanations for the fact that the prophet's name is not pre-served. It is possible that this prophet was a writer who wrote poetry for the religious meetings which took place in exile. It is also possible that this prophet had a very small following, never became famous throughout the community in exile, and that the prophecies were preserved without the name of the author. Some scholars have proposed that chapters 40 to 55 are not the work of one but of many authors representing a minority movement among the exiles. In this chapter we take the position that chapters 40 to 55 were written by one author; only a few short sections will be credited to other writers.

In this chapter we also take the position that chapters 40 to 55 of Isaiah form two sections: section one, 40-48; section two, 49-55. The first section was written sometime between 550 and 540 BC. The second section we will maintain was written after 539. This will be explained more fully in the commentary. We want you to know, however, that some scholars hold very different positions: some claim that there is no clear order of any kind in these chapters; others hold that there is a clear organization of material. We take a sort of middle position, holding that the poems fall into two main sections as indicated above, and that beyond that no clear, convincing order can be found in the material.

Putting aside all the questions which still do not have completely satisfactory answers, one thing is certain: chapters 40 to 55 contain some of the greatest writing to be found in the Bible. Great poetry always produces a sense of wonder; it can be read again and again and each reading will reveal something new, something deeper. In the original Hebrew, the poetry of Second-isaiah is extraordinarily beautiful; the sounds, the rhythms, the flow of thoughts create a mood and convey ideas in the manner of master poets. Even when it is translated into modern languages the beauty and warmth of Second-Isaiah comes through.

## Chapter 15a I Am Doing a New Deed (Chs 40-48)

What was happening in the Exile around 550 BC when, according to the position we have taken, Second-Isaiah began to prophesy? We saw in the previous chapter what was beginning to happen in the time of Ezekiel (See Chapter 14, p3'4). The teachings of Jeremiah and of Ezekiel had been accepted by many of the exiles. They came to understand that the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple and the Exile itself had been brought about as a result of the sinfulness of the People. Both Jeremiah and Ezekiel had foretold these terrible events and these events had come upon them just as the prophets had said. These same prophets, however, had also said that the Lord would take them back to Jerusalem and Judah once again, the Temple would be rebuilt and a time of peace would come to them. Jeremiah had said that the Lord held a future full of hope far them (Jer 29:11). Now ten, twenty, thirty and even forty long, long years had gone by and nothing seemed to be happening; they were still in exile, with no sign of any change.

Those who still had faith found their faith to be wavering, their hopes growing dark. They felt broken, bent, dried up. Mostly they were tired, weary, exhausted from the struggle to keep faith, obey the Law and believe in the promises that the Lord had made through the prophets. What is worse, they felt that they had all been labelled as condemned criminals by their God. The Exile was punishment for sin, and even though many of them had had no part in the sins which brought about the Exile, they still suffered from the pain of it. Why?

The exiles had been obliged to follow the instructions of Jeremiah, " _Build houses, settle down_ "Jer 29:5ff). They had settled down; they had become part of the life of the Babylonian empire. Many had settled down so well that they had all but melted into the society in which they lived; and some of these had probably even stopped hoping for a return to Jerusalem. Some, it appears, lost their faith, drifted away from the community of the People of God in exile and were absorbed into Babylonian society. Others may not have lost their faith completely, but were seriously tempted to include the gods of the powerful Babylonians in their worship. It is to all these people that Second-Isaiah addresses the word of the Lord.

Comfort, Comfort My People (Ch 40:1-31)

The first poem (Isa 40:1-11) serves as an introduction to chapters 40 to 55. It sets the tone for all the prophecies which follow and, in a very indirect way, introduces the prophet by making a subtle reference to his calling (vs 6). God is speaking to his messengers, giving them instructions concerning the message he wants his People to receive (vs 1). Though it is not clear in English translations, the command in vs 1 is in the plural: 'Ye (messengers) console, console my people'. In Hebrew when a command repeats the main verb (console, console) it has a sense of urgency about it The word translated as " _console_ " or " _comfort_ " has the root meaning of regaining one's breath. God is asking his messengers to give his People a message which will revive them, cause them to breathe a deep sigh of relief. Also, the word comfort or console has the sense of help or even rescue. Verse 1 could be loosely translated: 'Help my people, help them before it is too late. Give them reason to breathe again'.

Reading Isaiah 40:1-11

Note: Jerusalem (Zion) stands for the whole People of God.

Commentary

The poem is in five stanzas which are connected to each other by the theme of the word of God which is to be given to his People: speak, cry out, shout.

Vss 1-2: " _Speak to the heart"_ \- means to speak tenderly, in the way parents speak to a suffering child. The Lord knows that his People are in dire. need of being held firmly, of being assured that the time of punishment is over, finished; the time of feeling guilty has passed. The expression " _double punishment_ "does not mean that the Lord has punished too severely, but is an emphatic way of saying that the sins of the past have definitely been atoned for and there is no need to look backwards at these sins again. It is now time to look forward, look ahead and to be ready to see what the Lord is even now beginning to do for his People.

Vss 3-5: " _A voice cries_." it is not made clear whose voice this is; it could be a heavenly messenger, a prophet or even the Lord himself. " _Prepare a way in the wilderness for the Lord_." If you drew a straight line from Babylon to Jerusalem, the line would cross miles of desert and wilderness. The message of consolation to be given to the People is that the Lord is about to bring his People home, straightaway. He is commanding that a highway, straight and level, be made between Babylon and Jerusalem, right through the desert. This highway will be the road on which the Lord will make his glory known to all mankind. (This, of course, is poetry. The Lord is not commanding a construction project.) At the beginning of their history as his People, God had looked upon the misery and hopelessness of the group of slaves in Egypt. His first act for them was to make a highway through the waters of the sea (Exod 1 4). Now when his People are once again on the point of being wiped out by hopelessness, the Lord is about to open a new way out of their desperate situation. The first was through water; this second will be through the desert.

Vss 6-8: The third stanza begins like the second: " _a voice-, unidentified, gives the order to "Cry out_ ". Another voice answers, " _Cry what_?" This second voice is probably the prophet himself. This is the closest we will come to a direct reference to the prophet. It is most telling that the only time the prophet refers to himself he speaks words which show that he shares exactly the feeling of despair which his community has. It is as though the prophet were saying, " _What is the use of crying out? What is there to preach? We are like blades of grass, blasted and withered by the hot, sand-laden winds of summer, winds which God himself has breathed on us. Why not just leave us alone to die in the despair to which we have become accustomed? Don't hurt us with hope_." Without denying the depressed state of the People, or their sense of being insignificant, the prophet is given the one and only reason for hope: the People may be like dying flowers, but " _the word of our God remains forever_ ".

Moses had received the word of God (Exod 3:7-12); God had said that he would save his People out of Egypt, and that is what he had done. The prophets, such as Jeremiah and Ezekiel, had also received the word of God; God had said through them that disasters were about to take place and they had taken place. The Word of God is strong, it does what it says, it stands firm. Now a new word of God must be proclaimed.

Vs 9: The messenger is told to announce this new word to the whole world from the top of a high mountain. The message is joyful, good news for all the People. The core of the message is: _"Here is your God_ ".

Vss 1O-11: In language which suggests the triumphal marches of the Babylonian armies with their gods going in procession down the great Babylonian highways, the Lord is said to be even now preparing to carry his People home triumphantly, like a shepherd carrying his wounded sheep. The People need to be told that the Lord wants to hold them firmly to his breast and to carry them home again.

In the passage which follows this opening poem (40:12-26), the attention of the People is directed away from their own sense of being small and worthless. The only reason for their having any hope at all is that the Lord is not small and powerless: he is the all-powerful creator, the one who can hold all the waters of the earth in the hollow of his hand. To him the whole world and all its peoples are as specks of dust. Empires such as that of the Babylonians, he can topple in a minute. The Babylonian empire, not his People, can be reduced to nothing, like grass turned to drifting straw (40:23-24). The maker of the heavens and all its stars is in command of creation and of history, and, he is the Lord who now commands history for the sake of his People.

The next short poem has the Lord speaking tenderly to his People, It is important for the People to realize that the Lord knows how they really feel. When the Lord first spoke to Moses, he let Moses know that he heard the cry of his People in Egypt and that he felt their misery (Exod 3:7ff). In this poem God is not scolding, but comforting his People.

Reading Isaiah 40:27-31

Comment

The Lord knows the thoughts and feelings that have been afflicting his People like a sickness, weakening them, sapping their strength. The People feel ignored, abandoned by their God. The Lord's own strength, his own vigour will be given to his People the moment they begin to hone in him again. From the moment they grasp that their Lord

My Chosen One (Chs 41-42)

Around the year 550 BC events were taking place hundreds of miles away from which were to change the course of history for the People of God and for all the of the middle east. A leader was emerging who was beginning to conquer kingdoms. Second-Isaiah had been given the foresight and insight to see in this the sign of God's salvation for his People. This new power from the east Persian. While Babylon was still strong, majestic and secure in her splendor the prophet announced that the end of Babylon was in view. This fact, the foretelling becomes the basis for one of the prophet's main arguments against the gods and all other gods. His argument is that only the true God is able to send messagers to foretell the future before it happens. If the true God can predict what is to ha future, this means that he is in control of history and not simply a clever forecaster the God who is roaster of the nations can both foretell and bring about what The false gods, the idols of Babylon and all other gods, never were able to future; only the Lord God of Israel ever did such a thing, because only he powerful Lord, the only one worthy of being called God.

The poem you are about to read takes the form of a trial between the Lord God, and the idols, the dumb gods of the pagans. This trial is taking place in full vie nations.

Reading Isaiah 41:1-5

Note: " _Them_ " in vs 1 refers to the idols, the gods of the nations. " _Islands_ " is a way of referring to nations and peoples all over the world.

Comment

After calling for silence in the court and challenging the idols to present their (something they cannot do, since they cannot speak), the Lord presents his a 5). It is the Lord who is now clearly saying, before the event, that he is calling of the east, giving him victory. after victory. It is because the Lord is the first a because he is in control of history from the first moment of creation to the  time, that he can send prophets to foretell what is to happen. (Note: Cyrus, the the east, is named explicitly in Chs 44 and 45. In 41:6-7 a later writer has added a sarcastic poem making fun of idols.)

The trial poem continues with the Lord turning from his questioning of the : idols to addressing his People. In the presence of the powerless idols he tells both who they really are and what is going to happen to them in the future.

In the days of Moses the Lord showed his love not only by saving them from the Egyptians tians, but by the fact that he called them to be his very own, his special possession wedded to himself and destined to be his partner in history. Even before the day the Lord had called Abraham to be his own, and had promised Abraham that through his descendants all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Gen 12:1-4). It is not enough to sympathize with those who are crushed; they need to be told convincingly that they are worth a great deal. The Lord here reminds his People of their dignity by giving them the noble titles which recall their history.

Reading Isaiah 41:8-16

Note: _''Worm" "louse_ ," " _mite_ " or even " _maggot_ " in vs 14 are words which attempt to translate difficult Hebrew expressions. Whatever the best translation might be, the words are not insulting, but consoling; God is letting the People know that he realizes just how small and ugly they feel.

Commentary

Vs 8: " _My servant . . my chosen . my friend_." A servant in ancient times was not simply one who was owned by his master and owed obedience to him. While he was duty bound to serve his lord, the servant also enjoyed the security offered him by his master and shared in the glory of his master. The principal servant in a household was entrusted with all of his master's family and possessions (eg. Gen 24:2) The word servant also has a more subtle meaning: he is the one whom his master needs, the one on whom he depends. When the servant's master is the Lord God himself, the role of servant is one of great honour. The People are being told in this text that they are needed by the Lord to be his servant in much the same way as Abraham (eg. Gen 26:24), Moses (eg. Num 12:7) and David (2 Sam 7:8) were the Lord's specially chosen servants. In spite of all their feelings of inferiority, the People are needed by the Lord and called to share the dignity of his great servants.

Vss 9-16: _"Do not be afraid, for I am with you_." The People are not to be fearful of the task that is to be asked of them. Puny and small as they may feel, the Lord is with them and assures them of victory in much the same way as he told them not to be afraid on the night before the Exodus took place (Exod 14:13f). The new Egyptians (the Babylonians) will fall as surely as the old ones did, because the Lord is holding his People by the hand and their enemies will simply be blown away in the wind. (In vs 14 the prophet introduces a new and powerful expression, " _your redeemer_ ". He will use it again and again. We shall explain the expression later in connection with Ch 43.)

There follows a short poem (41:17-20) which describes in marvellous poetic terms the glory of the return from the Exile. The poor and needy exiles will receive all that they need for their journey home. It will be as though the desert were to burst into orchards and cool forests, filled with running streams. After this little poem the prophet returns to the trial scene with which this poem began (41:1). The Lord challenges the idols (" _them_ ," 41:22): did any of them foretell the future as he just did?

Reading Isaiah 41:21-29

Comment

The Lord repeats the promise that he is even now calling Cyrus to do his will (vs 25). The gods of Babylon never did and never would predict such a thing; they are nothings, mere wind and emptiness (vs 29). They are incapable of seeing into the future because they have no power in the lives of men. To say that they are powerless is to say, in our words, they do not exist.

Note: We now come to the first of four poems which are often called "The Servant Songs" in Second-Isaiah. The first is found in 42:1-4: the second in 49:1-6; the third in 50:4-9; the fourth in 52:13 - 53:12. Mystery surrounds these poems and no explanation is perfect except the one which Jesus brings to them. We shall deal with each poem as it appears in Second-Isaiah. A summary will be given in the conclusion to the chapter. Of the many possible interpretations of the Servant Songs, we have chosen a basically traditional one.

In the next passage (42:1-4) the Lord presents his servant. t is not clear to whom the Lord is speaking; it could be that he is addressing his People, or the gods of the nations as in the preceding poem (41:21-29), or even his heavenly court.

Reading Isaiah 42:1-4

Commentary

_"Behold my servant whom uphold_ " (vs 1). In saying " _behold_ ", the Lord is making an act of presenting his servant: _'Here is my real servant, the one I support, uphold with my strength'_. This suggests the act of enthroning a king (See Ps 2:6-7). This servant is the one whom the Lord has chosen. No explanation of the choice is given, except that the Lord says he is pleased with this servant. In 41:8 the People were called the Lord's servant and his chosen one.

_"Upon whom I have put my spirit_ " (vs 1) To receive the spirit of the Lord is to be given a special role to carry out for the Lord. Moses, the Judges, kings, prophets and the ideal ruler to come, all are said to receive the spirit of the Lord (Num 11:17; Judg 6:34; 1 Sam 16:13ff; Ezek 2:2; Isa. 11:1). It should be remembered here that in Second-Isaiah the People are called God's servant, his chosen one, and receive the promise of God's spirit (44:1-3).

" _That he may bring true justice to the nations_ " (vs 1). This is clearly the main function of the servant in this poem; the word translated as " _justice_ " occurs three times in these four verses. To bring about justice is to bring the judgment of the Lord to people; it is a legal function usually given to kings. Here, however, the function of bringing the Lord's justice goes far beyond anything ever given to kings: justice is to be brought to the whole world (" _the nations_ ", " _the earth_ ", " _the islands_ ").

" _He does not cry out or shout aloud . . ."_ (vs 2). The way in which the servant will bring God's justice to the world is very different from the way in which kings usually functioned; no loud announcements by kingly messengers declaring the judgments of the king. Prophets were called to make themselves heard and often shouted and cried out in public. The servant is not the usual type of prophet either; his work is to be done humbly, quietly.

_"He does not break the bruised reed_ . (vs 3). The servant will care for the weak, those on the breaking point of life. Gentleness will characterize the servant of the Lord. From what we have seen so far of the attitudes of Second-Isaiah, we would have to say that he surely is one who is gentle, very sensitive to the bruised and quivering state of his people in exile. The servant will be like our unnamed prophet of these chapters. We should also remember Moses, the humblest of God's servants (Nom 12:3-8), who gave himself no end of trouble caring for his weak and bumbling people. Moses always pleaded for the life of his people (Num -11:10-15, for example),

" _He will not waver, nor be crushed until_ . ." (vs L1). While he will he gentle and humble, the servant will also have the strength to carry out his task without wavering, or being suppressed. If we did not have the other three Servant Songs, we would not be able to suggest that the word " _until_ " might have a deeper, more threatening meaning. The other poems bring out the suffering and even the death of the servant. In the light of these other poems we can suggest that this verse is saying the servant will not be crushed until (before) he has accomplished his task.

" _The islands are waiting for his law_ " (vs 4). The word law here is torah, which means instruction in the proper way of life according to the will of the Lord. Giving the torah was a duty given to priests (Jer 2:8; 18:18), but it could also be done by prophets (eg. Zechariah 7:12). One servant of God stands above all others as the giver of the torah (Law), that is Moses. The -islands- stand for the nations, the peoples of the earth, especially those far away. The word which is translated as " _waiting_ " or " _awaiting_ " has the sense of striving, struggling anxiously to be rescued; it does not mean that the nations are sitting back calmly waiting, but yearning, longing for the instruction which the servant will bring.

If we were to search out the sources of inspiration which led Second-Isaiah to write this poem on the servant of the Lord, we probably would not have to search much beyond two special people in the history of the People of God. The first is Moses, who is called the servant of the Lord more often than anyone (eg. Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8; Deut 34:5; Josh 1:1 and throughout the Book of Joshua), and David who receives the title almost as often as Moses (eg. 2 Sam 7, throughout; Ps 89:3, 19-20; Ps 78:70; Ps 132:10; Ezek 34:23). It is true that many others occasionally receive the title " _servant of the Lord''_ , but no other receive it with the frequency and consistency of Moses and David. The first Servant Song seems to combine the functions of David and Moses justice and proclamation of the Law. The difference lies in the fact that while Moses and David worked for the People of God, the servant in this first song will bring justice and Law to all peoples.

A short poem follows the first Servant Song (42:5-9) which seems to be a kind of commentary on the servant. There are many questions about this little prophecy which simply cannot be answered with certitude. We take the position that this poem is about the mysterious servant.

Reading Isaiah 42:5-9

Commentary

The poem begins with another reference to the power of God the creator of all things, the One who gives breath (spirit) to all things living (vs 5). It concludes with a statement denying any honour to be given to mere idols, repeating the position already considered that only the Lord can foretell events because he alone can bring them about (vss 8-9). The middle section of the poem (vss 6-7) speaks of the servant and adds to what was said in the first Servant Song.

_"I have called you . taken you by the hand . formed you_ " (vs 6). These words are very similar to those spoken to the People in 41:8-10, It would seers that the servant is. identified with the People here: they were called by God, taken by the hand and formed in the Exodus and the Covenant.

_"I set you as a covenant of the people and a light to the nations_ " (vs. 6), This phrase is difficult to interpret because the Hebrew is not clear. An acceptable interpretation is that the servant is called to bring to the nations the salvation (light) which the People of God received in their Covenant with the Lord. The servant, then, would he given the mission to bring all nations into the scope of the Covenant.

_"To open the eyes of the blind free captives ._ ." (vs 7) The Covenant, with its good laws and its noble goal of bringing about a brotherly society, when extended to the whole of the human race would bring about great good. People would begin to see, to enjoy true freedom; oppression would cease. To sum up, this addition to the first Servant Song identifies the servant with the People, and gives to them the mission of bringing God's Covenant to all peoples, shedding light and creating freedom.

Second-Isaiah then has a short hymn on the triumph of the Lord (42:10-17). God, like a victorious warrior, will bring his People home. He is described as having had to struggle with himself to resist doing this sooner, but now that the time has come, nothing can prevent it from happening,

Reading Isaiah 42:18-25

Comment

It is clear that the servant is the People, Israel. The Lord complains that even though they are his servant, they are blind and deaf (See Isa 6:9-10). There are still a large number among God's People who do not understand what happened to them in the terrible events that brought them into exile. There are still those who explain everything away as though the Lord had had nothing to do with the fall of Jerusalem and the victory of Babylon: flames enveloped them, but they did not notice (vs 25).

If they still do not see what happened in the past, chances are they will not see what is about to happen in the future. If they cannot see the hand of God in the past events, then, when the time of liberation from exile comes. they will probably explain that away too as coincidence, or, worse still, as the work of forces other than the Lord's, such as the gods of the pagans.

What should be noticed in what we have seen of Israel as the servant so far is that while the whole People were called " _servant_ " (41:8), and the whole People were called to a mission to bring light to the nations, still not every member of the People was fit to be called the servant of the Lord. Many were blind, many were deaf. Nevertheless, there must have been some, such as Second-Isaiah and his followers, who did see and who could hear both what the Lord had done and was about to do. These would certainly qualify as the servant of the Lord, the " _remnant_ " among the People. The servant is spoken of in both an idealistic and a realistic way: ideally, the servant is the People as they are chosen by God and pleasing to him; realistically, the servant is the People insofar as they are not all open to the new directions the Lord wants them to take - they are deaf and blind. At their best, the People are the chosen servant pleasing to the Lord; at their worst, they are deaf and blind servants.

Your Redeemer (Chs 43-44)

We come now to possibly the most beautiful of the prophets poems. The Lord speaks to his People as though they were a single individual standing before him; the language is personal, intimate, affectionate. The oracle begins with a reminder to the People that they were created, formed by the Lord himself, a reference to his actions in history from Abraham to the present (vs 1). The Lord is very conscious of the fear that his People are feeling, and the sense of worthlessness that is weakening and depressing them.

Reading Isaiah 43:1-7

I have redeemed you (vs 1). The Lord is frequently called " _your redeemer_ " in these chapters. This is a new title given to the Lord by Second-Isaiah, and it is a rather daring one. Redeemer translates a Hebrew word (goel) which means a blood relative, a member of one's own clan or family, who has the duty to come to the rescue of any blood relative of his who is in trouble. God is part of the family, bonded to his People by a tie at blood which cart never be denied or overlooked. In the Law the kinsman (redeemer) was expected to ransom a close relative who had become a slave (Lev 25:47-49) and to restore the land of a relative who had lost it (Lev 25:231). A redeemer also had the duty to marry his brother's widow if his brother had not had a child from her (Dent 2,5:5-10). There is still another meaning to the word redeemer (goel) and that is 'the one who has the duty to avenge the murder of a relative'; but this meaning is not used by the prophet. In this poem the emphasis is on the close bond between the Lord and his People; a bond that is at least as strong as family ties. have called you by your name," _you are mine_ " (vs 1). The relationship between the Lord and the People is not a general or impersonal one. The Lord is not simply a relative who more or less willingly does his duty; he is the redeemer who knows and calls out the name of his relative, and is happy to say, " _you are mine_ ".

_"Should you pass through the sea . . . through fire_ (vs 2). Whether the problem that threatens his People is the sea, or the burning desert, the Lord will be the constant, protective kinsman watching over his own family.

" _I give Egypt for your ransom_ . (vs 3). The Lord is not about to give Egypt away to any other party in order to save his People. This is a figure of speech to say that his People are worth more to him even than Egypt in all its greatness - that is, Egypt as it once was, stretching from the Mediterranean to the Sudan. In all their sense of smallness, the Lord considers his People to be great.

" _You_ _are precious in my eyes . . you are honoured and love you_ " (vs 4). This expresses as simply and as personally as possible what is meant by the abstract term " _election_ ". The Lord is more than just a kinsman duty-bound to save his relative. The Lord has freely chosen this People, chosen them above all other nations. It was not because they were a great people, intelligent, virtuous, strong; it was simply because he loved them that he chose them, and love cannot be explained. (See Deut 7:6-7.)

In vss 5-7 the Lord assures them that he is with them and they should have no fear of what is to come. He will call his children from wherever they have been exiled. He refers to his People now as a father refers to his children - " _those who bear my name_ ". The personal touch of the prophet can be seen in the fact that he refers to both " _sons"_ and " _daughters_ " of the Lord.

There follows another poem using the setting of a trial (43:8-13). The Lord calls his People, blind and deaf as they might be, to act as his witnesses in the presence of all the nations. His People should know and understand him, since he is no stranger to them. The poem emphasizes the divine name YHWH. (Yahweh, He Is, taken from " _I am the One Who Is_ ". See Chapter 3, pp 8-9. This usage of " _I am_ " and " _I am he_ " is reflected in John's Gospel, eg. John 8:58.)

After a short oracle on the fall of Babylon, the prophet gives us another poem on the new Exodus which is about to take place.

Reading Isaiah 43:16-21

Comment

To the exiles who had become accustomed to thinking that God only acted in the past, the Lord says, " _do not recall the past . I am now doing a new deed_ " (vss 18f). The first Exodus was a great event, but this new one will be even greater.

There must have been some among the exiles who could not believe that God had found his People so sinful while they were still in Jerusalem and worshipping him in the Temple. They seem to be saying: "God had no reason to condemn us. After all. we offered fine, elaborate worship to him - and at great expense to ourselves. We did not mind the burden that worship placed on us. Why was the Lord not satisfied with us?" In words which echo Amos, Isaiah and Jeremiah, the prophet answers these complaints.

Reading Isaiah 43:22-28

Comment

Whatever sacrifices and rituals they had offered in the Temple in Jerusalem, the Lord denies that these had been offered to him. Second-Isaiah is saying what the first Isaiah had said in the name of the Lord, " _I am sick of holocausts . . they lie heavy on me_ " (Isa 1:11ff). Second-Isaiah quotes the Lord as saying that he never imposed these rituals on his People (vs 23). Both Amos (5:21) and Jeremiah (7:21f) had dared to suggest the same thing, calling the whole sacrificial system into question.

In contrast to Ezekiel, for whom the Temple and its liturgy are very important, Second-Isaiah has no time for Temple and liturgy. Only once does the word Temple occur in chapters 40-55 and it appears to be an addition by a later writer (44:28cd, compare 44:26), For Second-Isaiah any talk of Temple and formal worship would be a distraction; it would be recalling the old. }saving little or no room for the new, and it was the new which mattered for Second-Isaiah.

The next prophecy gives us a subtle example of the " _new_ " to which the prophet wishes to draw the People's attention. After repeating that Jacob is God's special People, and after reminding them of the great future he has in store for them (44:1-4), the prophet says that the day will come when non-Israelites (gentiles) will enter the People of God (44:5).

Reading Isaiah 44:1-5

Note: " _Jeshurun_ " in vs 2 probably is a title of honour or an affectionate name for the People. It is sometimes translated "darling-.

Comment

The future is full of newness: it will not simply he a restoration of the coast. One of the great new events in the future will be the entry of persons not horn Israelites into the People of God. Those who are members of the People of God already belong to the Lord (43:1, " _you are mine_ "); they already have Jacob's name. Non-Israelites will take pride in saying " _I belong to the Lord_ ", or " _l am son of Jacob, Israel_ ".

Just at a time when, partly under the influence of Ezekiel, the exiles were cutting them-selves off from the gentiles. Second-Isaiah asks them to be open to the entry of gentiles into their community.

The rest of chapter 44 contains various poems by the prophet and a section of prose which probably was not written by Second-Isaiah (44:9-20). The poems by Second-Isaiah (44:6-8, 21-23, 24-28) repeat themes which have already been considered in this chapter. What you should note, however, is that in 44:28 Cyrus the Persian is mentioned by name for the first time and he is given a name which had been reserved to kings, such as David, in the past; he is called -My shepherd'

Cyrus, the Beloved (Chs 45.48)

During the reign of Nebuchadnezzar (604-562), Babylonia was at ts peak of power and prestige, ruling over a vast empire. After him came a succession of weaker kings, ending with Nabonidus (556-539). This last king seemed to lack any sound political sense. One of the most serious mistakes he made was to attempt to promote the worship of the moon-god Sin in preference to the old and well-established worship of Marduk, the great god of the city of Babylon. This alienated the support of the priests of Marduk, a very powerful group in Babylon. Division weakened the ruling class of the empire.

While this was happening in the Babylonian empire, a new force was making itself felt; Cyrus, the king of Anshan (in southern Iran), was overcoming rival kings. Between 550 and 544 BC Cyrus had conquered the principal kingdoms that stood in his way of the conquest of Babylon itself. Some of the ruling classes of Babylon, led by the priests of Marduk, were in favour of Cyrus and against their own king Nabonidus. According to documents of the period, a Babylonian army general actually defected to the side of Cyrus and defeated troops of his own countrymen. Babylon was falling apart at the seams and Cyrus was on hand to pick up the pieces.

The prophet (Second-Isaiah) was carefully observing these events. From the first stirrings of Cyrus, he saw in him the conqueror who would bring down Babylon and free the People of God. It is not possible for us to know whether Cyrus had already given signs of being a very new kind of world ruler. From the information available to us, it would appear that prior to his conquest of Babylon he had been behaving very much as other conquerors did - fighting battles, grasping for himself the treasures of other kings. Second-Isaiah, however, saw in Cyrus a new type of conqueror, one who would not crush the conquered, but would actually treat them fairly.

In the next prophecy Second-Isaiah has the Lord speaking to Cyrus. This extraordinary oracle shocked many among the People.

Reading Isaiah 45:1-6

Comment

In the previous oracle the Lord had given Cyrus the exalted title which David had received: " _My shepherd_ " (44:28; 2 Sam 7). Now as though to underline the point more clearly. Cyrus is called the Lord's " _anointed_ " (45:1). In a later poem Cyrus is called the beloved of the Lord _("the Lord loves him_ " 48:14). Second-Isaiah also dares to use language of Cyrus which he once used to express the very special relationship between the Lord and his People: _'held by the hand'_ (45:1 of Cyrus; 42:6 of the People), _'called by name'_ (45:3 of Cyrus; 43:1 of the People). Cyrus is not a member of the People, he does not even know the Lord (45:4-5), and yet he is called the Lord's anointed!

It was, as tar as we can tell, during the Exile that the Book of Deuteronomy was finished This book, with its strong condemnations of all gentiles (Canaanites, and the like. Deut 7:1-6), was probably lending support to the movement, already seen in Ezekiel, to separate the People from the gentiles. Circumcision, the Sabbath observance, clean and unclean foods, all supported the separation of the People from their pagan neighbours. It was bad enough that Second-Isaiah was saying that the Lord wanted the gentiles to come into the People of the Covenant, but now he was going even more strongly against the grain by saying that the Lord was actually going to use a pagan, an uncircumcised gentile, who knew nothing of the Lord or his Law, to save them. Were there no Israelites worthy of being the Lord's instrument of salvation? Were there no "new David's" to fight against the Babylonians and liberate the People? Many of those who heard the prophecy concerning Cyrus were insulted and hurt by it. They made their protest known. Second-Isaiah wrote the following poem in answer to their indignant rejection of the Cyrus oracle.

Reading Isaiah 45:9-13

Comment

Vss 9-10 restate the protest of the People. In the opinion of Second-Isaiah they had been daring to question God's wisdom: " _What are you making_?" The very idea of God using this gentile to save them was disgusting. The People are like pots doubting the work of the potter; like children questioning the life given them by their parents. The Lord simply restates what he is doing with Cyrus (vss 11-13), giving no explanation for his actions.

This poem is followed by four short statements which have no special connection with each other (45:14-17). The first (vs 1 4) is probably by the author of Isaiah 60: the gentiles are pictured as submitting themselves to the People of God. The second, a difficult phrase to translate, expresses a thought near to the heart of Second-Isaiah: " _Truly, God is a hidden God among you"_ (vs 15). While the ways of the Lord should be clear, especially when he sends prophets to make his ways known to the People, the People cannot really understand. The Lord remains a mystery and his ways (eg. with Cyrus) are beyond human understanding. And yet this same Lord is -the God of Israel, the saviour- (vs 15). That he is their saviour should certainly be clear; how he goes about saving them will probably always remain a mystery to his People (See 55:8f).

For people who insist that all things should be clear and understandable, mystery is con-fusion. To those who want everything to be understandable in terms of old, familiar ideas, new things are chaotic nonsense. Through Second-Isaiah the Lord is making new things known as clearly as possible, but the People hear them as confusing nonsense, chaos.

Reading Isaiah 45:18-19

Comment

Creation had begun with chaos but had ended with order and rest (Gen 1), a place for humans to live in peace. God does not want his People to live in chaos (confusion); that is why he speaks clearly through his prophets (vs 19). (The same point is made in 48:16.) if God's plan to save his People through a pagan causes confusion and chaos among his People, it is because they refuse to listen to the clear message of the prophets. It is because the People refuse to allow the new revelation to be truly new, but rather want the new to fit into their old ways of thinking.

Second-Isaiah pushes still further in the next oracle (45:20-24). Here the Lord calls all the pagans together, including the Babylonians, we must suppose. He challenges them to prove the worth of their worship of idols. The reason that the Lord argues with the pagans is not simply to prove them wrong, but to lead them to acknowledge him.

Reading Isaiah 45:20-24

Comment

The Lord invites " _the ends of the earth_ " to turn to him (vs 22) and declares that the day will come when " _every knee shall bend_ " to him; " _every tongue confess'_. that he alone is truly the Lord, powerful to save. The nations will turn to the Lord; the Lord will he their God (See Phil 2:10-11).

To further underline the futility of the worship of idols, the prophet pictures the defeated Babylonians packing their gods (idols) and loading them on animals to be carried away to safety, out of the reach of the armies of Cyrus. Second-Isaiah mocks the powerless idols who are carried about by animals, like so much baggage. The Lord God of Israel does not have to be bundled and carried; the Lord is the one who carried and will always carry his People.

Reading Isaiah 46:1-4

Note: 8e|—Babylonian sky-god; Nebo—Babylonian god of wise men. The irony is in the image of the sky-god and the god of the scholars having to be moved by pack animals.

In 539 BC Cyrus was at the gates of Babylon. The city, divided within itself by factions who were for Cyrus or for Nabonidus, fell into the hands of Cyrus without battle. Ancient documents indicate that the majority of the citizens of Babylon welcomed Cyrus as a saviour. In Ch 47 Second-Isaiah gives us a lament over the fall of Babylon. This lament was written before the event; it describes Babylon in all her self-confident splendour, with all its trust in idols and sorcery, falling into ruins and being blown away like shredded straw.

The oracles in h 48 state again that the Lord, and he alone, is the master of the history which is taking place before their eyes. He is managing the events, not only for the sake of his People, but for his own sake (48:11). This first section of the oracles of Second-Isaiah ends with the command to leave Babylon and return to Jerusalem. The highway that was being prepared (40:3ff) is now ready; the People must set out on it.

Reading Isaiah 48:20-22

Comment

The poem reads as though the return has already begun (vs 21), but this is probably a strong poetic way of underlining the declaration that the Exile has come to an end and the return is already underway.

## Chapter 15b My Ways Are Not Your Ways (Chs:49-55)

Beginning with Ch 49 we notice some changes in the writings of Second-Isaiah. While the theme of the love of the Lord for his People remains in both parts of his prophecy, we notice that themes which were central in the first part (40-48) fall into the background, or disappear completely in the second (49-55). The new exodus, and the creation theme, so important in his poems to this point, take second place in these last chapters. Cyrus and the arguments concerning the idols are not even mentioned in Chs 49-55. We can also notice that themes which were secondary in the first chapters, such as Jerusalem, suffering, the gentiles, receive much more attention in the last. We have taken the position that the same author; Second-Isaiah, wrote most of both parts of these chapters. -These last chapters (49-55) appear to have been written later and under a different set of circumstances.

Scholars do not agree on these new circumstances: some hold that Second-Isaiah returned to Jerusalem and there wrote these chapters; others hold that he wrote these poems in Babylon, just after Cyrus had taken the city and before any of the exiles had returned. We take the position that Second-Isaiah wrote these poems in Babylon, after it had fallen to Cyrus. We leave open the question as to whether he wrote before or after the exiles began to return, because it is not at all clear and is not very important for an understanding of the poems.

The prophecies you are about to read (as well as the ones you have already seen) could only have been written by a person with a deep sense of the great goodness of the Lord. The poems are the work of one who knows the Lord as a lover, a mother, a father, a husband. The joy and the pain of these prophecies can only spring from love. The poet, how-ever, never becomes -mushy-; over all his poems there is clearly the sense of awe at the majesty of the Lord and the knowledge that both he and his People are called to be servants of this good Lord.

Light to the Nations (49:1-50:3)

**Objective 2.1** To describe the servant and his task in the second Servant Song (49:1-6).

The section begins with the second of the Servant Songs. The first (42:)-4) presented the servant in terms which recalled kingship and yet used language which suggested prophetic functions. The servant was described as quiet and gentle and he was designated to bring the Lord's justice and his law to the nations. In this second poem, the servant is described in terms of prophets such as Jeremiah.

Reading Isaiah 49:1-6

Commentary

_"Listen, distant peoples"_ (vs 1) The servant himself is speaking; he is addressing the gentiles. He has a message for them, that is, a message in their favour: not a message of condemnation of the nations which was so often found in the words of former prophets (eg. Ise 13-23)-

" _The Lord called me_ ". . _from my mother's womb he gave me my name_ " (vs 1). The vocation of the servant is the vocation of a prophet. The words used are very similar to those with which Jeremiah was called: _"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you came to birth I dedicated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations_ " (Jer 1:5). Jeremiah may well have felt himself called to be a prophet to the nations, but he seems to have been able only to speak words of condemnation to them (eg Jer 46). The servant, however, is called to be a prophet of good news to the nations; he is to bring the Lord's justice to them (42:1-4). The People of God are referred to.) as -servant' ' (41:8: 44:1), called by name (43:1) and formed from the womb (44:2)

" _A sharp sword . hidden, a polished arrow . . . concealed_ " (vs 2). The work of a prophet is to speak the word of the Lord (" _mouth_ ", see Isa 6:6f; Jer 1:9; 15:19). The " _sword_ " suggests penetration, the " _arrow_ " suggests far-reaching; the word of the servant will have the power to probe deeply, and it will reach out far and wide. But this power is not openly displayed; it is " _hidden-, -concealed_ ". As powerful and effective as the prophet's words are, they are not to be immediately evident as such, This may be another way of referring to the quiet and gentle way of the servant (42:2-4).

_"He said to me, 'You are my servant Israel'_ " (vs 3). The People are the servant. There is no valid reason for placing " _Israel_ " in brackets in this verse, or for suggesting that " _Israel_ " should be omitted, as some translators and commentators do. The word is present in all the important Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.

" _In whom shall he glorified"_ (vs 3), The People are the instrument through which the Lord will make his glory known. The true nature and disposition of the Lord himself will be made manifest through his servant. (See John 17.) The servant is saying that he knows now what the Lord has in mind for him; he realizes that he is called to the exalted role of being the one through whom God will make himself known.

" _But I was thinking, 'I have laboured in vain_ . . " (vs 4). The servant is saying that for a long time he had been working and exhausting himself without knowing that there was some purpose behind it all. Suffering and exhaustion is made much worse when there is no meaning, no purpose for it. The servant experienced futility, pointlessness in his suffering. The People expressed very similar thoughts: " _My way is hidden from the Lord, my rights ignored by my God"_ (40:27).

_" My cause was with the Lord_ " (vss 4c-5). It is clear now to the servant that all the time he was feeling that he was toiling for nothing, he was in fact honoured, protected, strengthened by the Lord. He was being used by the Lord for a special purpose: to bring the People (Jacob, Israel) back to the Lord. Israel is to bring Israel back to the Lord. There is no contradiction in this: God will use his own People (Israel) to be his servant to restore all his People to himself. " _To -bring back_ " and " _to gather_ " the People refers to the return of the People from the Exile; but it also means bringing the People to the Lord. It is not only the physical return, but the return of the hearts of the People to the Lord. There were many exiles who had either lost their faith, or were so weakened in their faith that they could hardly be called God's People, except that they were descendants of Jacob their ancestor. The servant has the mission to restore the People, body and soul, to the Lord. If it makes the passage any more understandable, we might say that the faithful among the People (such as the prophet himself and his disciples) are the servant called to restore all of the People to the Lord.

" _It is not enough . . . to restore the tribes of Jacob_ " (vs 6). The miss n to the People, great as it is, is much too small a task for the servant. The Lord has a far greater work in mind. The greater work, however, is not going to be possible without the lesser work: the People are to be restored first, but not for their own sake alone.

" _I will make you a light to the nations_ " (vs 6). The prophecy reaches back to the old traditions of Abraham, who was called to be a blessing to all nations (Gen 1 2:1-4), and the Covenant, where the People are called to be a priestly nation for the sake of the nations (Exod 19:3-8; see Chapter 5, p.5). The 'servant-people of God' are to be a light to the nations, bringing them knowledge of the true and only God, and the good news of his wise and prudent Law (Isa 51:4-5; see Deut 4:6). The love which the Lord has for all nations is shown in the mission of his People.

This second Servant Song is followed by a short poem on the same subject. The Lord tells his People that he knows they had been despised and loathed by their foreign rulers: but the day would come when kings and princes would recognize the wonder which the Lord worked for and through his People.

Reading Isaiah 49:7

The following poem (49:8-26) gives consolation to the People. If they are to be a light to the nations, they must be certain of the love which the Lord has for them. All doubts as to his concern for them must go. These thoughts of being abandoned cannot simply be ordered out of mind; they can only be replaced by a strong conviction that the Lord is caring for them. The prophet stresses the mother-like love of God for his People; he uses words which indicate the kind of love which a mother has for a child she carried in her womb. In English this is hardly noticeable because the words are translated as " _pity_ ", " _compassion_ ", " _love_ ", or " _cherish_ "(49:10, 13, 1 5).

Reading Isaiah 49:8-16

Comment

A normal loving mother cannot forget her child, no matter what the child has done, no matter what pain the child might have caused. But even if it were possible for a mother to forget the child she carried in her womb, it is not in any way possible for the Lord to forget his children.

The poem continues with guarantees that the Lord will bring about the restoration and the growth of his People. He is determined not only to have them survive the Exile, but to come out of it stronger and more numerous than ever before (49:17-26).

The image changes from the motherly qualities of God, to God as husband of his People. The terrible threats of former prophets (Hos 2:4-9; Jer 3:6-8) are put aside, once and for all: the Lord never did divorce his bride. There was a separation, but no divorce (50:1).

Disciple of the Lord

The third Servant Song (50:4-9a) refers to the servant as a disciple, one who listens and learns from his master. (See Isa: 8:16 where the same word is used of Isaiah's disciples.) We have already seen that the servant was called to be the gentle envoy of the Lord to the nations (42:1-4) We have also seen that the servant suffered from a sense of meaninglessness in his efforts until he realized the greatness of his mission to the whole world (49:1-6). In this third poem, the servant describes himself even further.

"-For my part, made no resistance. I offered my back to those who struck me, my

cheeks to those who tore at my beard;" .Isa 50:5-6

Reading Isaiah 50:4-9a

Comment

The servant is a disciple who day by day learns from the Lord himself. What he learns is the message of consolation which the Lord wants given to those who are weary(v4)

.Strangely, though his message is one of comfort, the servant is persecuted, beaten and insulted (yes 5-6). You remember, of course, how badly the prophet Jeremiah was treated by his fellows, how he was insulted, his life threatened (eg. Jer 20:10). Jeremiah vehemently complained to the Lord about the misery he endured in his vocation (eg. Jer 20:14-18) The servant here does not complain. He might have complained before he understood the greatness of his vocation (49:3-6), but now he does not. He offers no resistance, and makes no protest against his treatment. He is certain of the Lord's help and makes himself fit to endure his attackers (vs 7; see also Ezek 3:8-9). He knows himself to be personally innocent of whatever wrong his enemies see in him (vs 8) and is certain that the Lord finds no wrong in him (vs 9a)

A short poem follows this third Servant Song (50:10). It addresses the pagan nations who are walking in darkness until the servant brings light to them (compare 49:6). They are

" _Whoever walks in darkness . . let him trust in the name of the Lord, let him lean on his God." Isa 50:10_

asked to listen to the servant and to lean on the Lord, (5O:11 ;s an addition, probably from a later writer; which makes it clear that if the gentiles do not walk in the light of the Lord, they will be consumed by the fires they make for themselves.)

The next poem (51:1-3) speaks to the People of God and reminds them of their ancestors Abraham and Sarah. As they were once without offspring and the Lord multiplied their descendants like the sands of the sea, so now he will shower his deprived People with abundance as has not been seen since the garden of Eden. The prophet then turns once again to the gentiles who are still in darkness.

Reading Isaiah 51:4-8

Comment

The Lord wants to be the light of the nations; he wants his Law to bring them justice (vss 4-5Y 41 vs 7 it appears that both the People of God and the gentiles are being spoken to; both can be the ones who take the laws of the Lord to heart. The insults which those who seek the Lord receive should not disturb them, for the Lord is strong and will sustain them.

51:9 to 52:12 is a long poem on the theme " _Awake, awake_ " (This poem is interrupted by two short prose passages, 51:14-16 and 52:3-6.) The prophet urges the Lord to action, then urges Jerusalem to respond. The " _cup of wrath_. (51:17ff) which the People have had to drink is now taken away from them. The Lord is about to adorn his People as a bride (52:1-2).

The last part of this long poem (52:7-12) seems to presume that Cyrus has made public the edict which allowed all the exiles to go back to their homelands. Shortly after he captured Babylon, Cyrus made the unusual announcement that all the groups who had been deported from their countries by the Babylonians were free to go back to their native lands. Not only were they free to go back home, they were also free to rebuild their shrines and temples and to resume the worship which had been interrupted by their exile. (A version of this edict is given in Ezra 1:1-4,) This was the great good news Second-Isaiah had been waiting for, No conqueror before Cyrus had ever shown such kindness to his subjects; it was unheard of for a king with a vast empire to treat his subject nations so humanely. The excitement of this announcement seems to be reflected in the following verses..

Reading Isaiah 52:7-12

Note: " _Unclean thing_ " refers to anything Babylonian; " _vessels of the Lord_ " refers to the sacred treasures which the Babylonians had taken from the Temple and which Cyrus gave back to the People; " _not in haste_ ": at the first Exodus the People had left Egypt in a hurry (See Exod 12:39); this new -exodus" will not be in a hurry

Comment

After centuries of hearing prophets speak of doom, now it can be said without reservation, " _How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of one who brings good news" (vs 7)._ The People are free again; they can be led back to Jerusalem by the Lord, who will go before them and guard them from behind as he did in the pillar of cloud and fire at the Exodus (vs 12). There is no need for them to leave in haste; they can prepare themselves properly for the journey home. Unlike Ezekiel, Second-Isaiah says next to nothing about the way the People are to organize themselves when they are back in Jerusalem. About all he says is that when they get home they will not have an earthly king; the Lord will be their king (vs 7).

He Shall be Lifted tip (52:13 54:17)

The prophets of the Lord had to have "an open ear" to hear the message of the Lord. They also had to have an ear for hearing the message which was coming to them from the People. Hearing both messages, the prophet somehow uses them to deepen the words he speaks. Second-Isaiah allows a third voice to reach him, the voice of the gentiles. The Lord opened his ear to hear the gentiles, opened his eyes to see their need for the light which the Lord had given to his People. He began to realize that the Lord was calling his People to become his servant, and, in some way, the servant of the nations who did not belong to the People of God. It was shocking enough for Second-Isaiah to say that the Lord was going to save them out of the Exile by means of a pagan (Cyrus); now the prophet was beginning to say that the People were called to be the Lord's servant to serve the pagans. The three Servant Songs seen so far have made this quite clear.

There were those among the People who would have been ready to accept this -service of the gentiles, if it meant that in the process the People would end up being recognized as the best of nations, the greatest and the strongest of peoples. If being a servant meant being a servant-king, with nations and kings coming humbly in submission to them, it would, of course, be very acceptable to hope for this. There were persons who interpreted the role of the People regarding the nations in just this light. (We shall see some of them in Chapter 16.) Their opinion is represented in some of the additions that were made to the prophecies of Second-Isaiah. For example, someone wanting to soften the scandal of the Cyrus oracle added a few lines to indicate that if the People were going to be saved by a gentile, the day would come when the gentiles would submit " _in chains_ " at the feet of the People (lsa 45:14; compare with Isa 60, written by a later writer).

Second-Isaiah was convinced that the Lord meant his People to be highly honoured and esteemed by all the nations of the world; he too felt that a great future was in store for the People (eg. h 54). The way to that future, as Second-Isaiah saw it, was not as glorious as its ending. Second-Isaiah had opened his ear to hear the message of the Lord about the pagans and about the People's servant role in their regard: they were called to he a prophet to the nations, to bring them the salvation for which they longed (42:4; 51:4-5), Out of the experience of the People themselves, out of the experience of the prophets who, had (-tome before him, and out of his own personal experience, another message was coming to him all too clearly. It had to do with suffering.

Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, Zephaniah, Ezekiel, all had said loudly and repeatedly that the suffering and death that was coming to the People was explained by their sinfulness. Suffering was a punishment for sin. That was that. As we have seen in Chapters 14 and 15, Jeremiah and Ezekiel began to feel a little uncomfortable with that explanation of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Exile. While they still felt that these things were punishment for and purification from sin, they longed for a more just world, where children did not suffer for the sins of their parents. They ridiculed the proverb which said that 'the fathers ate green grapes and the children's teeth were set on edge' (Jer 31:28; Ezek 18:2). They hoped for the day when each person would suffer for his own sins, and no one else's. (Not a bad dream, really!) Experience cannot be denied. Second-Isaiah, coming after Jeremiah and Ezekiel, could clearly see that the dreams of Jeremiah and Ezekiel about a world where suffering is explained by each person's own sinfulness had not arrived.

Before his very eyes Second-Isaiah saw old people who had been devout from their youth and yet had lived through the torture of seeing their family and friends butchered in Jerusalem by the Babylonians. There were young people, born in exile, who had been faithful from their earliest days, They had had no part at all in the sins which destroyed Jerusalem and brought on the Exile. Why were these people, old and young, suffering? Not for their sins, surely. And even if they were suffering for their sins, didn't the Lord himself declare that the punishment for sins was over, that the sins were atoned for (40:1)? Why did suffering continue after the punishment was over? Why were so many of the People still living on the borders of despair? Why was he himself, with all his words of consolation, still suffering? Why were his followers suffering? There had to be a better answer than sin to explain suffering, the suffering of the just. a prophet, and his People were called to be prophets, was there something to be learned from the experience of the prophets who came before?

There certainly was! Jeremiah was a just and good man, devoted to his service of the Lord and yet he was persecuted, insulted, abused; he even had attempts made on his life by his own relatives (Jer 11:18ff). t was not for his sins that he suffered; the sins of the people he served made him suffer. And what of Moses, the prophet and servant of the Lord, the Lord's very best, his friend (Exod 33:11), the humblest of men (Num 12:3)? He suffered throughout his life, not for his sins, but because of the rebelliousness of his people. Since the experience of the great prophets was one of suffering, could it be that if the People were called to be the prophet of the Lord to the nations, that their suffering should not be explained by their sinfulness, but by their prophetic vocation?

Second-Isaiah heard and heard well the message which came to him from the Lord and his People. Through the agony of this whole experience he reaches through five centuries and takes hold of the Cross.

Reading Isaiah 52:13 - 53:12

Note: This is the fourth Servant Song. The speaker in the first lines, 52:13-15, is the Lord. The speakers in 55:1-10 are the gentiles, or possibly both the gentiles and the members of the People who did not believe in the servant role. The speaker in 53:11-12 is the Lord again,

Commentary

_"He shall be lifted up_ " (52:13). The poem begins and ends with the exaltation of the servant (53:12). The suffering and death that comes in between is a passing thing; the final outcome of the passion and death of the servant is that he will be lifted up and multitudes will acknowledge him.

" _As crowds were appalled . . so will the crowds be astounded_ , (52:13-15). These verses state the great contrast in the reaction of the multitude: at first they looked down on the servant as someone ugly and despicable, but then, on seeing him raised up to such heights, they were astounded, dumbfounded.

" _Who could have believed what we have heard. . ."_ (53:1-3). The multitude speaks: this servant grew up before their eyes, without beauty, like someone sick and sad. He was despised, and rejected.

_"And yet ours were the sufferings he bore . ._ ." (53:4-5). The astounded speakers realize what was really happening to the servant: he was not simply suffering because others sinfully maltreated him, but because he had taken on himself the suffering which they themselves deserved. Since most people held that suffering was punishment for sin, they thought of the servant as a sinner, punished by God. Now they understand that he was " _pierced through_ " for their sake, rather than on account of his own sins. (The word translated " _pierced through_ " is also translated as " _defiled_ ", "profaned". It refers to the desecration of the People caused by the events of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Exile in Isaiah 43 28; 47:6; 48:11.) This suggests a new and startling interpretation of the Exile itself; the People had been " _pierced through_ ", that is defiled, profaned, not simply for their own sins, but so that they would both discover and begin to carry out their responsibility to the whole world. The servant had to take on the burden of the punishment due to others in order to bring them peace: " _by his wounds we are healed_."

" _We had all gone astray ._ . ." (53:6-7). The speakers admit that they were sinners them-selves and that the servant was the one on whom the Lord had placed the burden of their sins. (" _Harshly treated_ " is the same expression that was used of the way the People were treated in Egypt, Exod 3:7.) When Jeremiah had been persecuted by his townsmen, he said he was like 'a lamb being led to the slaughter' (Jer 1 1:19). The servant offers no resistance and makes no protest, as in the third Servant Song (50:5-6).

" _He was stricken to death for our faults ._ . ." (53:8-9). The servant suffers death and is buried with the wicked. Ezekiel had spoken of the Exile as a death and burial from which the People would rise again (Ezek 37) It was not for his own sins that he was put to death, but for the sins of others.

_" His life in atonement ._ ." (53:10). The servant's suffering and death is as a sacrifice to take sins away. Having been subjected to all this suffering and having died for others, the servant will be restored to life. He will be blessed by the Lord for having done what the Lord wanted of him. After going through the death of the Exile, the servant People will be restored to life and given the blessings of the Lord.

The last verses (53:11-12) are spoken by the Lord about the servant. They restate emphatically that the servant bore the faults of many (all) and that he will be raised to a position of great honour over the whole world.

There is a strange mystery in this prophecy: people persecute those who speak the word of God to them. It was true in the history of the People of God - they persecuted their own prophets. If the People of God are called to have the role of prophet to the world, they should fully expect to be treated badly by the world (Matt 5:1 1f; Luke 6:22-23, 26). Only false prophets were well received and honoured by their contemporaries.

Furthermore, prophets were not only mistreated, they were also called to bear the burden of the guilt of the people they served. Ezekiel was told to lie on one side and to take upon himself the sin of the House of Israel, then to lie on the other side and take on himself the sin of the House of Judah (Ezek 4:4f). This symbolic action reveals a realization which was coming to light among the prophets during the Exile: a prophet not only suffers at the hands of those he serves, but must be ready to take upon himself the guilt of his people. We see this idea reflected in Psalm 106. The psalm speaks of the many times when the Lord was about to punish his People on account of their sins. Moses, the chosen one of God "stood in the breach" deflecting God's anger (Ps 106:23).

This fourth Servant Song also suggests a new interpretation of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Exile. These events were not simply because of the sins of the People. It was for the sake of the gentiles that the Exile took place, so that God might reveal himself to them through his People. It took the suffering and death of the Exile to bring the People of God (at least some of the People of God) to realize that they were called to bring [he word and justice of the Lord to the pagans. The Exile had a new purpose; it was not simply to atone for the sins of the People, but it was endured for the sake of the gentiles.

But this fourth Servant Song cannot be explained simply as a prophecy about the new role of the People of God. The poem is so personal and seems to be so much about an individual, that it is difficult to believe the prophet was thinking only of the community of the People of God. Perhaps the poem is about Second-Isaiah himself; perhaps he was severely persecuted, possibly even killed as a terrible sinner for all the startling new things he was saying. Perhaps a disciple wrote this poem about his dead master. What is more likely, however, is that the prophet was hoping for a new Moses, one who would intercede for the world the way Moses did for his People. The Book of Deuteronomy, which was very probably well known by the exiles, contains a prophecy: " _The Lord said to (Moses_ ) . . _'I will raise up a prophet like yourself for them among their own brothers; I will put my words into his mouth and he shall tell them all I command him'_ " (Deut 18:18). The new Moses would be all that Moses was, and more; what Moses did, what he endured would be intensified to the extreme in the ideal prophet who would come. The new Moses' words would reach through the People of God to the whole world; he would justify all people by his sufferings and his death; but God would raise him up to an exalted position, where the whole world would recognize him and realize the meaning of what he had done. (See Acts 8:26-35.)

The theme of exaltation with which the fourth Servant Song ends s continued in the prophecy that follows it (54:1-17). The image changes from the servant to the barren woman, the widow without children. The prophet responds to the laments of the People: they feel like a barren woman, a widow without children; they are fearful that the Lord will forsake them again; they do not yet feel safe and secure in the new promises which the Lord has given them. The Lord does not deny that he once was angry with them; but he promises that he will never again forsake them.

Reading Isaiah 54:1-17

Commentary

Vss 1-6: The exaltation of the People is described in terms of a barren woman becoming the mother of numerous children; a childless widow for whom her kinsman (redeemer) has raised many sons (vss 4-5). The Lord did forsake her for a short while, but he cannot forget " _the love of his youth_ " (vs 6).

Vss 7-10: The Lord admits that he did turn away from them for a while, but he has now turned towards them with compassion. The situation at the end of the Exile is much the same as the situation at the time of the end of the Flood: as he made a covenant of peace with Noah and his descendants never to flood the earth again, so now he promises a new covenant of peace, never to bring on his People anything like the Exile again. (See Gen be " _'taught by the Lord_ " (vs 13) and you will be " _founded on integrity'_ These two expressions sum up the future that Jeremiah and Isaiah dreamed of: the new covenant when all would be taught by the Lord himself (Jer 31:31f) and the new Jerusalem founded on integrity (Isa 1:26). The poem ends with another reference to the People as the " _servants of the Lord_ " (vs 17).

Witness to the Peoples (Ch 55)

The whole of chapters 54 and 55 are directed towards the new future to which the Lord calls his People. Entering the "new" inevitably means leaving something of the "old" behind; for many this was a threatening and unsettling thing. During the long years of the Exile one reality of the past seemed to be on the point of extinction: the promises made to David. God had said to David, " _your throne will stand secure forever_ " (2 Sam 7:16). The last legitimate king of David's line had died in captivity in Babylon. No new king could be enthroned to succeed him, since they had no country of their own for him to rule over. Now that the Exile was over, we can presume that hope for a restoration of the Davidic line was high. Ezekiel had spoken of a new Davidic king (Ezek 34:23ff), even though his role would be very limited (Ezek 44-46). At the end of the Exile, however, these hopes had no real foundation. Cyrus had been very generous in allowing the exiles to go back to Jerusalem. He encouraged them to rebuild the Temple, but he would not allow them to restore the monarchy. Second-Isaiah himself does not seem to have dreamed of a restoration of the monarchy; he hoped for a new life in which only the Lord himself would be king (52:7). Were the promises which the Lord had made to David empty promises? What future did these promises have? Just as Second-Isaiah had proposed a radically new interpretation of the role of the People of God along the lines of the tradition of prophecy, so now he proposes a radically new interpretation of the People's role along the lines of the promises made to David.

He urges the People to come and quench their thirst, to come and feast on the future which the Lord has in store for them. He begs them to pay attention to this new promise which the Lord is about to make.

Reading Isaiah 55:1-5

Note: in vs 4, read " _I made him a witness_ ", as in the Hebrew; not you as in some translations. The translation of these verses which best suits our interpretation here can be found in the NEB, NAB, RSV, The JB is obscure.

Comment

The tradition of prophecy which had been embodied in individuals in the past, would in the future be the role of the whole People with regard to all the nations. This much we have already seen in the Servant Songs. Now Second-Isaiah tells the People that the promises made to David, which used to be fulfilled in individual kings who succeeded David on the throne, these same promises will be fulfilled by the whole People in their role as " _David_ " to the world. David, by his just rule, had been a witness to the nations; now the whole People are to be a witness to the nations of the world. Just as David had been a leader, so the People will be leaders of nations. The promises made to David have not been forgotten by God; they have simply been handed on to the whole of the People and are no longer restricted to the one family of David.

(For a very moving expression of the lament of the People over the apparent ending of the line of Davidic kings, you might read Psalm 89.)

As presented by Second-Isaiah, the Lord's understanding of the role of his People certainly was not the same as the People's understanding of themselves. What the Lord had in mind for them, certainly was not the same as what many of the prophet's listeners had in mind. The prophet urges the People to seek the Lord, and the Lord's thoughts. They should abandon their own ways of thinking and trust in the ways of the Lord, even though his ways differ radically from their own ways.

Reading Isaiah 55:6-9

Comment

To be a disciple with an open ear means to be prepared to hear something new and surprising from the Lord: his ways and his thoughts are not always the ways and the thoughts of his People.

The word which the Lord speaks through his prophets, as new and startling as it might be, is thoroughly reliable and effective. Both the new role and its successful fulfilment by the People is assured by the power of the word of the Lord.

Reading Isaiah 55:10-11

Comment

In these verses the word of God is presented as though it were a reality in itself, having a life and a power all its own. In the Book of Deuteronomy (30:11-14) we have a similar way of speaking of the word of God. Expressions such as these would one day lead sacred writers to speak of the new Moses, the new David, in terms of the Word of God (see John 1:1ff).

The prophecies of Second-Isaiah come to an end with a (joyful poem which resembles the poems of the return from Exile (ed. 48:20-22). This poem does not seem to be about the physical return from Exile; it is much more likely that the prophet is urging the People to set out in the new direction given them in the servant role" The Lord assures them success and support; they will succeed in their work and the Lord will obtain a fine reputation as a result of their witness and their ministry to the world. This cheerful poem has the People setting out in procession towards their new life. Lined up along the way, the mountains and hills cheer with loud "bravos", the trees applaud, thorns will turn into tall stately cypresses to make the way more dignified, and briars will turn to evergreen myrtle bushes to make the way as fine as any that could be imagined.

Reading Isaiah 55 :12-13

Conclusion

Second-Isaiah is a prophet who prophesies about prophecy! All of his main ideas revolve around prophecy itself. The main work of a prophet is to announce the word of the Lord. In his case Second-Isaiah's message is one of consolation. He is called to bring comfort to his depressed brothers and sisters. And this he does by assuring them time and again that the Lord their God loves them; they are precious in his eyes. As proof of this love, the Lord will upset all of history and bring about a most surprising event - the return from exile. The fact that the Lord's prophets foretold this event will prove that the Lord alone, the Creator of all things, is also the creator of history. Since he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last, he is the only God with power to save. The gods of the pagans are nothings, zeros. This is good news for the Lord's family, but it is also good news for the pagans who are still labouring under the illusion that their gods have power. The gentiles need to be liberated too from the darkness in which they live.

For the sake of the nations, the Lord wilt demonstrate his power by bringing Cyrus to capture Babylon and to tree his People from exile. All of mankind shall see the salvation which the Lord will work for his family. This, however, is not enough. The Lord needs his People to be his servant, to bring his justice, his light, his good news to the gentiles. He calls his own sons and daughters to be his prophet to the nations.

The ministry of the word, as the experience of the prophets had shown, s one which is carried out in weakness, without a show of strength, without the power of kings to dominate others. His People, the servant-prophet, wilt carry out their ministry to the nations quietly, gently, taking great care to show by their way of acting that they are speaking for the Lord. And the Lord is the one who showed great love for the weak. He is the one who looked upon their helplessness, their wretchedness when they were in Egypt (Exod -12); he is also the same Lord who looked with motherly compassion on their misery and helplessness in exile.

Just as the prophets had always been persecuted, so they should expect to be persecuted in their role as prophets to the nations (50:5-6). What is more, they should fully expect to have the guilt of the nations placed on their shoulders. The suffering and death which they had, and would still endure in the future, would be explained not simply by their sinfulness, but by their role as the new Moses who would have to take away the sins of the world.

Second-Isaiah, by his vision of the new role given to the People, looks forward to the day when his prophecy will be fulfilled in the perfect prophet, the genuine new Moses, who would announce good news and would liberate the world from darkness and take away its sins by the sacrifice of his own life.

The future of the People and the future of the new prophet to come. Second-Isaiah saw as a glorious future-an exaltation beyond all expectations (53:11-12; 54:1-3). The message of Second-Isaiah frees the People from too small a notion of their calling (49:6). In all their sense of weakness they were apt to settle for too cheap a vision of their importance. The Lord sees his People as having universal importance; the whole world depends on them. empty promises; they were now to be fulfilled in the role of the whole People. The People were called to be servants, as David had been the Lord's chosen servant. And they were called to be servants as Moses had been called to be the chosen servant of the Lord. To be called " _servant of the Lord_ " gave the People a new role as noble as David's and yet a role that required the humility of Moses.

These new and astounding prophecies could be very upsetting for those who would rather not be so important, so needed by their Lord. To these, Second-Isaiah can only say that the ways of the Lord and his thoughts are far beyond anything that mere humans could think up. The People should not be taken aback by the new which comes from the Lord. What they should rely on, what they should find their strength in, is the power of the word of God -- a conviction which every prophet must have (55:6-11).

In Second-Isaiah what matters is the new direction which the People must take. It is not enough for them to have a way opened for them through the desert from Babylon to Jerusalem; they must have a way opened for them to the future. The future, says the prophet, is the whole world and all its peoples. For him this is great good news. The People should set cut gladly on this road away from the " _exile_ " of isolation from the nations. When they do set out, all of creation will shout, cheer and applaud (55:12-13).

With Second-Isaiah and the return from exile, a new period begins in the history of the People of God. Its newness is noted by a change in name which comes about. Since the exiles were almost all from the Tribe of Judah, and since the reconstruction of the People was limited pretty well to the territory of Judah, the People of God began to refer to themselves as Jews (from Judah) Also their new way of life began to be referred to as Judaism. But more of this in chapter 1 6.

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 16 New Directions

**Introductory Notes to Chapters 16 to 20**

In the JOURNEY program so far we have considered the first two categories' s of books of the Old Testament: the Law (Chapters 1-6) and the Prophets (Early Prophets: Chapters 7- 1 0; Later Prophets: Chapters 11-15). Now we are about to begin the books which were grouped together to form the Writings. According to the Hebrew Bible, the Writings are a loose collection of all those books which do not clearly fall under the Law or the Prophets. While many of the books which are contained in the category of the Writings have their roots earlier in the history of the People, all of them have in common the fact that they became known and accepted later, during or after the Exile.

Chapter 16 marks the transition between the prophets and the later books (the Writings). This chapter will include some readings from the last part of the Book of Isaiah, as well as a few selections from the prophets Zechariah and Malachi. It will also include the Book of Jonah. This chapter marks the end of prophecy as we have come to know it in the last five chapters. You will begin to see priests, scribes and scholars taking the place of the prophets. A new emphasis is beginning to be placed on the written word, the word that is fixed arid needs to be interpreted. In Lessen 19 you will he introduced to a new kind of literature called "Apocalyptic"written form of prophecy (Chapter 19).

The Writings contain some of the different and provocative literature of the Bible. The books of the wise men, the Intellectuals among the People of God tackle some of life's most nasty and nagging problems. Ecclesiastes (also called (Quoheleth)There are also more calm and less tortured writings: Proverbs and the Song of Songs deal with the day to day joys and sorrows of getting by in life (Chapters 17 and 18).

Intellectuals of a later age combine the roles of wisdom writers with the job of prophecy (Ecclesiasticus) called Sirach, and the Book of Wisdom. Chapters 18 and 19) These are a new type of literature. They were not even written in Palestine.

The period of history from the year 400 BC to 175 BC is one which gives us next to no information about the life of the People of God, either in Palestine or outside of it, We know the major events in world history during this period: the Persian empire fell, the Greeks under Alexander the Great (336-323 BC) conquered all that once was the Persian empire and extended the borders even to the western parts of India. All of the People of God, wherever they lived, came under Greek rule.

At first this Greek domination was not too terribly oppressive, but in time it developed into a nightmare. The People of God in Palestine were subjected to persecution because of their faith and their rejection of Greek customs and gods. A nationalistic and religious revolt got under way (Books of Maccabees. Chapter 19), which brought about the downfall of Greek rule over Palestine and the rise of a form of self-rule for the members of the People who lived there. The persecution and the revolt produced some literature which will be considered in Chapter 19 (Daniel).

Our twenty chapters will end with a consideration of the Book of Psalms. You will have had a short presentation of 19 of the 150 prayers in the Book of Psalms in the first part of each chapter. In Chapter 20, we will deal with the Psalms as the prayers which indicate that the revelation which the Lord had given his People really did enter their lives. The prayers which they valued as the best in their history show that God and all his messengers had not laboured in vain. The Psalms clearly show that the history of the People of God right up to the time when Jesus was born is a history of a great victory both for the Lord and for his People.

Commentary

Things could never be the same again. The People could dream of restoring all that had been lost through the destruction of Jerusalem and the Exile. They were, at the end of the Exile, having to face drastic changes once more. The first time they came into the Promised Land, they had been forced to adjust to a whole new situation; they had to change from being a wandering desert group to a settled people. They became a loose federation of Tribes. Just when this system was well established, the pressures from the Philistines obliged them to find a new way of organizing themselves and a new form of leadership. So they changed again from the federation of Tribes with Judges arising as needed, to a kingdom made up of two groups of Tribes (northern and southern) under one king, David. This organization and this form of leadership lasted only a short while. After Solomon's death, the kingdom split into two. Then, some 200 years later, the northern kingdom was destroyed, never to rise again, leaving only the southern kingdom of Judah. This too came to an end after over 400 years of existence. Now with the end of the Exile, the basic questions of organization and leadership had to be laced once again.

Most everyone seemed to know that there was no way of restoring the old forms. The Tribes were almost all gone - for practical purposes only Judah and parts of Benjamin were left. The kings in the line of David, even though there were still living descendants, were not allowed to rule in the Persian Empire. The territory they had in Judah when the exiles first returned was a tiny little 'island' extending no more than 40 km (25 miles) from Jerusalem in any direction.

Ezekiel had given them some practical advice during the Exile. He had directed them towards becoming a nation ruled by priests, centered around the worship of the Lord in the new Temple which was to be built in Jerusalem. Second-Isaiah had given them a rather different dream, more idealistic and less practical. He had urged them to be open to the future, to forget the past and create the new which the Lord had in mind. He had told them that they were called to be the servant of the Lord. They were called to be prophets to the nations, to bring to all the nations the good news of the life which the Lord had given them.

The two prophets of the Exile seemed to be pulling the People in different directions: Ezekiel stressing the liturgical role of the People with its insistence that the People be distinct and different from all the other nations; Second-Isaiah stressing their need to accept being saved by a pagan and to accept being the instrument whereby the pagans themselves would be saved.

The People had learned a hard chapter the hard way. Becoming " _like the other nations_ " (1 Sam 8:5) had brought a disaster upon them. They had become so much like the other nations that they were hardly worth saving as God's own special People. Ezekiel had given them names such as Sodom (Ezek 16:46ff). The chapter had been learned by most of the members of the People of God: they must keep themselves from the filthy practices of the pagan nations. To help them from adopting pagan ways, they began to practice customs which assured separation from the pagans - e.g. clean and unclean foods, circumcision and observance of the Sabbath.

These things they did to maintain their own identity, their selfhood in the face of the pagans among whom they lived in exile, But they did not do what Second-Isaiah told them to by just keeping the pagans. As the Lord's prophet them to go the gentiles and to bring them into the People of God to enjoy the good gifts of the Lord. So there is the basis for the tension, the struggle of the People in the years following the exile- to be distinct, free of pagan influence, and to be servants to the pagans; the first seemed to call for separation, the second for presence among the gentiles..

Leadership, organization and relationships to the pagans (gentiles), these are the three main concerns of this chapter. You will note that they are almost identical to the concerns we described for Chapters 7 to 1 0 (See Chapter 7, p. 2).

Note: Since in this chapter we will be asking you to read passages from several different books, many of which are very small, it might be helpful for you at this time to locate and mark all of the books from which you will read in this chapter. They are: Ezra, Malachi, Nehemiah, Ruth, Isaiah (chapters 56 and 60), Zechariah and Jonah.

## Chapter 16a Those Moved by the Spirit of God

**Towards the Temple**

Babylon fell to Cyrus in 539 BC. He took the city without a battle; a majority of its citizens welcomed him. Cyrus showed himself to be a truly new and different type of world conqueror. The Assyrians and the Babylonians had controlled their subject kingdoms by fear and force, but Cyrus won their loyalty by giving them concessions. There were two things which Cyrus permitted: the first was to allow any and all exiles whom the Babylonians had deported to return to their homeland if they wished; the second was to allow, even encourage each kingdom or nation to resume the worship of their own god or gods when they returned to their homeland. This second concession gave permission to the various national groups who were in exile to return home and to rebuild the temples which, in all probability, the Babylonians had destroyed.

This news was published in what has been called the Edict of Cyrus. This edict was made known to all the exile groups regardless of their country of origin, A version of this edict is contained in the first reading.

Reading Ezra 1:1-11

Comment

_"In the first year of Cyrus_ " would be 538 BC, by our calendar. Cyrus does exactly what the Lord had prophesied through Jeremiah (and Second-Isaiah). This version of the Edict of Cyrus is addressed to the exiles from Judah, who identified by their God YHWH,The Lord; the God of heaven. It appears that Cyrus was giving permission even for the exiles of the northern kingdom(whom the Assyrians had deported some 200 years earlier) because he says " _Whoever there is among you of all his people.... let him go up to Jerusalem"_ But it does not seem that there were any exiles from the northern kingdom to respond to the invitation, it appears that only persons from the southern kingdom (Judah and Benjamin, vs 5) began to organize to return to Jerusalem

Cyrus allows those whom " _the Lord had moved by his spirit_ " (vs 5) to collect donations from their neighbours to help both with the journey and the project of rebuilding the Temple (vss In addition Cyrus generously returns to them the precious vessels which the Babylonians had taken out of the Temple

_"Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah_ " (vs 8), to whom the vessels are handed, is possibly Zerubbabel under his Persian name (See Ezra 2:2). He is a descendant of the royal house of David, one in whom some of the exiles at least placed their hopes for a restoration of the Davidic kingship. But this was not to be. One thing clearly not present in the Edict of Cyrus is permission to revive the monarchy. Cyrus treated his subjects humanely, the God of Israel he was not out to encourage hopes of independence in the small kingdoms. Cyrus was generous, but not politically foolish.

Ezra chapter 2 gives a list of those who returned in the first wave. (The numbers given seem to combine the first and subsequent waves of migrants.) It would seem that anywhere from several hundred to a few thousand returned soon after the Edict was made public. It would seem, however, that the majority remained in and around Babylon. Life had become quite comfortable for them. They preferred to send their money than to go themselves to Jerusalem. (This community in Babylon continued in existence for well over one thousand years. In fact it is known down to the Middle Ages of the Christian era.)

The first to return were headed by two people: Zerubbabel, of the royal house, and Jeshua (or Joshua), priest of the line of Zadok. This dual leadership is very interesting. As you will see, it lasted only for a time.

Soon after their arrival among the ruins of their holy city, work was begun on rebuilding a place of worship. What was necessary for worship was the altar of sacrifice and an open area around it for the People to gather in.

Reading Ezra 3:1-6

Work on the Temple building itself had not yet begun. When they had sufficient funds, they hired Sidonians and Tyrians, the descendants of Hiram of Tyre's workmen who had built the first Temple, to lay the foundations. Once this important work was done, a great celebration was held. Most rejoiced, but some, who remembered the wonder that Solomon had built, wept.

Reading Ezra 3:7-

". then our mouths filled with laughter and our lips with song."Ps 1 26:2

Those whom the spirit of the Lord named to return to Jerusalem had found life very difficult on their arrival home. of Jerusalem alone would be enough to depress any stout heart. Then there were the people who had been left behind when the deportations took place. These had not been considered important enough by the Babylonians to take into exile. They had stayed behind and had managed to eke out a living among the ruins. For many, no doubt, the arrival of the enthusiastic rebuilders of Judah and Jerusalem meant they would have to leave farms and properties which they had come to view as their own. It is doubtful that the welcoming committee in Jerusalem was very sincerely excited. We do not hear too much about them. We do hear a great deal about another group - the Samaritans.

You will remember that when Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 721 BC, the upper classes were all deported to different parts of the Assyrian empire. The Assyrians then proceeded to replace the deportees with exiles from other parts of their empire. The citizens of the northern kingdom who had not been exiled naturally married into the families of the foreigners whom the Assyrians had placed in their midst (See 2 Kings 17:24-41). The Samaritans were now, after two centuries, all a mixed race. What is worse, their worship had continued and it too had become even more impure over the centuries \- or so, it would appear, the new arrivals in Jerusalem judged things to be, when the Samaritans came to the returned exiles and offered to assist in rebuilding the Temple, their help was flatly refused.

Reading Ezra 4:1-5

The Samaritans, angered by this refusal, set out to make life even more difficult for the rebuilders of the Temple. They accused the new citizens of Jerusalem of treachery against the throne of Persia. Until a later king was able to find a copy of the Edict of Cyrus, work on the Temple was stopped. It seems that even after permission to build the Temple was renewed (Ezra 6:1-12), work on the project was slow getting underway. The prophets Zechariah and Haggai had to utter some pretty fierce oracles before work was resumed in earnest (eg. Haggai 1:1-15). By 515 BC, over twenty years after the return of the first exiles, the modest but solid second Temple was finished and a great Passover was celebrated in Jerusalem.

Reading Ezra il:13-22

All is done " _as is written in the Law of Moses_ " (Ezra 6:18). This is a new expression, one that has considerable importance. When the Lord first gave the law (torah, instruction) to Moses it seems to have consisted of a basic orientation for a just and brotherly society under the guidance of the Lord (such as is given in the Ten Commandments). The basic law, or direction, given by the Lord, evolved as a living, growing, adapting thing in the course of history. (See Chapter 6, p. 4.) Now, with the end of the Exile the Law is no longer in evolution, no longer changing, it is a torah fixed firmly in writing.

## Chapter 16b My Messenger

The Temple was now rebuilt and worship could now be carried out according to the Law. Sacrifices were offered as prescribed. But all was not well. Those " _who had been moved by the spirit of God_ " to come back to Jerusalem and to rebuild the Temple were not necessarily the most noble and high-minded of the People of God. Apparently, among the first to return there were adventurers, opportunists who saw in the return a chance for excitement and the possibility of getting rich quickly, There was land to be reclaimed, properties to lay hold of, businesses to start up in the Jerusalem which was now to be repopulated. These ambitious people had been more interested in paneling their own homes than in building the Temple (Haggai 1:4). Now that the Temple was built, they were satisfied to have sick, crippled and blind animals, rejects of the flocks, offered to the Lord in sacrifice: it was cheaper.

The Lord raised up a prophet to speak his word bluntly and money-grubbing crooks know the prophet's name; he simply which means " _my messenger"._ (We will follow custom and refer to him as Malachi) To Malachi this begrudging, cheap and disgusting kind of attitude towards the worship of God clearly stated where the hearts of these offerers really were. He tells them that the Lord refuses their sacrifices. In fact, he tells them, the day will come when a genuine sacrifice will be offered throughout the world -a pure offering and it will be offered by the gentiles:

"From sunrise to sunset

my name is great among the nations,

and in every place incense is offered to my name;

a pure offering;

for my name is great among the nations,

_says the Lord of hosts"._ (Malachi 1:11)

Tired of the many imperfections in the way which his People worship him, the Lord announces a day when he will be worshipped perfectly by all people. (There are many possible interpretations of this verse; the one given above is commonly held.) The day of the perfect and unending, universal sacrifice is seen by us to be the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

Malachi was not upset simply about cheap worship in the Temple. Like the prophets before him, the liturgy reflected life and was worth whatever the lives of the offerers were worth in the eyes of the Lord. In the period after the Temple was rebuilt, leadership in Jerusalem seems to have been very weak. People fended for themselves as best they could, and for many this meant getting rich and powerful by hook or by crook. Men divorced their wives whenever it suited them; widows were being taken advantage of, orphans were cheated of their property; foreigners who had settled in the area had their property taken from them. Jerusalem was far from the " _City of Integrity"_ it should have been.

Through Malachi the Lord says, " _I hate divorce"_ (2:13-16) and then goes on to promise a day of reckoning when he sends his messenger to prepare the way for his coming to Jerusalem and its Temple, in person.

Reading Malachi 2:17

We see this prophecy fulfilled in John the Baptist who is the messenger preparing the way for the Lord's coming to his People. (See Matt 11:2-19.) The day of prophets was drawing to a close. A little appendix to the Book of Malachi serves as a conclusion not only to this book but to the collection of the twelve small books of prophets. This short addition reflects the popular belief of the People that Elijah had never really died: since he was taken up in a fiery chariot into the presence of God (2 Kings 2), he was still living and could return to bring prophecy back to God's People.

Reading Malachi 3:22-24

Note: In some Bible following the septuagint, these numbers are Malachi 4:4-6

Once again we see this prophecy concerning the revival of propehecy fulfilled in John the Baptist. (see Matt 11:13-15

Malachi's criticism of the population in and around Jerusalem makes it very clear that things were not going well after the return from exile. It was clear that the justice promoted by the Law was not being realized; in fact, it was clear that most of the citizens did not even know the Law. There was a serious need to educate the People of God who lived in Jerusalem and Judah. This need became known to those members of the People of God who were still in Babylonia. They decided to take action to remedy the situation.

## Chapter 16c The Scribes

The first exiles to return to Jerusalem were headed by Zerubbabel, a member of the House of David, and Joshua, a priest in the line of Zadok. It is not clear exactly what became of their leadership. There is some evidence that the citizens of Jerusalem attempted to restore the dynasty of David by having Zerubbabel crowned as king (Haggai 2:21-23; Zechariah 4:6-10). There is even a passage in Zechariah which appears to have applied originally to the coronation of Zerubbabel, but now applies to Joshua the priest. (More on this later in the chapter.) What is certain is that the Persians would not have tolerated a king in Jerusalem. If the citizens tried to make Zerubbabel king, he could not have reigned for long. What is also certain is that the people of Jerusalem were not in good shape; they lacked knowledge of the Law, and most of all, they lacked leadership. Their brothers and sisters in Babylonia felt it their duty to come to their rescue. They did so in the persons of Ezra and Nehemiah.

To understand who these two were, we must first say a few words about the Law. When the Law was still in the process of evolution, it was easy enough to take away from the Law itself, as the historical situation demanded. For leader the People had had the experience of Solomon's reign, it was clear to them that something had to be said about what the Lord thought of the behaviour of Solomon. So Deut 17:14-20 came to be. warning kings about the excesses they were to avoid if a truly brotherly society, faithful to the Lord, were to exist under a king. But now the Law was in writing, and this written Law was not to be tampered with in any way. No more change, no more adaptation of the Law itself.

Historical situations, however, continued to change and the Law continued to need adaptations to new circumstances. How could this be done without actually changing a word in the text of the Law? Answer: by interpretation of the Law. This was the work of the scribes. Experts were needed who knew the written Law extremely well and 'who could deduce from the Law what was to be done in this or that new situation which was not covered in so many words in the written Law,

And so a new kind of leadership was beginning to arise among the People of God "scholar" who interpreted the written Law, that is, the scribe. (Our English word "scribe" comes from a Latin word which means "to write". The scribes were necessarily literate men; their first talent was the ability to read and write well.)

The new leaders would be persons steeped in the written Law of God, capable interpreters of his will for the People. Such persons were not to be found in Jerusalem, but they could be found in Babylonia. The People of God in Babylonia had not only preserved and edited the Law as it had been handed down over the centuries, but they had developed a class of experts at interpreting this Law. Jerusalem badly needed such persons. The community in exile sent two of their ablest - Ezra the priest-scribe and Nehemiah. Nehemiah was a man devoted to the Law who served in the Persian king's court. He had himself appointed by the king to put order in Jerusalem and Judah (Neh 1-2). Ezra and Nehemiah were not mere scholars, spending their days in their scrolls. They were also practical, pastoral men who knew that Jerusalem had to be physically rebuilt as well as morally renewed.

There is a great deal of confusion about the dates and the sequence of events concerning Ezra and Nehemiah. We shall not even attempt to explain the problems. All that matters for our chapter is that the events described in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah actually took place; when and under whose direction does not matter here.

Ezra and Nehemiah were involved in the physical rebuilding and the moral renewal of their brothers and sisters in Judah. The city was rebuilt and re-populated (Nehemiah 2-7) and the Law was proclaimed at great length and explained. For our purposes what is most important about the work of Ezra and Nehemiah is that they gave a new definition _to membership in the People of God:_ membership was to be established by the observance of the Law and by the blood line.

Membership by the Law and by blood

Ezra, a priest scribe, probably a highly placed official in the Persian count in charge of Jewish , sought and obtained a most extraordinary permission. This is recorded in the passage you are about to read. You should note three points in this decree:

1.It allows other members of the People of God still living outside of Palestine to return to their homeland (Ezra 7:13f).

2.It allows for financial aid to be sent to Jerusalem by those living outside of Palestine

3. It makes the Law of Moses the official law for all the members of the People of God living both in Palestine and in those parts of the Persian empire west of the Euphrates (Trans-Euphrates).

This last concession is the most important, because it means that a person living outside of Palestine, outside of Judah and Jerusalem, can still be a member of the People of God because even outside his homeland he can and will be ruled by the Law of Moses. In effect, the People of God have become international.

Reading Ezra 7:11-26

Comment

Ezra is given the power to appoint scribes and judges and to give these appointees the power to enforce the Law, even to the death penalty if necessary, for those who are members of the People of God (vss 25-26). Communities of the People of God existed in various parts of the Persian empire. We know for certain that there were communities in the area around Babylon, and in Egypt as well. There were very likely other communities in other parts of the empire of which we know little or nothing. We do know that within a few hundred years there were communities in hundreds of centres throughout the middle east and in various Mediterranean countries. Living among gentiles as these communities were, their existence was seriously threatened by intermarriage with the gentiles. (Solomon's experience with foreign wives had taught them all a very powerful chapter.) it seemed very clear to Ezra and Nehemiah that purity of blood was essential for purity of faith.

The work of Ezra and Nehemiah in Jerusalem, and the fact that the one and only place of sacrificial worship for all of the People of God was there, made of the city a centre for all the communities of the People. It was most important that the citizens of Jerusalem and Judah should set the example concerning the purity of their blood line. A campaign to break up marriages with pagans got underway. This radical and seemingly merciless program of purification reached into homes from the richest to the poorest (Ezra 8-10). A list of the most important people affected by this anti-mixed marriage program concludes with the line, " _All these had married foreign wives,- they put them away, both women and children"_ (Ezra 1 0:44).

The Covenant renewed

Ezra and Nehemiah knew well just how ignorant of the Law of Moses the People were. The written Law was a relatively new thing. It had to be made known and the People and to commit themselves to it. A great assembly was called in Jerusalem to proclaim the Law and to get the People to accept it sincerely. The law had been written in Hebrew but by now most of the People spoke only Aramaic a language close to Hebrew). With the flair of a stage director and the good sense of a teacher, Ezra proclaims the Law.

Reading Nehemiah 8:1-13

Neh 8:9-12 give the tone which Ezra wanted the celebration to have ; the God of Israel " _Do not weep . the joy of the Lord is your strength ; the God of Israel ; the God of Israel Be at ease"_. The breaking up of families which was involved in this proclamation of the Law was bound to make of the feast a sad affair for many. Nevertheless, the festivities were effective because we are told that the people did begin to " _enjoy themselves_ " (vs 12), For seven days Ezra read from the Book of the Law of God (vs 18). After this a ceremony of repentance and atonement took place (Ch 9). Then an agreement was formally signed binding each family to the words of the Law proclaimed through Ezra (Neh 10:1-28).

In the passage you are about to read, we find that certain regulations are spelled out.

Reading Nehemiah 10:29-34

Note: In some Bibles verse numbers may differ by one.

Comment

Mixed marriages are to be avoided in the future (vs 31); no trading is to be done on the Sabbath or a holy day (vs 32); the rules for the sabbatical year are to be observed (vs 32; see Chapter 6, P. 15); the Temple liturgy is to be supported by a tax and through various other regulations (vss 34-40).

Whatever we might think today of the actions of our predecessors in ruling against marriages with foreigners, we at least have to concede that the times were extremely difficult and that some sort of drastic action seemed to be called for. The completely new situation of the People of God, living both in and outside of their homeland, without any unifying political organization under a common king, unable even to gather all together for worship in Jerusalem - this new situation demanded some firm actions. It can be doubted whether the People of God would have survived at all without some such measures against their assimilation into foreign families and cultures.

What had happen to the exiles from Samaria after a few centuries? They seem to have simply vanished into the cultures and religions of the nations into which they were deported by the Assyrians. ; the God of Israel warned and ,religions of the nations into which they were deported by the Assyrians. And this process more than likely took place by the ordinary means of intermarriage with foreigners. In the time of Ezra and Nehemiah the People of God were few in number and they were beginning to live in different communities scattered throughout the Persian empire. While we may think it a harsh measure, we cannot overlook the determination which underlay the regulations of Ezra and Nehem

The rule against mixed marriages also points out a very new awareness of the importance of the home, and especially the role of the mother, in the transmission of the faith. it had clearly been their experience that an unconverted gentile wife and mother would almost inevitably raise children not of the faith of the People of God. But there was the other possibility - the gentile wife who accepted the faith of her Israelite husband. The next reading is on this possibility.

## Chapter 16d The Good Law lived by a Good Foreigner

The opening to the pagans (gentiles) which Second-Isaiah had made was not closed completely. Whatever resistance there was to the rules of Ezra and Nehemiah could hardly have been uttered very loudly or very publicly. Ezra and Nehemiah were acting in the name of the Law of God and with the authority of the king of the Persian empire. But there was a kind of "underground movement". R preserved some old stories and created some new ones which expressed a very different attitude towards the gentiles. One of the stories which survived the purge of Ezra and Nehemiah on marriages with foreign wives is the story of Ruth.

It is not known for certain when this beautiful story was written. It most likely existed as a story that was told and retold by storytellers among the People of God long before it was written down. It is set in the days of the Judges (c. 1150 BC) and tells of one of king David's ancestors who had married a foreign wife. This wife is a model of all that is upheld as noble and beautiful by the Law of God. She has ail the qualities of the best possible member of the covenant community- loyalty, fidelity, tenderness. We have no knowledge of the date of writing of the Book of Ruth, but it would seem very safe to say that it existed in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah and that certain members of the People of God found in it not only a consolation, but a quiet protest against too rigid and cruel an application of the rules against marriages with foreign wives.

The Book of Ruth is as artistic a short story as has ever been written. Gently and with great discretion, the author shows us not only an exemplary foreign woman, but also an example of just how good life can be even for the most unfortunate, when the Law is observed by generous people. Throughout the story the main characters are sensitive to the goals of the Law; they do not just observe the letter of the Law, but go beyond it to the real spirit that runs through the Law. Ruth obeys the fourth commandment (" _Honour your father and your mother_ "), not in a stingy begrudging way but with a warmth and an affection that is above and beyond the Law; she treats Naomi as her real mother. The Law urged farmers not to pick every last ear of grain from their fields but to leave some for ;the poor to collect (Deut 24:19ff); Boaz tells his workers to leave plenty behind. Strictly speaking the Law did not demand that a relative as distant as Boaz had the duty of raising children to a kinsman who had died without any, but Boaz and Ruth are happy to extend the Law so that Naomi's husband Elimelech will have offspring (Deut 25;5-10) The Book of Ruth makes two important points: the Law, when obeyed generously, creates a fine society in which to live; and a foreign wife can be as good and generous in observance of the Law as any wife with Israelite blood in her veins.

". .. _And they came to Bethlehem. at the beginning of the barley harvest."Ruth 1:22_

Reading The Book Ruth

The fact that Ruth was an ancestress of the great king David gave this story even greater impact. it is quite probable that David did have roots back in Moab, When Saul was hunting David to kill him. David sent his parents off to Moab for safety (1 Sam 22:3-4). This gesture seems to indicate that he had some connection with the Moabites.

The Book of Ruth ends with a reference to another pagan, Tamar the Canaanite woman, who insisted on her rights to raise children to her deceased husband and tricked her father-in-law into giving her these rights (Gen 38). Tamar the Canaanite and Ruth the Moabite are part of the family tree of king David; gentile blood therefore flows in the veins of all who are related to the House of David. St. Matthew in giving the genealogy of Jesus, includes both Tamar and Ruth and adds a third gentile. Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite, who became the mother of Solomon (Matt 1:3-6).

## Chapter 16e Let Them Come to Us

The attitude towards those who were not members of the People of God, that is, the gentiles, which Ezra represented was rather severe. The best thing to be done with the gentiles was to avoid them as much as possible. But Second-Isaiah had preached a different kind of message, and it seems that some heard what he taught: the People of God have a mission to the gentiles, the nations are awaiting the Law of the Lord (Isa 42:4). Among those who took this message to heart were the writer or writers of the last chapters of the Book of Isaiah (Chs 56 to 66). We have no names for them, but it is quite clear that they were disciples of Second-Isaiah who carried his message to Jerusalem when they returned from exile. They adapted his words to the new situation making it quite clear that the very least that the People should do is to allow foreigners (gentiles)come in. (These last chapters of the book of Isaiah are often referred to as Third or Trito-Isaiah)

Reading Isaiah 56:1-8

Comment

In vss 21 the prophet. calls " _blessed_ " any person, without distinction of race, who clings to the Lord God. Such a person is not to he excluded from membership in the People of the Lord, even if such a person is a foreigner; even a eunuch who clings to the Lord is to be allowed in. Castrated men were looked upon as unfit to take part in the worshipping assembly of God's People (Deut 23:2). The prophet makes it very plain that in the plan of God the Temple is meant to be " _a house of prayer for all the peoples_ " of the world (vs 7), and he intends to bring both the outcasts of his own People (such as the eunuchs) and many foreigners into his house (vss 7-8). (See the cleansing of the Temple by Jesus, Mark 1 1 :1 7.)

The same thought is repeated in other parts of Third-Isaiah., in chapter 60 we have a vision of the future of Jerusalem, when gentiles of all kinds will swarm to Jerusalem bringing their gifts. The poem can be read on two levels:

1 It can be read as saying literally that the gentiles will come to make themselves servants of the People, and the People will become materially rich; or,

2. it can be read more figuratively as saying that the People of God will see the day when the gentiles will become one with them, learning from them, submitting to their teaching about the Lord, and in the process, the People themselves will be greatly enriched by the presence of so many different nations being counted as part of the family of God.

Reading Isaiah 60:1-11

Comment

This is a joyful poem. The nations are not being beaten into submission to the Lord and to his People; the gentiles in this poem are seen running happily to the light, which is the light of the Lord present among his People. The gates of Jerusalem will lie open always, day and night, to welcome all the foreigners who flock to the People (vs 11 ab). (We might say that this passage, along with Psalm 87, stands midway between the desperation of the nations in the story of the Tower of Babel ill Genesis 11, and the rejoicing of the nations in the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost, in Acts 2.)

Another prophet of the period after the Exile was Zechariah. His prophecies are pre-served in the first part of the Book of Zechariah (Chs 1-8). (The remaining chapters are a collection of writings from different periods after Zechariah) In the selection you are to read from Zechariah, the author reflects on the conditions which the People would have to meet if the gentiles are to be attracted to them.

If the gentiles are to come hurrying to join the.: of God, there will have to be some-thing to attract them. It is not likely that foreigner will be joyfully drawn to join a People who practice oppression, who lie to each other, in whose system of justice (the dates) there is bribery and incompetence, for whom a person's word, even under oath is worthless. The nations will also know enough not to come running to join a People whose leaders are always calling them to fast and mourn. The only way in which the gentiles will come willingly is it they see in the People of God a joyful nation, a people who practice the Law, who treasure justice, honesty, trustworthiness and who therefore enjoy the greatest gift - peace. The Lord wants his People to be a blessing for the nations (Gen 12:1-3: Zech 8:13),

Reading Zechariah 8:14-23

Comment

If the People of God " _love the truth and peace_ " there is no doubt that foreigners will crowd around a member of God's People, take him by the sleeve and say, " _Take us with you, for we have heard that God is with you_ " The prophet is certain that if the People of God truly obeyed the Law of their Lord, f they took it to heart, they would be a most attractive community.

## Chapter 16f Let Us Go To Them

We come now to one of the most delightful stories of the Bible. It is like a tasty drink which one takes with pleasure, only to realize later that it was a powerful medicine. We will not spoil the story by giving away the message before you read it. We would, however, like you to recognize the kind of literature you have in the Book of Jonah. Firstly, it is a well planned story, or play, in two acts, with a musical interlude between acts and a kind of finale at the end. The two acts are similar in design:

No words are wasted; everything that could distract from the message is excluded (eg.the name of the king of Nineveh). The pace of the story is carefully measured to sustain interest (ea. no reason is given to explain Jonah's first disobedience until near the end of the story), The author uses striking contrasts and exaggerations (eg. the behaviour of the pagans contrasted with Jonah's), The contradictions within the character of Jonah are cleverly brought out (eg. Jonah tries to escape from the "God of everywhere and everything."

To appreciate the story better you might keep the following in mind:

— Nineveh was the ancient capital of the Assyrian empire. The hideous cruelty and barbarous ways of the Assyrians had been experienced by the People of God when the Assyrians had taken the kingdom of the north (Samaria) in 721 (2 Kings 17; see Chapter 11, p. 29). The Assyrians represented a hated nation.

— Nineveh was almost due east of Palestine; Tarshish was in Spain, due west.

— Because they had no good port facilities, the inhabitants of Palestine were never good sailors. When Solomon wanted a merchant navy he had to hire the Phoenicians both to build and to man his ships (1 Kings 9:26-28; 10:22). Natives of Palestine, like Jonah, feared the big sea and would have to be very determined in order to get on a boat.

—When the Lord is called the " _God of heaven and earth_ ", this means he is the God of everything and everywhere.

Reading The Book of Jonah

Note: It is best read aloud, with some dramatic flair.

Commentary

The story can be read on two levels, firstly as a parable, secondly as an allegory. A parable is a story which conveys one overall message. An allegory is a story which conveys an overall message by having the persons, events and things in it stand for something else. As a parable, the Book of Jonah's overall message has to do with the merciful love of God for all peoples, even the most wicked. As an allegory, the Book of Jonah has a number of possible interpretations. In general it can be seen as an allegory about the role of the People of God to be the messengers of God's merciful love to all the nations, the People's rebellious response to this mission, and God's extreme patience with both his People and the pagans. ln particular, Jonah can stand for the prophets who were called to minister to the nations (eg. Jer 1:5), but who never showed God's mercy to them.

Or again, the Book of Jonah can be taken as an allegory on the history of the People of God: the three days in the belly of the fish stand for the period of the Exile. The story becomes a new interpretation of the reason for the Exile; the Exile came about because God's People refused to share their Lord with the pagan nations, a mission they had from the beginning since they were called to be a blessing to all nations (Gen 12:1-4). After the Exile the People, like Jonah after his stay in the fish, are called a second time to bring God's message to the nations.

ln this last :allegorical interpretation, the sacred author would be saying to his readers that the real reason they are unwilling to go to the nations is that they are afraid that God's mercy will be shown to the nations and the nations will not suffer what they deserve. in other words, the author is saying that the People of God want their God to hate as they hate, to make their enemies his enemies, and to let them decide when and where his wrath should be exercised. The People want to possess and control God, not share him and allow him to be free with his love and mercy.

A strong message, but one that is delivered with good humour. It deserves to be numbered among the prophetic books, for it is prophecy in a new form; or better still, prophecy in a more developed version of the prophetic parable (eg. Nathan's parable about the favourite lamb in 2 Sam 12:1-14). The author of the book is unknown. Because the book has a number of Aramaic expressions in it, most commentators believe that it was written after that language was common (after the 8th century). The author of the story is clearly familiar with the prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel and even Second-Isaiah; so it Would seem that he wrote either late in the Exile, or after. the end of the Exile during the debates about the gentiles which revolved around the work of Ezra and Nehemiah. This is where we have placed the writing of the Book of Jonah.

The sacred author chose to build his story around a man called Jonah possibly because there had been a prophet called Jonah, son of Armitai, who had ruled the northern kingdom shortly before it fell to the Assyrians (2 Kings 14:25). it is possible that the name Jonah appealed to his sense of humour: the angry, vengeful prophet bears a name which means " _dove_ ", the symbol of love, gentleness and peace (eg. Cant 5:2; Gen 8:8- 12).

The sacred author used such art in writing this little masterwork that it is possible to read it and meditate on it time and time again. The message has great importance and it has universal significance. The People of God are always in need of hearing the prophetic word it contains. Our Lord referred to Jonah's stay in the belly of the fish as a symbol of his own three days' stay in the tomb. After his stay in the belly of the fish. Jonah carried out his mission to the Ninevites; after his rising from the tomb, our Lord's mission to the nations would begin (See Luke 11:29-32).

The prophecies of Third-Isaiah and of Zechariah which we have seen in this chapter spoke of the pagans coming to the People of God and asking to be allowed to count themselves as members of the Lord's family. These prophets urged the People to let the nations come in. Zechariah stressed the fact that the People had to live lives which proclaimed good news to the nations, before the pagans would say to one another, 'let us go to the People of God' The author of the Book of Jonah is adding something to this debate about the relationship of the People to the nations. If is not right, he seems to be saying, to simply sit back and try to set our own house in order so that the nations will attracted to us. The People have a calling to bring the word of God to the nations; they may well find that the pagans will respond more generously and sincerely to the word of God than God's own chosen ones. This point recalls the wore of God spoken to Ezekiel: _"If I sent you to them, (foreign nations) they would listen to you_ " (Ezek 3:4-9).

## Chapter 16g Directions Taken

Within the hundred years which followed the return of the first exiles to Jerusalem, the People had fairly well settled the direction they would be taking for the next centuries. One thing was clear, they would never again all live in the same land. Communities of the People were firmly established in Babylonia and Egypt, and these gave no signs of ever wanting to move back to the land of their ancestors. Over the next centuries many other communities were established in other parts of Asia Minor, Greece and Italy. The People of God were spreading out among the nations. If they were to keep their identity, new institutions and roles of leadership had to develop alongside the older ones.

Of the old institutions which were retained the Temple was the most important. The presence of the Lord in his holy city was a fact which daily reminded the People of their one source of unity" Whether in Egypt or in Babylonia, members of the People of God would long for the day they could take part in person in the worship being offered in the temple in their name. As a member of the People of God however, the obligation to worship according to the Law was fulfilled as long as worship was carried out in the Temple. Those who lived outside of Palestine helped to support the Temple and its liturgy by contributions: There were great feasts at the Temple to which all were invited to come in pilgrimage.

If the presence of the Lord in his Temple was the source of their unity, the Law (his will) was the bend of unity. Now that the Law was fixed in writing and written copies of it were readily available, it was possible for the People, wherever they lived, to know the Law and to live by it. A great love and devotion to the Law grew among many of the People. Many came to see just how far superior their Law was to those of other peoples and religions; they felt grateful and proud to have received it and they fried to live it out with the humility it required.

Within Palestine, the leadership of the People went to the high priest. He was the head of the priests who ministered to the Lord in the Temple. Both the origins and the development of this office are obscure. It is not clear how the high priest was named after the Exile, nor exactly what his duties and powers were. In time he would become quite powerful and would become the head of the Sanhedrin, the highest council of judgment among the People. The dual leadership which was indicated by the two men who led the first exiles back (Zerubbabel, the prince of the line of David and Joshua the priest) did hot last. It may be that an attempt was made to have Zerubbabel crowned, but in time only the " _crowning_ " of the high priest proved to be possible (Zech 6:9-14).

We have already mentioned the rise of the new leaders, the scribes, who were needed for the teaching and interpretation of the Law. These grew in importance, both in Palestine and in the communities outside. The scribes made copies of the Law and of the other books which became part of the Bible. They studied the Law especially in order to explain it to others and to answer difficult questions as to the application of the Law to new or strange situations. They also were responsible for translating the Law into the language of the People. Hebrew had become a sacred language with which few besides the scribe were familiar. The common language under the Persian empire was Aramaic; later, under the Greeks, the communities of the People outside of Palestine generally spoke Greek.

In the centuries after the return from exile there arose a completely new institution — the synagogue. There is little evidence within the Old Testament books on the synagogue, but it is certain that its roots go back to the gatherings of the exiles in Babylonia. Unable to offer sacrifices according to the Law (since they had no Temple), the exiles got together to pray and study their heritage from the Lord. These meetings must have continued after the Exile was over. The synagogue became a gathering of a community to pray, hear the word of God and have it explained, and to celebrate some forms of worship which did not involve acts which could only be carried out in the Temple in Jerusalem (eg. sacrifice). Synagogue ceremonials developed which fostered the faith and devotion of the People wherever they formed a community. In time synagogues were organized in every town or city where members of the People lived. The scribes played an important role in the synagogues, both as interpreters and as teachers, especially when schools for the young were formed by the synagogue.

The relationships to the gentiles varied. The communities outside of Palestine were almost necessarily more open than those at home. Since there is so little information about the period after the Exile, it is not possible to document developments clearly. What is known however, is that by the year 100 BC there were many pagans who had joined the community of the Lord. This process must have started earlier. Two kinds of "converts" are known: the proselyte (Greek for' "one who draws near") one who entered totally into the People of God. He was treated as one who was newborn. He was circumcised, he bathed, offered a sacrifice, and was expected to cut all ties with his gentile past. This was a rather severe form of conversion. The other kind of convert was called a God-fearer. The " _one who feared God_ " accepted the Lord as revealed in the sacred books, and as taught by the People; he observed the commandments and the laws of ritual cleanliness; he took part in the synagogue. But the God-fearing gentile did not accept circumcision and was therefore not considered a full member. Because this second form of conversion was less drastic, many gentiles accepted it.

In the next chapters we will meet other writers, men of great wisdom. These had no hesitations about the gentiles: they mixed with them, and, what is more important, they openly admitted that they learned a great deal from the wisdom of those who were outside of the People of God.

##

##

## "~~~~~~~~~~"

##

##

##  

## Chapter 17 Early Wisdom

**Introduction**

For some, the meaning of wisdom is related to the acquisition of knowledge, to intellectual capacity. For the biblical writers whom we now study, wisdom has a much broader meaning. In itself, wisdom is order or harmony. As a quality, wisdom is present whenever and wherever good order, smooth functioning is found. In people wisdom is shown in the proper management or handling of reality. If a person knows how to handle material things properly, that person is wise. For example, when an artist fashions a beautiful statue out of a shapeless lump of clay, that artist is wise. When someone knows how to manage material things well (eg. a good economic planner), such a person is showing wisdom. If a person knows how to enjoy wine and food without going to excess, that person shows wisdom. It is important also to know how to relate to wealth and to the absence of material goods.

On another level wisdom is to be found when a person knows how to relate to other people properly - to parents, brothers and sisters, wife or husband, children, friends, superiors, servants. The one who does not know how to handle these relationships is a fool.

A very large part of reality which one must learn to handle properly is time. There is a right time and a wrong time for almost everything; few things are always and everywhere well-timed. The wise person knows when to speak, and when to be silent. (One who shouts blessings at his neighbour before sunrise, might as well be cursing, Prov 27:14.)

The greatest wisdom in a person is the ability to handle properly his relationship to God. This thought, though not always in the foreground, is never far from the minds of the writers of the wisdom books. (See Chapter 1 0, p. 4.)

The teachers of wisdom, whether they be mothers or fathers, kings or peasants, diplomats or scribes, all are concerned with "peace", that is, harmonious relationships between all that is. Good order between humanity and its God, between humanity and all created things, between all human beings, that is the goal of wisdom.

How is wisdom discovered? How is it learnt? How is it lived out? What are the problems which a wise person meets in his search for wisdom? These are some of the questions which will be approached in this and the next chapter.

There are three things we wish to bring to your attention before we begin these chapters (17 and 18):

1. Wisdom literature in the Bible is a large body of material, (Job, Proverbs, Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes),ecclesiasticus), Song of Songs, Book of Wisdom). These books literally touch on everything in life, from birth to death, from ants to monster crocodiles, from the depths of the earth to the stars, and almost every kid of relationship. It is therefore not possible in these two chapter to do anything but give a very modest introduction to wisdom literature.

2. Most of wisdom literature is written in poetry of some sort, This poses problems for translation and for interpretation. By way of illustration, it is very difficult to translate into another language the poetry of our proverb, "A stitch in time, saves nine". A good proverb such as this one has a little flair to it, found in its meaning, its rhythm and in the sounds it plays with. In English we simply could not say, "A stitch in time, saves eleven". Most of the proverbs and poetic pas-sages of the books of wisdom play with sounds and rhythm as well as with meanings. It is difficult to translate such materials, What makes matters even a little more complex is the fact that a good proverb should not yield its meaning and application too easily; a good saying makes one reflect a bit, and allows the hearer to make possibly more than one application. As a result translations of wisdom books can vary a great deal, and so too can their interpretations. In these chapters we have had to adopt translations and interpretations, often without having the space to justify our choices.

3.Wisdom sayings, wisdom problems, existed among the People of God from the day parents gave advice to their children, that is, from the beginning. At what dates the actual books of wisdom were written down in the form we now have them, poses a problem. Once again, we have had to adopt certain positions, many of which we will not attempt to justify, Readers who wish to probe further in these matters should consult the one-volume commentaries listed in the INTRODUCTION, p. 14, and check the bibliographies given in them.

The readings in this chapter, according to our judgment, were all written at some point before 450 BC. There is dispute about the dates for Pray 1-9, but we are adopting the position that these chapters too belong in the category of early wisdom, that is, written before 45

## Chapter 17a The Wine of Wisdom ( Proverbs)

**Creation sings**

Creation, from the stars to the child in the womb of its mother, all of creation is the basis for the reflection of the wisdom books. The wisdom writers look upon creation with wonder and amazement; it is a marvel to behold, a treasure to enjoy, a mystery to be probed endlessly. Creation is a good mystery, one that yields its mysteries bit by bit to human searching. The creation of the world by God was such a happy event that it produced a cosmic celebration, " _when all the morning stars sang with joy, and the sons of God chanted praise together_ " (Job 38:7). When a person takes the time to look, see, hear, touch, feel creation, it speaks to him of beauty, order and harmony. The wise person opens his ear to the sound of creation and allows himself to be drawn info its singing.

In creation there are patterns to be found. Laws of regularity, movements with order, gracefulness and beauty are everywhere to be discerned. Creation proclaims the glory, the wisdom of the Creator(Ps19:1-2 and the wise person listens to this good news proclaimed by creation. God created things " _in wisdom_ " (Ps 104:24), and all things carry the imprint of his proper handling, his good management. A person, to be wise, must enter into dialogue with creation itself. The role of the human being in creation is to hear what creation is saying, to allow creation to pose its questions, and to wrestle with the good and beautiful mysteries it offers.

To the wise there is sense and meaning in creation" even if it is not immediately self-evident. The plan, the order of creation was with God even before he made his first act of creation, Just as a wise craftsman has a plan in his mind before he begins to make anything, so God the Creator had a plan, " _Wisdom_ ", before he made all that is. When he created he expressed this wisdom, this order, this plan in all that came from his creative hand. Wisdom was released to become part of ail that came to be it delighted in being expressed in creation, rejoiced in being sent to be with the human race.

Reading Proverbs 8:22-31

Note: This poem has Wisdom itself speaking; " _me_ " in vs 22 is Wisdom.

Comment

Wisdom is presented poetically as a person (female, the word "wisdom" in Hebrew is feminine) who was "acquired" or "possessed" by the Lord when he first decided to create, " _When his purpose first unfolded_ " (vs 22). (While some translations render vs 22 by " _The Lord created me_ ", in our judgment it would seem more exact to translate " _The Lord possessed me_ ", or _"acquired me_ ", or " _begot me_ ".) What is being expressed poetically is the presence of Wisdom with the Lord before time began; but a distinction is being made between the Lord and Wisdom. The poet does not equate Wisdom with God.

Wisdom says that she came to birth (vs 25) before anything was made. Wisdom also says that she was with the Lord in his acts of creation: " _I was by his side...delighting him_ " (vs 30).

The poem ends with a ring of celebration. Wisdom is delighted to be at play everywhere in creation, and especially to be present and at play with the " _sons of men_ " (vs 31). (Small wonder that the New Testament should apply this passage to the Word, the Son of God, who was with God from the beginning, through whom all things were made and who came to dwell among us. See John 1:1-18.)

The poem continues with an invitation to the human race to come to her for instruction. Wisdom is here presented as a mother addressing her children.

Reading Proverbs 8:32-36

Comment

Anyone who comes to know the wisdom that is present in creation and walks according to its laws will have life. To violate the rules, the ways of wisdom to be found in creation, is to court death. Happiness awaits the one who seeks to live according to creation (we might say, according to the "natural law").

A further section of the poem has wisdom pictured as a priestess who has prepared a banquet in her sever-pillared temple, She sends her maidservants out to invite the ignorant to come and eat.

Reading Proverbs 9:1-6

Comment

The acquisition of wisdom is as good for people as eating bread and drinking wine. Wisdom is not something acquired superficially, as though it consisted of so many facts and laws to be memorized; wisdom can only be received as food and drink that is digested and becomes an inseparable part of the human person. (Once again it is easy to see why these verses apply so well to the Eucharist, seen as the act of receiving and making one's own the full Wisdom of God. See John 6.)

The wonder of humanity

The great admiration for ail creation which the wisdom writers express includes awe and wonder over humanity itself. The human person is the Lord's greatest accomplishment known to these writers, and the human person is a fine tribute to the wisdom of its Creator. The wisdom tradition expresses this in Psalm 139: " _You it was created my inmost self, you put me together in my mother's womb. I praise you that I have been so wonderfully made; your works are wonderful_ " (vss 13-14). The psalmist is filled with awe and amazement, not only at the thought that God was concerned with him even when he was taking shape in his mother's womb, but also at the marvellous thing which God has wrought in the human person. The Hebrew of Psalm 139:14 literally says, " _l am wonderful, your works are wonderful_ ". The positive view which the wisdom writers have towards all of creation includes a most positive opinion about humanity.

To the wise, a human being is a marvel, a well made, well-equipped creature, a masterpiece of workmanship by God. So well made is the human person that it can actually come to see, hear, know and appreciate the wisdom that is implanted in all that is. There is no argument over which is greater, God or man: God who is great beyond words has shown his greatness in his finest work, the human person. The abilities which the Lord gave to humanity are to be used to probe everything, These very abilities to sense, to reflect and to know, these very powers of the spirit of a person, are in fact the light of the Lord:

"The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord, searching his deepest self" (Prov 20:27).

Mankind is so made that it can be trusted, and is trusted by the Lord, to search out and find the ways of wisdom.

"Ear that hears, eye that sees,

the Lord made both of these' (Pray 20:12).

The gifts of sight, of hearing, feeling, smelling, tasting are from the Lord, and therefore to be used to investigate and to discover whatever can be known in all reality. All of reality is there for a person to sense and experience; from these experiences knowledge can be sorted out.

"A perceptive person acquires knowledge,

and the wise keep their ears pricked for knowledge" (Pray 18:15).

It is not enough to sense and feel reality; one must come to a knowledge of the rhythms, the patterns, the laws which are expressed in reality. The patterns of the sun, the moon and the stars give knowledge; the behaviour of ants, the flight of eagles, the growth of plants ail teach some truths. But most of all, human beings, if carefully observed, beginning with one's innermost self can yield the most astounding truths and the most fascinating knowledge. Wisdom among the People of God did include a knowledge of all kinds of things, plants, animals and birds (1 Kings 4:33; LXX 5:13)~ , but most of the literature from the wisdom tradition which has been preserved in the Bible is concerned about the human person.

What is very striking about the wisdom tradition among the People of God is that it was so very open to all peoples, all cultures, all nations. This is only logical. it was the conviction of the wisdom tradition that human nature was basically one and the same everywhere, regardless of the colour of one's skin, the system of government one lived under or the religion one practiced. The experience of human beings in Egypt or Edom was, for them, basically the same as the experience of an Israelite. And if there was anything different about life in another country, that different experience became just so much more information to be sifted through and measured against one's own experience.

Note: Some Bibles follow the Hebrew, 4:33; some follow the Septuagint (LXX), 5:13

The wisdom therefore, has an international flavour; in it you will find words from Agur and Lemuel, both of Massa, a tribe in northern Arabia (Prov 30:1; 31:1). The hero Job, is a man from Uz, a place in Edom. Discoveries of ancient Egyptian wisdom literature have made it clear that wisdom among the People of God was influenced by Egyptian wisdom. In fact the Book of Proverbs (22:17 - 23:1) reflects the same ideas as are found in the writings of Amen-em-ope, an Egyptian whose writings are dated between 800 and 600 BC. Wisdom from wherever it came was respected. Since we do not have writings from Edom or Moab, and insufficient materials from other countries round about Israel, we cannot prove that the wisdom of the People of God went out to and was absorbed by other nations, but we can certainly presume that this was so. (See the queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon in 1 Kings 10:1-4.)

The whole human race is endowed with mind and heart, with powers of discovery and reflection; whatever it finds in its search for wisdom is of value, not to be rejected simply because the finding did not come from one's own nation. Wisdom is " _at play everywhere n his world, delighting to be with the sons of men_ " (Prov 8:31). The sacred author did not say that wisdom was at play in Israel alone, hut everywhere; nor did he say that wisdom delighted to be with the sons of Abraham alone, but with the sons of all people,

The art of being human

Since the view of the wisdom tradition is that God has done a good job of creation, and especially. of humanity, it follows that the goal of wise people is to discover the original plan or intention of God in order to guide oneself and others along that path. In creating human beings, the Lord did not make a defective creature, one that had to be remade, recreated after birth. The Lord made the human person a living, growing creature, a creature called to become more and more human as it grows. Since the human person is not an adult from birth, good upbringing and good education are of supreme importance.

The goal of upbringing and education is not to repair a broken and defective creature, nor is it to call persons to superhuman qualities and abilities. The wisdom tradition is not interested in making supermen and superwomen. Its ideal in upbringing and education is to make humans human; to bring them up to be truly what the Lord has made them to be from the beginning.

"Better a person with self control,

than a hero who conquers a city" (Prov 16:32).

To be truly human is to be truly wise. To be human means to develop those qualities, those abilities which are the special gifts of humanity. Physical strength, while it is useful, is not an ideal - mere animals can be physically strong. The wise person shows strength of intelligence, the power of discernment, for these are talents peculiar to humanity.

"Better the wise man than the strong,

the man with knowledge than the man with •muscle" (Prov 24:5).

Humility and fear of the Lord

The art of becoming human can only be learnt by those who are raised to be humble. _"With the humble is wisdom_ \- (Pray 11:2). it is better to be humble and poor than to be proud and rich (Prov 16:19). Basically humility is knowing the truth and hiving accordingly, The truth to be known is that a human being is a fine creature called to be open to the Lord who is the Creator, Humility is recognizing one's place in the whole scheme of creation as designed by the Lord. Humility is accepting to be related to the Lord as creature to Creator, accepting to be related to other people as an individual who cannot grow wise without other people, accepting to grow without ceasing and never presuming to have enough knowledge or enough maturity, Humility is accepting the things of the earth as necessary for life, without abusing them by wanting too much of them, or insulting their Creator by denying their goodness.

Humility expresses itself first in fear of the Lord. There can be no wisdom, no growth in becoming human, without fear of the Lord. This thought about the human person's relationship to the Lord is expressed more often than any other in wisdom literature. " _Fear_ " in these sayings has nothing to do with being scared or frightened. We lack a good word in English to translate the thought properly. To fear the Lord is to recognize that one is a creature and that the Lord is one's maker. This establishes the basic relationship: the Lord is greater than his creatures. The Lord is also wiser than his creatures. The human creature must have an openness to /earn wisdom from the Lord. The wisdom of the Lord has been planted in ail he made; nature itself reveals the wisdom of God. Human common sense, human sensitivity to justice, human appreciation of what is good and noble, all of these teach the wisdom of the Creator. (We must be careful not to jump too quickly to the wisdom of God which is communicated to the People of God through revelation in history. The early wisdom writers do not reject what God has revealed in history, for example through Moses and the prophets; they only place much more importance on God's self-revelation through creation and through the experience of people. If people are basically well made by God himself, then they should be able, by sharing experiences and following their good instincts, to come to some sound conclusions about the will of God. You will see in Chapter 18 that later wisdom writers include all of historical revelation in their teaching. The materials used in this chapter, however, make no explicit mention of the Exodus, Moses, the Covenant, David or the teachings of the prophets.)

To fear the Lord is to obey what human experience has come to recognize as wise and

true. Since human beings are basically the same all over the world, it should not be surprising that in their search for wisdom peoples of every kind should arrive at the same basic truths about what is good and true, and therefore the will of the Creator. To give a few examples: reflective people everywhere recognize that parents should be respected, that society breaks down when there is no justice in the courts, that theft without dire need is not good. The compassionate side of human nature knows that it is not good to laugh at the crippled, the blind or the old; it also knows that it is inhuman to mistreat the poor, the orphan and the widow. These thinkers even came to the point of seeing the need of love for one's enemies. People everywhere value true friends, honest persons, genuine love. God has placed a love for these qualities in human nature. For each of these examples we could quote sayings written by Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians or Canaanites as well as sayings from members of the People of God. (See Appendix, The wisdom of the ancient near east.)

Humility and the need for others

For the early wisdom writers fear of the Lord means being open to what the Lord teaches through creation. Since it is human observation, human reflection, human experience which discovers the ways of the Lord in creation and especially in human nature, then being open to the Lord is basically the same as being open to the tested experience of people. the wise person knows that it is impossible to grow more and more human without other people. A relationship with others is essential for growth in wisdom.

"Iron is made the finer by iron,

a man is refined by contact with his neighbour' r (Prov 27:17),

The sense of this proverb is that just as iron is sharpened by iron, a person is made sharper, wiser, better, by neighbours. Only a fool believes that he can do without others: " _A fool is wise in his own eyes" (Prov 12:15). -He who trusts in his own promptings is a fool_ " (Prov 28:26). A wise man knows that he needs others and is careful to choose wise companions (Prov 13:20) and values friends very highly (Prey 27:10).

The relationship between man and woman is highly prized:

''Find joy with the wife you married in your youth,

fair as a hind, graceful as a fawn.

Let hers be the company you keep,

hers the breasts that ever fill you with delight,

hers the love that ever holds you captive- (Prov 5:18b-19 Jt3).

Human nature has an inbuilt longing for love that is strong and constant. The passion of love, its joy and its pain, is celebrated by the wisdom tradition. (Song of Songs will be considered in Chapter 18.) The depth and power of love between man and woman was the subject of amazement, as is shown in Gen 2:24-25, a saying influenced by the wisdom tradition. This, too, reveals the plan (will) of God for human beings. (The teaching of Jesus on marriage is based on the notion of the wisdom tradition that there is in human nature itself a "natural" drive towards fidelity in one love, for life; a drive placed there by the Creator from the beginning. See Mark 10:1-12.)

The truly human person is humble and this humility shows itself in obedience to the Lord's will which people have come to recognize by experience. Humility also shows itself, therefore, in the unashamed admission that one cannot go through life alone; other people are necessary.. Community is not simply to be tolerated, but is essential for growth as a human being.

A private opinion, or an original idea remains of dubious value until it is accepted by the community; the wider the acceptance, the more the certitude. This is why many counsellors are recommended (Prov 15:22; 20:18).

Humility: correction and discipline

The wise person is a humble person for another reason - the acceptance of correction The wise person not only accepts correction, but actually seeks it out and treasures it.

"Stupid is the one who hates correction" (Prov 12:1),

"One who 'hates being reprimanded will die" (Prov 15:10).

"One who listens to t correction gains understanding"(Prov 15:32)

The wise Person knows the need to learn from others, respects Parents as teachers arid seeks out wise persons for education. The process of growing into one's humanity invokes discipline. One who hates discipline can never be wise.

"One who rejects discipline despises self" (Prov 15:32).

Discipline and hard work are needed for proper growth in wisdom; the lazy person must overcome the inclination to do nothing and the habit of appearing busy while accomplishing nothing useful. Laziness is the subject of a great many sayings (ed. Prov 26:13, 14, 15, 16). Along with laziness there is the foolishness of a quick temper. The hot-headed person, lacking in self-control, is hot only stupid, but downright dangerous to himself and others,

"The hot-headed provokes disputes,

the even-tempered calms dissension" (Proy15:18).

Wisdom ought to grow as one grows older. The models of humanity, therefore, are the aged who are as wise as their years. The ideal of humanity is not the youth full of supple strength nor the girl in all her beguiling beauty, but the aged men or women, wrinkled and grey, honoured by their children and their children's children, surrounded by trusted friends. The aged men and women who are humble, at ease with their Lord, comfortable with their families, relaxed with their friends, having learnt self-control, discipline and moderation, are the most prized persons in the community. These are the ones who can teach wisdom because they are the ones who have mastered the art of being human. They are like grain that is ready for harvesting (Job 5:26).

## Chapter 17b 2TheLimits of Wisdom

**The rich and the poor**

Since eyes are for seeing and ears for hearing, the observant person will take note of what is happening anywhere within reach. In human society certain things were clear to anyone who had eyes to see:

" A rich man's wealth is his stronghold,

but poverty is disaster for the poor" (Prov 10:15),

'A poor man is hated even by his friend,

a rich man has friends aplenty" (Prov 14:20),

`A poor man speaks with pleading voice,

a rich man gives a rough reply' ' (Prov 1 8:23).

The facts are clear - poverty is real, and so is wealth. The poor are in a bad way; being

poor makes them a liability to their friends, so even friends abandon them. The poor carry no weight with the rich; from their position of weakness they can only plead. The rich man, from his position of power, does not need the poor, and so he can afford to treat him roughly.

The plight of the poor cannot help but touch the hearts of others. Something should be done. " _Happy is he who is kind to the poor_ " (Prov 14:21). " _He who oppresses the poor insults his Creator_ " (Prov 14:31). The wise know that all men are created by the same God; none should be oppressed or victimized.

"Do not rob the poor man because he is poor,

do not crush a needy man in court,

for the Lord will fight his case(Prov 22:22f),

The miserable state of the poor was not to he made worse by injustice done against them. Since the rich were especially inclined to take advantage of the poor, there was a special need to exhort them to desist from making matters worse for the poor. it was not enough, however, simply to avoid doing them harm:

"It is the kindly man who is blessed,

for he shares his bread with the poor" (Prov 22:9).

This recommendation of generosity, interestingly enough, does not come from the Law of Moses, but from the springs of compassion within human nature. The same injunction to share with the poor is found in wisdom of other cultures: " _Honour and clothe the one begging for alms. Over this his god rejoices_ ", says a wise man from Akkadia. " _God desires respect for the poor, more than honour for the exalted_ ", says an Egyptian sage. The wise men of any culture would come to the same conclusion as the wise men in the People of God: human suffering is not to be made worse; it should be made less if possible.

Explaining poverty and wealth

But how are poverty and wealth to be explained? Are there any patterns, any observable causes which help explain the different classes in society?

"Idle hands bring poverty

busy hands grow rich" (Prov 10:4).

This is the standard explanation for poverty. The wise person observes that in many cases laziness brings on poverty and hard work and energy bring prosperity. But the truly wise person observes more keenly and sees that poverty cannot be so easily explained. He sees that one man spends freely and still grows richer; another is miserly and grows poor (Prov 11:24). The writer of the Book of Job sees clearly that the poor work as hard as they can, and still stay poor:

"They must do the harvesting ,

they must do the picking . . ,

They go about naked, without clothing;

and starving they carry the sheaves...

they tread the winepress , but suffer thirst...(Job24:6,10, 11).

Clearly, hard work does not explain wealth, nor does laziness explain poverty; there is more to the problem. But the wise men needed some explanation and they sought to find it in the overall plan which they felt must he God's plan. If God is a God of order and harmony, if he is a God of justice, then there must be some logic, some observable order in the way he runs society. To be fair, God must reward those who are wise and virtuous and punish those who are foolish and wicked.

"The virtuous man is rescued from misfortune,

and a wicked man takes his place (in misfortune)" (Prov 11:8).

-The virtuous man eats his fill,

the belly of the wicked goes empty" (Prov 13:25).

"Evil pursues the sinner,

good fortune rewards the virtuous" (Prov 13:21).

This answer to the question of the riddle of poverty and wealth was a very popular one among the ancient wise men. It could only be maintained by persons of the upper classes who lived as virtuously as they could, according to their own wisdom. This answer (the wicked grow poor, the virtuous grow rich) could only be upheld by people with very limited experience outside their own comfortable circle. Anyone who took the trouble to move outside his upper class experience and actually expose himself to the poor and their experience could not hold fast to this simplistic solution to the problem of poverty. It became clear to every wise person that the facts did not back up the position that the virtuous are rewarded on earth and the wicked punished. This position is more a wish than a fact. The wicked do grow rich; it is clear if one looks hard. So wrote the wise man in Psalm 73. It does not help matters to pretend that the wicked rich are miserable deep down, because they are obviously healthy and happy (Psalm 73:4-7).

The ancient wise men seem to have thrown up their hands in defeat, They resort to the mystery to which they cling: God is in control and makes everything happen.

"Rich and poor alike,

the Lord made them both" (Prov 22:2).

This and similar sayings of the wise express an attitude: things are the way they are, and there is nothing one can do about it anyway. Once again, it is clear that only the comfortable rich could afford such an attitude. Untouched by the misery. of poverty, they could sit back and say, " _Why worry, the Lord is in charge_ ". Such an attitude, of course, was not worthy of the greatest of the wise. The truly fine teachers of wisdom stepped outside the safe, secure comfort of their upper class circle and allowed themselves to observe, to feel and to reflect on the experience of poverty and misery. They put themselves in the place of the poor and came up with very different responses to the problem of misery in society.

There is not space to go into the question in de all, but it is very clear that most of the literature on wisdom in the Bible came to us through those who had the leisure to both compose it and hand it. Much of Proverbs, for example, comes from the courts of kings and was used to train diplomats and royalty. The greatest of the wise men were able to rise above the narrow experience of their class, as is clear in the Book of Job.

## Chapter 17c Human Misery and God (The Book Job)

The author of the Book of Job was one of those wise men who dared to venture outside the limited experience of his upper class circle. He placed himself wholeheartedly inside human misery – not the misery of the rich, but the misery of the poor. Having done this, all the brilliant theories and opinions of the "wise" concerning human suffering became clearly the theories and opinions of people who never truly felt the pain and degradation of human wretchedness,

The Book of Job, as it has come down to us, is a compilation of various materials. It contains a folk story about Job, a long drama in three acts, with opening and closing speeches, a poem on wisdom and a series of speeches by a person called Elihu. There is much dispute among scholars as to what the original author of Job actually wrote: All of these materials, of course, are part of the inspired literature of the Bible, whether written by the original author or not,

We adopt the position that the drama in three acts with its opening and closing speeches

is from the original author, it is this drama which we will consider in this chapter. The following passages, in our judgement, were not part of the original composition(drama)

Chs 1-2 and 42:10-17 These passages form a kind of folk story about Job. We will indicate some of our reasons for excluding the folk story later.

Oh 28: A beautiful poem on the search for wisdom. Though we do not include it as one of the readings for this chapter, we strongly recommend that it be meditated over at some time.

Chs 32-37: A series of speeches by a certain Elihu, who does not feature in the drama either before or after he delivers his lines, His speeches, well written and poetic, do not add anything significant to the argument of the drama.

Chs 40:6-41:26: This seems to be a second version of the concluding speech, While its poetry is impressive, it does riot seem to be as fitting to the drama as the first version of the closing speech.

The central part of the Book of Job a play, a drama in three acts with an opening and closing speech and a final scene. It runs from 3:1 to 42:9, omitting the sections indicated above. The play is built as follows

Opening speech

Act I

Eliphaz speaks Job responds

Bildad speaks Job responds

Zophar speaks Job responds

Act II

Eliphaz speaks

Job responds

Bildad speaks

Job responds

Zophar speaks

Job responds

Act Ill

Eliphaz speaks

Job responds

(Bildad speaks)

(Job responds)

(Zophar speaks)

Job's final

defence

Closing speech,

Denouement (final scene)

Note: The third act is not well preserved. The Hebrew text seems to have become jumbled in transmission. We will follow the reconstruction given in The Jerusalem Bible.

The folk story in the Book of Job (Chs 1-2 and 42:10-17) presents Job as a man whom the Lord is testing to see if he loves the Lord for unselfish reasons. Job amply proves that he loves the Lord, the Giver, much more than the gifts he gives. In all the suffering which the Lord allows to fall on Job. Job utters not a single complaint, not a sinful word: " _The Lord gives, the Lord takes away; blessed be the name of the Lord"_ (1:21). Job with the greatest of patience accepts both happiness and grief from the Lord. The conclusion in 42:10-17 tells us that Job was rewarded twice over by God for his exemplary conduct.

In ancient wisdom literature Job seems to have been known as a model of the truly wise man. He is referred 'd by Ezekiel as such (Ezek 14:14, 20). it is quite likely that various different stories circulated about him. among the learned people of ancient times. In the Book of Job two of these have beer preserved: the first is the folk story found at the beginning and the end of the book, the second the lengthy drama in three acts. At some point an editor united these two separate pieces; to do so he wrote connecting lines between the folk story and the drama (2:11-13 and 42:10).

In this chapter there is only space to deal with the drama. We very strongly recommend that you put the story found in the Prologue (patient job being tested by God, and visited by friends) completely out of mind. As you begin to read the play, you should remind yourself that you know nothing about this Job, except what you can learn from the lines of the play. At the start of the drama you do not knew whether he has always been poor and miserable; you do not know whether he is a just man or not. Allow the play to tell you about him.

It might help to give you a few stage directions. These of course are not found in the Book of Job. We provide them here to help you set the scene. In centre stage. Job, wretched looking, repulsively poor, sitting amid refuse, Three other men, clean, well-dressed:

_Eliphaz_ , old, gentle appearance, clean but not meticulously dressed. He is closest to Job, but not within touching distance.

_Billdad,_ middle aged, somber, seriously clothed.

_Zophar,_ young, dressed just a little too nicely, fidgety.

He tends to glance at Eliphaz often for approval when he speaks.

After a long silence during which Eliphaz looks sympathetically at Job, Bildad scans a scroll and looks occasionally at Job, and Zophar tidies a spot for himself, Job utters the opening speech.

Reading Job 3:1-26

Note: Since this is a play, it is best to read the lines aloud, dramatically. (All quotations will be taken from the JB.)

Comment

This violent and anguished speech powerfully sets the tone. " _Why was I born to such suffering? Why was I not aborted?_ "Why this gift of light to a man who does not see his way. .?" Job vividly describes his agony and poses the question, why?

Act I

We must presume that Eliphaz. Bildad and Zophar are not close, intimate friends of Job. At best they know him vaguely by reputation. In his beautifully worded opening speech (4:1-5:27). Eliphaz shows great diplomacy, but little real feeling for Job's suffering. He is more interested in Job as a theological problem than as a human being. Job's "why" grips him more than Job's pain. He immediately attempts to explain why Job is suffering (4:4-11). The answer is clear: the reason Job is suffering is that he has been wicked Heclaims that he knows this has always been the way God deals with sinners.

To back up his argument, he turns to his own mystical experience in a dream (4:12 \- 5:7). His dream is more credible to him than Job's evident suffering. He advises Job to appeal to God (5:8-16), for God always hears the prayer of the repentant. Finally he tells Job that his suffering is really a harsh but healing medicine from God (5:17-27); all will turn out well in the end.

In this speech, we have come to learn that Job was once a respected person whom others consulted (4;3-4).

In his answer (Chs 6-7) Job first begs for what all poor people iong to receive- compassion: _"if only my misery could be weighed_ " (6:2). He goes on to state what ail the learned people of the writer's day presumed was true: God does everything that happens on earth, therefore God is the one who is persecuting Job (6:4ff). He longs for death, but then begs for an honest hearing. " _Come, I beg you, look at me_ " (6:28), he pleads, implying that Eliphaz's answer is based on theory, not on the person who sits right in front of his eyes. He continues his speech.

Reading Job 7:1-21

Note: Sheol - a place under the earth where the dead have a sort of shadowy existence, without feeling joy or sorrow. It is a levelling place where all the dead experience the same neutral afterlife. The author of the Book of Job has no clear knowledge of reward and punishment after death.

Comment

In moving language Job expresses the sense of futility, pointlessness which the poor know so well (7:1-4); he longs for Sheol but is bitter at the thought that he should die in his misery (7:11). He turns to God, strongly objecting to God's constant watch over him. Job says that if he were as big as a sea monster, he could understand God's close attention, but he is only a puff of breath. He begs God to take his eyes off him " _long enough for me to swallow my spittle_ " (7:19). Even if he did sin, what is sin in such an insignificant creature as man, in the eyes of the Almighty (7:20-21). Notice how Job has turned the phrase of Psalm 8:5 (-" _What is man that you should care for him_ ") into resentment (7:17).

Bildad speaks next. His speech is cold, blunt, crude. He does not allow the experience of Job to affect his theory. To him it is as clear as day that God orders human affairs with justice (8:3), a justice which people can clearly see and understand. He tells Job to plead with the Lord, and assures Job that God will answer. If Job resists, matters will only get worse (8:4-22).

Job replies to Bildad (9:1 -10:22) He begins by saying he knows that at least part of what Bildad says or supposes is true. God is in control of all things, he is wise and beyond reproach (9:1-13) To Job, however, these are statements of faith. faith that lacks proof as far as he himself is concerned. Job wants a fair trial, a trial with God (9:14ff), but realizes that it is useless to bring God to court, since he is all-powerful and in control of everything. 9:22-23 Job utters a most bitter statement, one which disturbs even us today: _"; innocent and guilty he destroys all alike . . he laughs at the plight of the innocen_ t". Job knows there is no contest between the Almighty and himself, a mere man (9:320, but in his desperation he finds one strength - he has no fear. He can speak boldly (9:35).

Reading Job 10:1-22

Comment

Job pleads, but does not admit that his sins explain his pain. He pleads with God not to cheapen the work of his own hands (10:3). Then he wonders whether-God really knows, really feels what it is like to be human and mortal (10:4-5). Job expresses his faith in God; in fact he expresses his faith in the tender love and care which God had for him from the moment he came to be in his mother's womb (10:8-12). Was this loving intimacy of God only a show, a pretence which was the prelude to God's destruction of what he so carefully created? Job is pressed in the ViC9 of incomplete revelation: God created him in love, but the same God is the cause of all his pain. He begs God to leave him alone; he wants to be relieved of all this painful attention at least for a moment (10:20-22).

Zophar responds with sparkling words in a shallow speech (11:1-20). He restates the theory he has learned from his teachers: " _for sin he calls you to account_ " (11:6). Then he proceeds to accuse Job of claiming to understand God (which is exactly what Job does not claim), while he, Zophar, clearly says he understands God (11:7ff). To Zophar there is no mystery: God is punishing Job for sins; Job need only confess and all will be well (11:13-20), To these harsh unfeeling words, Job lashes back with sarcasm: -when you die, wisdom will die with you- (1 2:2). Job then goes on to say that if God is in control of all that happens in both nature and in human history, then there is no clear, humanly understandable moral purpose in the way he manages things. If he does everything, then he makes judges crooked, counsellors stupid, leaders incompetent (12:11-25).

Job continues his speech, addressing his "wise" accusers, who seem to be trying to interrupt him (13:5, 13, 17). Job accuses the three other speakers of wanting to defend God by telling lies about him (13:7f). He asks again for a trial. He wants to ask God a few questions of his own (13:22ff). Job here admits that he had committed some faults in his youth (13:26). Job does not claim to be sinless, but innocent of the kind of crimes which might justify such suffering.

Reading Job 14:1-22

In the final lines of Act I Job sums up much of what he has said: life is short and full of sorrow. A human being is so small, so trivial, yet God hounds him and keeps track of everything he does. And then a person simply dies and there is no more life for him, no more hope (14:5-12) ( the author of job, as was noted before, has no clear knowledge of reward and punishment after death, This only becomes clear later in the wisdom tradition.)

Job wishes it were possible for him to go into Sheol, just long enough for God's anger to pass. Then he could come back to normal life with no sins held against him at all (1 4:13- 17). To Job there is no consolation in the idea that his children will be well off; all that a poor man really knows is the pain in his body right now (14:21f).

Act II

Eiiphaz opens the dialogue (15:1-35). He is losing Ms calm, patient disposition. He claims that Job is "protesting too much", betraying a guilty conscience (15:5f). He accuses Job of arrogance and of letting himself get carried away with emotion, a terrible thing for a wise man to allow (15:7-13). He tells Job that everything less than God is imperfect and that human nature is corrupt, implying that suffering is everybody's due (15:14-16). Leaning on the traditional teachings of past masters, he repeats the cliché: the wicked suffer for their sins (15:17-35). Through all of this, what is implied is that if a person suffers, it is obviously because of personal sin.

Job's reply poignantly expresses the difference between talking about suffering when one is suffering, and talking about it when one is not in any pain. In the next reading we get the first hints as to what has happened to Job to bring him to this terrible condition.

Reading Job16:1 -22

The language of 16:7-16 is so full of imagery that it is not possible to see clearly what sort of disasters brought Job to his present condition, He says that he once lived at peace, but that terrible things came upon him one after another, He was like a man attacked with arrows, slashed with knives. He begs the earth not to cover up his blood, but to let his blood cry out to God along with his tears and groans. He feels certain that God cannot ignore such misery.

Verses 19-22 pose serious problems of interpretation. We understand the " _witness_ " and " _defender_ " in heaven to be God himself. Job is torn between two views of God: God his attacker who seems about to kill him, and God his defender and the witness to his innocence. This inner conflict is expressed again later in the play. Ch 17 has Job lamenting his state and the lack of support and understanding he is receiving. He continues to long for death: hut it is only a relief, not a solution,

Bildad has the stage next (Oh 18). indignant that Job questions the longstanding theories of the wise concerning suffering, he hammers away at Job with the same old theory the wicked suffer. in his last line he cuts Job to the heart: if the wicked suffer, then the sufferer is wicked, he " _knows not God_ " (18:21); that is, Job is not with God and God is not with Job.

These harsh and cruel remarks hurt and insult Job; they serve to underline just how absolutely alone he really is. As you read Ch 19, you should keep in mind that you are reading the words of a most sensitive and skilled dramatist. After Bildad's brutal accusation that Job is a sinner who does not know God, Job, tormented, alone, rises to the insult and makes a most powerful speech, a speech which clearly shows that it is Job, not Bildad, who knows God. In this chapter the dramatist marks the turning point in the dialogue and offers a first hint at the way in which the play will end.

Reading Job 19:1-29

Comment

Job is injured by the insults of his accusers. He states again that it is God, after ail, who is his oppressor; what is happening to him is God's business, not theirs (19:2-12). Job then describes his total loneliness: he has been abandoned by his brothers, relatives, servants, his wife, his children, his closest friends (19:13-20). In view of this abandonment he begs his three accusers, whom he calls friends, to pity him and not to hound him (19:21-22). Once again, it is compassion, not explanations the sufferer needs.

In 19:23-24 Job emphatically declares the importance of the words he is about to speak. He wishes they were chiseled in stone forever. Here Job makes his great act of faith. Though God is his oppressor, though he has sent him all this misery, God is still " _my GO`EL...-, "my Redeemer_ ". Using the same verb which Bildad used in 18:21, Job says: " _I know that my redeemer lives_ "( 19:25). In one way or another God who is his go'el will vidicate him, show his to have been just. Job is convinced that he will be given a personal experience of God which will make it clear to him, at least, that God has not rejected him." _will set me close to him_ "" (19:26); and Job will see God and know that God is not the aloof, withdrawn judge he is made out to be by traditional wise men, Job tells his accusing companions that they should take care lest they themselves should fall under God's judgment (19:28f).

Job 19:25-27 are very difficult to translate from Hebrew. There are various possible translations. It seems best to look upon the words first from their artistic function in the drama, and secondly as a statement of the dramatist's faith. Artistically, the words show that Job holds within himself views of God which seem to pull him apart from within: God as oppressor, God as redeemer (vindicator). This is the extreme tension within the central character of the play. In this passage (19:25-27), he seems to be desperately clinging to the God he prefers to believe is the real. God, the redeemer. Though he emphatically makes his choice for God the go'el here, Job comes close to losing his grip on it in the third act:

The faith which the dramatist (the sacred author of the drama in the Book of Job) expresses is not a faith in the resurrection of the dead. His conviction, however, that God must, in some way or other, render a verdict of just when a man is just and guilty when a man is guilty, will help lead the generations of thinkers after him to faith in the resurrection and reward and punishment after death.

Zophar clearly has not heard Job's passionate act of faith. He seems to have been too busy plotting his next speech to pay any attention. " _My spirit whispers to me how to answer_ ", he says preciously (20:3). He has ears to hear the whispers of his soul, but not for the cries of Job. His speech (20:2-29) is a dull echo of what he has been taught: the wicked suffer, their life is short.

Job replies knowing full well Zophar has not heard a word: " _Listen, only listen to my words this is the consolation you can offer me"_ (21:2). Job then tries to expose the theorists to the facts: the facts are that the wicked do very well. in fact they seem to fare much better than the virtuous. Both at home and abroad, they live well and get buried with pomp and ceremony (21:2-34). The theory of the three wise accusers is just so much nonsense. On that line the second act ends.

Act III

Ellphaz opens the third act with a searing blast against job. Job has already admitted that he had sinned in his youth (13:26) and that as a member of the human race he was born tainted with impurity (14:4). That is enough for Eliphaz to conclude that Job committed all the sins which rich men are wont to commit. Eliphaz, who is at best only vaguely acquainted with Job's past life, commits the sin typical of theoreticians - he forces the facts to fit his theory. Since Job is suffering terribly, he was and is a terrible sinner"

Reading Job 22:1-11

Comment

It is interesting to note that Eliphaz accuses Job of having sinned especially against justice and charity for the poor. He again urges Job to make his peace with God.

Job does not bother to reply directly to Eliphaz. He longs to meet God and debate his case with him. Job is certain of his innocence, but he now is close to despair for he feels that God has abandoned him, left him in total darkness (23:1-17).

Anger seems to boil within him and he cries out in a fury.

Reading Job 24:1-12

Comment

If God is the cause of all, he is the oppressor of the poor, the defender of the wicked. He is " _deaf to their appeal_ " (24:12. RSV, JB, NEB). Job is being tempted to this view of God, though he clearly finds it repugnant.

"Why has not Shaddai his own store of times and why do his faithful never see his Days? . ." Job 24:Iff

While Job has been ranting aloud. Bildad has drifted off into contemplation. He piously utters sighs of wonder in admiration of God: " _What sovereignty, what awe, is his_ " (25:2). He continues without a single fresh idea (as reconstructed in JB his speech consists of 25:1-6 + 26:5a-14).

Job's answer to Bildad is short and sarcastic (26:1-4). He goes on to vow that he will never lie, he will never twist what he knows to be true about himself (that he is innocent of any crime warranting such punishment). " _I take my stand on my integrity_ ", he says

The next verses should be given to Zophar (27:13-24). Then, is nothing new in what he says. By now his speeches have become utterly boring.

The third act ends with a long speech by Job (Chs 29, 30, 31). Job reviews his past life and all the happiness he had, the respect he received (29); then he describes how he came to be brought so low (30); finally (31) he answers Eliphaz's accusations made at the beginning of the third act (22:2-11).

Chapter 29 gives us a vivid description of the former greatness of Job.

Reading Job 29:1-20

Comment

He had been an honoured and important person in the city. All respected him, sought his virtue, Polite, considerate, gentle, generous in all his ways, Job as a mature adult was clearly the model of humanity.

But then all was swept away. It is not clear exactly what happened to him. It appears that

some motley crew of rebels overthrew him, despoiled him of his wealth and humiliated him, leaving him abandoned, ridiculed and sick to death.

Reading Job 30:1-31

While Job was the kindest of men to the poor within the confines of his city, and especially to those who were on his estate, it does hot appear that he had much sympathy for the wretches who lived on the borders of civilization and eventually triumphed over him. To him these almost beastly characters could only bring and maintain chaos, not order. Whoever, these people were, they were the victors, Job the loser,

In his final speech Job defends his case, listing all the things which he did which could only have been pleasing to God, since he commanded them. As he reviews what his life had been, Job seems more and more strengthened in his conviction that he is innocent. in all his ugly misery he is made bold by an inward feeling of nobility. His last words are not those of a braggart, but the words of one who truthfully knows his innocence: " _I will.. go as boldly as a prince to meet (God)_ "(31:37)

Reading Job 31:1-37

Note: Verse 37 should be read as the last verse in the speech. Vss. 38-40a seem very much out of place.

Closing Speech

The third act leads without interruption to the conclusion of the drama. Job no sooner states that he is prepared to go to meet his God than all the stage is turned into a storm. Out of the storm, God himself speaks.

Reading Job 38:1 - 39:30

Note: If you are reading these texts aloud, do not make God sound pompous. His voice should be firm, assured and calm. His voice is not frightening. The audience is not meant to be beaten into scared submission, but led to wonder.

Comment

The speech of God lists wonder after wonder in creation, it moves from the first moment of creation to the light of dawn, the stars and then to snow, hail, lightning and rain. It returns to the stars and their constellations and then to animals of various kinds. Running through the speech are number of questions. Was Job there at the beginning of creation? Does Job know his way around the universe. Does Job know enough science to make the universe function well? Does he have the power to make it obey his commands? Can Job look after all the animals and can he explain their behaviour? (The sacred author is doing what dramatists often do: he is addressing the audience and or the reader - through an address to the main character) The answer to all the questions has to be "no". What is not said clearly, but is implied throughout, is that since humans know so very little about creation, about nature which lies before their eyes, they should be humble enough to admit that they know equally little about human affairs, such as suffering. Humans cannot understand nature, and even if they could, they would still not be able to make it work the way God does. It follows then, that humans cannot understand the ways of Gad in human history. They should have the humility to admit the limitations of their knowledge.

Nowhere in the divine speech does God explain his way of acting in human history. God does not side with the three debaters, nor does he side with Job. His conduct in human history is simply beyond human understanding, (38:13,15 pose a problem. We believe that the word translated as " _wicked_ " would more properly be translated as referring to groups of stars that are "shaken out" of the sky by the light of dawn. In vs 13 the Hebrew word would be "Dog-stars", and in vs 15 the reference would be to the group of stars that stretch like an arm in the sky and which navigators used to guide their course)

God speaks directly to Job, asking him to answer him (40:1-2; in some translations this is 39:31-32). Job can only mutter that his words were silly; he has nothing to say (40:3-5; or 39:33-35). But in 42:1-6, probably part of the original drama, Job does speak.

Reading Job 42:1-6

Comment

Job withdraws his words. He realizes now that he did not understand and still does not understand. But intellectual understanding does not matter to him anymore, and, we should add, neither does his physical misery matter. Job asks no more questions, and does not ask to be relieved of his suffering. As far as Job is concerned suffering as a problem has no more significance because he has seen God with his own eyes (vs 5). His suffering itself can be endured now that God has made himself know to him in all his mystery. Job is certain that, in ways he cannot understand, God was close to him and did not remain the distant, aloof God who left him in darkness, What is most important for Job is that all through his agony God was not his enemy.

There is no understandable answer to the problem posed by the suffering of the innocent; no answer that humans can grasp. But there is an answer in God, as yet unknown to Job and his accusers: if God is all-powerful, all-wise in the management of creation, he must also be all-powerful and all-wise in the management of human affairs How he is wise in human affairs is a mystery which requires a humble act of faith. And Job makes that act of faith.

Denouement

The unravelling of the drama comes in the following verses (42:7-9).

Reading Job 42:7-9

Comment

God passes judgment on Eliphaz and his friends; " _I burn with anger against you_ , ," (vs 7). The three accusers stand condemned as dishonest: They lied to defend God, as Job suspected (13:7-10). Though God burns with anger against them, nothing happens to them; they remain as clean and respectable in appearance as when the play started. They stand at the end of the drama as living proof of how false their theology is; the wicked do not always get their due in this life. God is merciful towards the three condemned liars; he asks them to offer sacrifice and fells Job to pray for them. These are the only clues we are given to the mystery of the prosperity of the wicked and the suffering of the just: God is merciful towards sinners, and the prayer of the just sufferer is powerful in the eyes of God. The sacred author seems to be referring to the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 52:13 - 53:12. In spite of his misery. Job is God's servant; God " _listened to Job with favour_ " (vs 9), According to our interpretation, the curtain falls at this point. The drama's tension has been resolved. The audience is left with Job still looking wretched and poor, but the audience now knows that God's favour rests on this miserable man. The audience too is asked to make the act of faith which Job had to make.

(According to our interpretation, 42:10-17 is an addition to the original drama. These verses belong to the folk story about Job which was presented in Chs 1-2. We maintain that the drama itself is brought to a proper conclusion in the preceding verses (42:7-9). Verses 10-17 are simply not necessary to the drama itself.)

To what has the inspired dramatist led us? One thing is very clear in his work: suffering is not explained properly by sin. Anyone who cares to see things as they really are will discover that wicked people prosper as often as not, and just people suffer as often as not. It is clearly false to say that a suffering person is automatically a sinner and equally false to say that a healthy, happy, prosperous person is blessed for being virtuous. It is false to say that poor people are simply bearing the results of their sinfulness, whether that be laziness or impiety. Facts prove conclusively that the rich are often rich precisely because they are thoroughly unjust. The sacred author makes his point again in another way: the miserable, poor person is not by the very fact of his misery to be seen as cursed and abandoned by God. The very opposite was the case with Job. It follows that the rich and comfortable person is not to be seen as blessed by God by the very fact of being rich and comfortable. (Our Lord Jesus will push this to a startling conclusion. See Matt 5:3ff; Luke 6:20-26; Mark 10:17-27.)

The author throughout the drama is exposing the strength and weaknesses of reason without the aid of historical revelation. He chose to place his play in very early times, long before Moses when people still referred to God with ancient titles, such as Shaddai (see Exod 6:2ff) Throughout the drama he avoids any reference, to the acts of God in the history of his People. We find no mention of the Exodus, the Covenant, the Temple and no explicit mention of the prophets. The characters of his play are all men of reason, philosophers who are searching by reason alone to come to some understanding of the ways of God among men. Job represents the best of philosophers, the three debaters represent the worst of philosophers.

The true man of reason must be desperately honest. His attitude must be that of a person who has nothing to lose, nothing to gain except truth. He must be willing to push the accepted principles of philosophy to their logical or illogical conclusions. Job is shown as relentlessly driving the principle that God is in control of all that happens to the revolting conclusion that God must therefore 'laugh at the plight of the innocent and be deaf to their cries' (9:23; 24:12). He must be the cause of injustice as well as justice (12:1 1:1ff,)Our author also argues that if a philosopher wants to be honest, he must move outside the comfort of his academy and look hard and long at the agony of people in this world. if a man claims to explain reality, he must immerse himself in all of it, or be doomed to telling lies.

The author also shows us that reason honestly pursued will lead a person through an agony of doubts to an act of humility and possibly even to an act of faith, Humbly the seeker of truth will have to acknowledge that there is enough order, harmony and beauty in creation to acknowledge that the Creator is wise, and must be wise in his way of handling human affairs, though he knows not how. Our author, however, has not shown us that reason alone leads to an act of faith. He has clearly indicated that the path of reason towards faith is made clear by some sort of experience of God which reveals him as personally related to the human race; this is a gift of grace. Without this gift, reason cannot proceed to anything but an aloof God indifferently manipulating the human race. Reason and grace do not oppose each other; they complement each other.

The inferior philosopher is proud, maintaining that God's ways can be understood; and worse still, believes that philosophy is actually in possession of such knowledge. The inferior thinker does not have the courage to bring his principles to their logical or illogical conclusions. Poor philosophy develops in the protective shell of the classes of people who can afford the luxury of leisure and never bother to be dirtied by the sordid side of reality. God, creation and human history are reduced by them to a simple game whose rules they have invented.. They treasure their rules more than truth itself, The sacred author has God call such people liars, On many occasions in the play, the author points out the shallow "experiences of God" which the false wise men claim to have had; they claim whispers in the soul, dreams in the night and their whispers and dreams only repeat what they already know. They have become incapable of receiving a genuine experience of God because they have come to believe that they already know him (a position forcefully portrayed by some Pharisees in the gospels).

Note: There are about as many possible interpretations of the Book of Job as there are of Shakespeare's Hamlet. Anyone who pursues a study of this book will soon discover many approaches which differ in one way or another from the one given in this chapter. They all have something to contribute.

In the next chapter we will see how the wisdom tradition developed in later centuries, Within the People of God wisdom could not remain the domain of reason and human experience alone. The force of the revelation received in history was eventually absorbed into the wisdom tradition.

## Appendix 6- The wisdom of the ancient near east

The basic convictions of the wisdom writers on human nature (that it was one and the same everywhere, and that it had been well made by God) found proof in the writings of the wise from nations outside of the People of God. Their writings yielded wisdom to match much of what was written by the wise among the People of God. In this Appendix we give a few examples. (Excerpts from "Proverbs and Precepts," transl. by John A. Wilson in Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, ed. by James B. Pritchard, 3rd edn. with Supplement (copyright © 1969 by Princeton University Press), pp. 413-429, Reprinted by per-mission of Princeton University Press).

Note: The parts in brackets represent what the translator has had to add to the original text.

_Respect for parents_ : "(Whosoever) takes no pride in the names of his father and mother, may the s(un) not shine (upon him); for he s a wicked man."

From **The words of Ahiqar** an Assyrian probably from c. 700 BC"The Aramaic text is from the fifth century B.C. Compare with Prov 20:20.

_Against false witness_ : _"Do not bear witness with false words, nor support another person (thus) with thy tongue_."

From **The instruction of Amen-em-ope** , Egyptian, Text from between 700 and 500 BC. Compare Prov 14:5.

_Against slander_ : " _Do not slander, speak what is true._

_Speak no evil, tell what is good_ ,"

From **Counsels of Wisdom** ; Akkadian. Text from before 700 BC. Compare Prov 10:18.

_Kindness to the poor_ ; " _Give food to eat, give date wine to drink;_

The one begging for alms honor, clothe:

Over this his god rejoices,

This is pleasing unto the god Shamash, he rewards it with good.

_Be helpful, do good._ "

From **Counsels of Wisdom,** Akkadian. Text from before 700 BC. Compare Prov 14:31.

"Do not neglect a stranger (with) thy oil-jar,

That it be doubled before thy brethren.

God desires respect for the poor

More than the honoring of the exalted."From **The Instruction of Amen-em-ope** , Egyptian. Text from between 700 and 500 BC. Compare Prov 22:22f.

_Kindness to one's enemy_ : "Unto your opponent do no evil;

Your evildoer recompense with good;

Unto your enemy let justice (be done)."

From **Counsels of Wisdom** , Akkadian. Text from before 700 BC. Compare Prov 24:17f; 25:21f.

_Against greed_ :"Do not be greedy, unless (it be) for thy (own) portion."

From **The Instruction of the Vizier Ptah-hotep** , Egyptian. Text from around 2450 BC. Compare Prov 15:27.

Many other sayings of wise men not of the People of God could be listed, thousands in fact. There are also examples of wisdom writers in Egypt and Sumeria who tackled the problem of human suffering, especially the suffering of the just man. Although these writers did not reach the high level of the Book of Job, they saw and faced the problem of the apparent injustice in the way God (or the gods) managed human affairs. See Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, pp 413-429.

"~~~~~~~~~~"

##

##  

## Chapter 18 Later Wisdom

Introduction

People of every social and economic class possess wise sayings and proverbs of their own. This must have been the case among the People of God as well. Examples of wise sayings of ordinary people are referred to in books other than the books of wisdom. For example, " _Wickedness comes from the wicked_ " (1 Sam 24:14); " _Let him boast who takes his armour off, not he who puts it on_ " (1 Kings 20:1 1); " _Is the axe stronger than the axeman_?" (Isa 10:15). Reflection and wit in any class of people will produce wise sayings.

We can ask how wise sayings were collected, how they were handed on and how the ideas and experiences of the wisdom tradition were developed into such books as Job, Qoheleth, Sirach and Wisdom. While no clear and definite answers can be given, we can nevertheless offer a fairly accurate sketch of the development of the materials of the wisdom books.

The family, the clan and tribe would seem to be the most natural setting for the earliest collections of wisdom sayings. Parents, interested in preparing their children for the proper handling of life, would be interested in passing on to them the wisdom of their family, clan or tribe. This is an assumption which appears quite reasonable, though of course it cannot be proven.

We are on more certain ground when we come to the period of the kingship in the People of God. Here we see the rise of official counsellors to the kings, persons whose very position in government demanded "wisdom". David had his counsellors (eg. 2 Sam 15:12). It was the role of such persons to advise the king on the proper way of handling the affairs of state. The kings had many officials who played various roles in government, both within the country and in its relations with other countries (1 Kings 4:1-21). All of these diplomats and ministers of the crown had to have training of some sort. It is most likely that "schools" developed in the courts of the kings where young men could receive training in the wisdom required for these positions. It is probably in the courts of kings, therefore, that some of the material of the wisdom tradition was collected and handed on. (Along with the kings they served, the wise men were often attacked by the prophets: Isa 29:14; Jer 8:8-9; 9:22.)

When the kingship came to an end after the Exile there was of course no need of coun-sellors for kings. There was, however, still need for prudent leaders and administrators of the country and a need for diplomats and ministers of whatever form of government the People in Jerusalem had. There was still a need for training programs for the youth who were preparing for some official role in government. Schools or academies for young men were formed. It is most likely that Jerusalem had such a school or schools. Youths for whom parents had planned careers in government studied there under masters known for their wisdom.

It is probably in such schools that the books of wisdom developed. Since these academies served the children of the upper classes, it was normal enough that the teaching handed on in them would tend to be conservative and in favour of the maintenance of order and moderation. But schools can also be the medium for radical thought. Some commentators believe that the writer of the drama in the Book of Job was one such rebellious genius, the product of a Jerusalem academy.

In this chapter we will consider the work of another man, possibly a teacher in one of these schools in Jerusalem. As disturbing as his thought might be, Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes) is a man of intellectual honesty and integrity. He is a teacher to be respected.

It was almost inevitable that the wisdom tradition and the institution of the scribes should meet, and they did meet. Both were interested in learning; both were literate: both were in Jerusalem. In this chapter we consider one of these "wise scribes", Sirach (Ecclesiasticus). In him we begin to see the fusion of the wisdom tradition with the legal tradition which grew so strongly after the Exile. Sirach, it appears, was a teacher, a master in both wisdom and the Law.

In the previous chapter we dealt with literature which we dated as coming before 450 BC. In this chapter we consider literature which is later: Qoheteth wrote around 250 BC; Sirach around 190 BC. The Song of Songs, also considered in this chapter, is dated anywhere between 960 BC (time of Solomon) and 230 BC. We chose to place it in this chapter because its theme fits well after Qoheleth.

Note Carefully: While we have accepted a date around 250 BC for Qoheleth, his thought quite clearly belongs to earlier wisdom, such as the Book of Job. You will notice that Sirach, writing only some 60 years after Qoheleth, is quite different in outlook.

Between 450 and 200 BC certain important events took place in the history of the People of God. In order to get caught up on these events, we include a section on historical developments up to the end of the third century BC.

## Chapter 18a Events from 400 to 200 BC

By 400 BC the power of the Persian empire began to weaken. The first signs occurred in the rebellion of Egypt (401). Other leaders in the western part of the empire, inspired by the success of the Egyptians and tired of heavy tax burdens, revolted.

The Persians appeared to regain control for awhile, particularly under the tyrannical rule of Artaxerxes III Ochus (358-338). He immediately crushed any revolts throughout the empire and regained control of lost territories, particularly Egypt. However, this show of strength was only momentary. Internal struggles for power within the royal Persian household weakened their rule once again. In the west, Philip II, ruler of Macedon (359-336), began to gain control over a number of Greek city states. By the time Artaxerxes was murdered, Philip had gained complete control of the Greek states. In 336, Philip was succeeded by his son Alexander. Little did the Persians know that in him they were to meet their match.

The Persian empire came to an end with the conquests of Alexander the Great (336-323). Alexander not only wanted political control of these vast territories; he also wanted the Greek culture to unite the empire. Known as Hellenism, Greek culture was principally expressed in their language, literature, philosophy and art. (From c. 700 BC Greeks called themselves Hellenes. The Greek word hellen simply means "Greek".) Alexander had established Greek colonies throughout the empire that would promote Hellenism. In Egypt he founded the new city of Alexandria. He arranged marriages between Greeks and those of other nations and built cities based on the Greek design. A new era had begun that was to mean drastic changes for all peoples in this part of the world, including the People of God.

After Alexander's premature death at thirty-three, internal struggles resulted in his empire being divided among his army generals, the most important being Ptolemy and Seleucus. Ptolemy seized control of Egypt and Palestine, establishing his capital in Alexandria. Seleucus became ruler of Babylonia, eventually taking control of other territories including Syria and what is today Iran.

As far as we know, life for the People of God in Palestine was peaceful during these times of great struggle for international power. In Judah it appears that the high priest was gaining power in both religious and secular matters. The People of God paid their tribute to the Ptolemies and it seems that life went on as usual.

Outside of Palestine, particularly in Egypt, the People of God increased in numbers. The Community in Alexandria grew as members came from other parts of the empire and Greek-speaking gentiles (proselytes) were accepted into the faith. Many members of the Community now spoke Greek though a few could still speak Hebrew. As more of the People of God in Alexandria spoke Greek and more Greek-speaking converts were accepted into the Community, the need arose for a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. Beginning in the third century BC a translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek was begun in Alexandria.

Legend has it that upon the request of Ptolemy II a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures was made by 72 men from Jerusalem. Each finished his task independently of the others in 72 days and all their translations were found to be identical; thus the name Septuagint (70). This story is very unlikely, as the translations were probably done by many people over a long period of time. (See Appendix for the different lists of sacred books which began to develop at this time.)

Over the years the empire of the Ptolemies (successors to Ptolemy) weakened until they were defeated by the Seleucids (successors to Seleucus). The Seleucids, under Antiochus III (223-187 BC) gained control of Egypt and Palestine. This Antiochus was generous to those in Palestine: captives were set free, exiles were returned, and economic assistance was given. The influence of Greek culture increased as Greek colonies thrived in Palestine and towns with Greek names were commonplace. Even the authors of the books of Qoheleth and Sirach appear to have had some knowledge of Greek philosophy.

## Chapter 18b Serenity or Despair (Qoheleth)

The Book of Qoheleth has always been the subject of controversy. The author has been accused of being a hedonist, a cynic, a man without hope. He has also been called 'an honest seeker after truth'. His book has been said to reek with the 'smell of the tomb'; it has also been called 'one of man's noblest offerings on the altar of truth'. If you have never studied this book before, it will no doubt raise questions in your mind. Is this author a jaded cynic, a promoter of despair? Is he an honest man without illusions about human life who is trying to promote serenity?

Many people wonder why this book ever got to be accepted as part of the Word of God. Others may wonder how it got to be accepted, but are most grateful that it was accepted. As literature it contains some of the finest pieces of writing in the Bible. On that basis alone it was worth saving. As a book of philosophy (of natural theology) it places us squarely in the problem of dealing with life without revelation. Like the drama in the Book of Job and much of the Book of Proverbs, we are dealing with the thinking of a person who has not assimilated the 'good news' of the Exodus, the Covenant and the tradition of the prophets. Qoheleth is a man of reason, a philosopher who sees God as cause of all and nothing more.

Qoheleth is also struggling with incomplete knowledge concerning reward and punishment after death. It appears that in his day some people were beginning to hold that there was reward and punishment after death, but he does not accept this position because he holds that it cannot be proven either by experience or by reason. He is limited to life on this earth from birth to death, nothing more. Is there any sense in this earthly existence? Can any sound conclusions be made about the way in which God directs the affairs of the human race? Can humans come to know anything as certain and completely trustworthy? These questions haunt our author. You might find it difficult to accept his answers, but you will have to admit that his questions are good ones.

The name Qoheleth renders a Hebrew word which can mean " _one who gathers or assembles_ " a congregation, a class of students, an audience. It does not seem to be a personal name, but a name which gives the man's profession. He is a teacher or a preacher. ( Qoheleth is a transliteration of the Hebrew; Ecclesiastes is a transliteration of the Greek for the same word.)

Qoheleth is presented as "a Solomon", " _son of David, king in Jerusalem_ ". This is simply a way of speaking: the book is placed under the patronage, we would say, of Solomon. It is clear from his writings that the author is not Solomon himself.

Qoheleth's writings begin and end on the same note. The word often translated " _vanity_ " has the meaning of "a breath", a "puff of wind", a "vapour". It is used of something short-lived and of little importance. It also has the sense of something that can be felt, but not grasped, understood or controlled.

Reading Qoheleth 1:1-2

Comment

All of human effort and hard work appears to the author as nothing but emptiness, a thin thing that evaporates in no time. If he had heard the word of the sacred authors of Genesis 1-2 and Psalm 8 (and he probably did), he would be saying that their theology of the greatness of the human race called to be lord and master of creation, made a little less than God himself, simply does not stand up to the penetrating scrutiny of reason. The evidence which eyes can see supports not the great eternal significance of the human race, but its triviality.

In the next reading we find our author reflecting on the results of the search for patterns, rules, laws in nature. The wisdom tradition firmly held that creation itself could reveal the wisdom of God the Creator; if a person observed creation, discovered its laws, then that person could come to know something of God's will. Qoheleth, in bold and beautiful prose, tells us what his search for patterns in nature and life really revealed.

Reading Qoheleth 1:4-11

Comment

Nature reveals cycles; things go in circles, endlessly repeating themselves. The sun keeps doing the same thing, the winds repeat their patterns, the rivers keep trying to fill the sea, but never succeed. Neither in nature nor in human life is there anything really new. Those foolish enough to believe that something really new has happened do so only because they do not know any better.

In the next passage he describes the sense of futility which results from the search for wisdom and understanding.

Reading Qoheleth 1:12-18

Comment

His efforts to study reality have borne the fruit of weariness. No satisfaction, no sense of reward for his efforts, did he experience. He only realized that nothing much can be changed in life, " _What is twisted cannot be made straight_ " (vs 15), and the greater the wisdom, the deeper the pain (vs 18). The more one knows, the more acutely and painfully aware one becomes of one's ignorance.

The author then goes on to describe all that he did to try to find out whether there was any sense or meaning to life (2:1 -1 1). He threw himself into life with zest and enthusiasm, trying all the things which his wealth allowed him to try. In the end he realized that all these things were empty little gusts of wind (2:11). All this toil, all this striving - what did it get him?

Reading Qoheleth 2:12-26

Comment

Qoheleth believes in principle that being wise is better than being foolish. But in the long run who is better off, the wise man or the fool? They both die; neither one knows what will come after him; neither one can foresee what his successors will do. With these thoughts running through his mind, the author says that he hates life (vs 17) since it is empty of real meaning.

He then comes to one of his main themes. in fact it is central to his message: 'eat, drink and find contentment in work, since this is from the hand of God' (vss 24-25). Qoheleth rejects the traditional teaching that the good are rewarded and the evil punished; this theory is nothing but emptiness (vs 26). To Qoheleth it is a waste of precious time to seek satisfaction in life in terms of rewards for virtue. Since God does what he pleases and what he does seldom makes any human sense, there is no point in seeking happiness in reward and punishment. But there is something which expresses the will of God - the enjoyment of the ordinary things of life. Food, wine, work are intended by God to give people pleasure. To rejoice in that pleasure is clearly the will of God.

Qoheleth sees in the events of human life the same patterns of repetition that he saw in nature (1:4ff). There is a "time", that is, an appointed moment for everything that happens. To the author, God has made things so; people can do little or nothing about it, nor can they find any meaning in it all.

Reading Qoheleth 3:1-13

Comment

To try to find some humanly understandable explanation for the constantly repeating events of human life is pointless (vss 9-1 1). He then turns again to his theme: the ordinary events of life, eating, drinking and work give pleasure. God wanted it so. The person who spends life making happiness depend on the discovery of meaning, the understanding of history, is indeed missing the one sure source of happiness - the joys of everyday life.

In the next passage it appears that Qoheleth is addressing himself both to those who still hold that the virtuous are rewarded in this life, and to those who were beginning to say that there was some sort of afterlife in which justice would be done. Qoheleth cannot believe either position. (Qoheleth could be protesting against the Greek idea that the soul of man is immortal.)

Reading Qoheleth 3:14-22

Comment

To Qoheleth the fate of man and beast appears identical (vs 19). He does not see how anyone can prove that the fate of the spirit of a human being is any different from the fate of the spirit of an animal. He turns again to his trusted principle: 'enjoy what is at hand (vs 22), and do not turn life into a waiting room for some future happiness'.

Qoheleth feels for the injustices which exist in the world (3:15); his heart is sensitive to the situation of the oppressed. He finds their lot so depressing that he envies the dead and the unborn.

Reading Qoheleth 4:1-4

Comment

The strivings of people are motivated by envy, rivalry, jealousy; such motives are just so much nonsense to our author. While he feels for the suffering of the poor, he shows none of the passion of the prophets. The poor, pitiful as they are, are an inevitable part of human society. It is clear that Qoheleth wishes things were otherwise, but he does not seem to believe that anything significant can be done about it.

Qoheleth clearly accepts worship at the Temple (4:17 - 5:6), but advises against getting carried away by religious enthusiasm. He neither denies the existence of God, nor rejects worship.

Reading Qoheleth 5:7-8

Note: the Hebrew here is very obscure in parts. Translations can vary.

Comment

With deadly accuracy he describes the hopeless state of the victims of injustice caused by government. The bureaucracy is there, with officials under higher officials . . . and nothing happens to correct the wrongs done against people.

After considering other things which depress him (5:9-16), the author returns again to his theme of joy (5:17-19). In this short life, people would be wise to take joy as it passes. To rejoice in the things which God does give is the lot of humans in this life; a person should not wait till all injustices are resolved before he enjoys his meals.

Qoheleth treats of a number of topics in Chs 6 and 7: he doubts that anything certain can be known about what is good for mankind; he mocks the superficially joyful; those who still talk of "the good old days" he calls foolish. He considers the question of reward and punishment again, but concludes that reality is so deep and complex that nothing certain can be found. He also makes a very prejudiced remark about women (7:26ff), a remark which has led some commentators to believe that he was not very successful in love. Ch 7 ends with a saying which credits God with having made humans rather well, but that they have complicated themselves no end (7:29).

After some remarks about relationship with kings (8:1-9), he turns again to reward for virtue and punishment for evil.

Reading Qoheleth 8:10.15

Comment

He has no illusions about the facts: the good suffer, the evil prosper, at least as often as not. The fine principle (vss 12b-13) just does not work out in practice. There is no sense making one's life miserable, because God's ways in human affairs cannot be understood. There is still the possibility of enjoying what life provides (vs 15). To make the enjoyment of the simple pleasures of life conditional on solving the riddle of justice on earth is to rob oneself of the very support God intends people to have in their labours on earth.

In the next reading Qoheleth makes a strong statement on the limits of human knowledge. Humans, in spite of all their efforts, never really understand anything thoroughly. People of the profoundest thought cannot understand the ways of God; in fact not even the most common, ordinary, everyday experiences of life are understood by them.

Reading Qoheleth 8:16 - 9:10

Comment

If a person makes happiness depend on achieving a thorough understanding of reality, that person will never find joy. The fact that humans can know so very little with certitude should not lead them to ignore what joy there is in this life (9:7-10). The pleasure of love between man and woman is intended by God as the lot of humans. All the pleasure of planning and accomplishing work is also a joy given to be enjoyed on this earth; it should not be despised or ignored simply because the whole meaning and purpose of life has not been discovered.

In Chs 9:11 to 10:20 Qoheleth gathers together a number of sayings only very loosely connected with each other. He touches on things which are very disappointing in life and things which simply do not seem right, such as revolutions which topple princes and set slaves on high (10:5-7). He praises good kings and warns against the abuses of nobles (10:16-18). He knows that money is what makes good meals and fine wines possible (10:19). He warns against the dangers of even thinking evil of the kings and the rich —such thoughts seem to have wings of their own (10:20).

The message of Qoheleth could leave a person paralysed: since people can understand so little, since the future is unknown, since God is in control of everything, a person could simply sit around and do nothing at all. Qoheleth says that it is precisely because only God knows what is going to happen that a person should boldly take risks and undertake venture.

Reading Qoheleth 11:1-6

Comment

Investments usually bring returns, but they should not all be placed in one project or undertaking; one should diversify investments (vss 1-2). What will happen, will happen. It is not possible to grasp all the odds, all the indications which could assure success or failure in human ventures (vss 3-4). Since it is not possible to understand ahead of time what God will bring about, the thing to do is to act (vss 5-6).

Qoheleth turns again to the message of joy. He urges people to rejoice when and as they can because troubles will also come. He tells young people to enjoy themselves while they have all the vigour needed to enter into the joys of life. Then he turns to a very moving poem on old age and death. The imagery of this poem is not consistent; it goes from picturing an old man in terms of a mansion or an estate that is falling into ruin, to a simple set of images referring to the gradual weakening of a man in all his members and senses.

Reading Qoheleth 11:7 - 12:8

Comment

The senses, which are the instruments of what pleasures life can legitimately offer, weaken one by one. Strength goes first (" _the watchmen of the house tremble_ "), then sight and hearing (vss 3-4). When a man's hair grows white as the blossoms on the almond tree, his sexual appetites wane (" _the locust grows sluggish_ ", NAB) and cannot be revived even by the stimulant of the caper berry (vs 5). (For a different translation and interpretation of this verse see the note in The Jerusalem Bible.) A last indignity accompanies death - hired mourners walk around faking sorrow. The man returns to the dust from which he came; the life (breath) which God gave him returns to God. Death for Qoheleth is the ultimate expression of the emptiness of human life: " _Vanity of vanities . . all things are vanity_ ".

An editor felt that something should be said in defence of Qoheleth, or at least in defence of having his book placed in with the other sacred books.

Reading Qoheleth 12:9-14

Comment

The editor sets us straight on a few things: Qoheleth was a very learned man who wrote very well and probed very deeply. His words are like prods for the human mind. He asks the reader to appreciate all the work that goes into writing such a book, but ends on a very orthodox note: " _fear God, keep his commandments_ "; God, after all, is the judge.

Is it serenity or despair which Qoheleth teaches? Interpreters have held both opinions. The only convincing argument against the position that Qoheleth preaches despair is the fact that he never advocates suicide and he never regrets having been born. Some ancient writers outside of the People of God did discuss suicide as a way out of the human dilemma. At his best Qoheleth would seem to be promoting the image of the supremely free human being, the person who enters into life's joys and sorrows without ever making either joy or sorrow absolute. Neither wealth, nor knowledge, nor power, nor success nor failure should totally capture a person. The enjoyment of the ordinary things of life, food, drink, love, work, should be enough to make life worth living, and even these are all transient things, not absolutes. Qoheleth has uncluttered the world of all that is beneath the dignity of humans; he leaves us with nothing in this world to cling to with all our might. He shows us the vacuum in which we live and move and only tells us that moderate pleasure makes life worth enduring. We would like to have him say that only God himself can satisfy the human heart, but this he does not say. He does not say it because as a man of reason, a philosopher, he knows only the God of reason - the aloof manipulator of all things whose ways are beyond understanding and with whom there can be no true personal relationship.

In spite of the incompleteness of his thought, Qoheleth is a tonic for many of the weaknesses of religious people and an antidote for many of the poisons which can harm the devout. There is healthy advice for those inclined to depression caused by the apparent meaninglessness of life. To these Qoheleth would recommend the focusing on the ordinary joys and pleasures of daily life. There is a meaning in these joys, though it may not satisfy the proud mind. For those who are diseased by distorted hope, looking only to the future for joy, he points to the present moment and what it holds of promise. To those sickened by the proud desire to find logical explanations for life, he offers the humbling mystery that surrounds all that is, even the most common of things such as love and hate.

The truth of the book, it should be said, lies in the fact that it says what most human beings feel about life at one point or other. Whether one has faith or no faith at all, sooner or later the feeling of futility strikes. When it does we know that in Qoheleth we have a spokesman for our depression. Probably the healthiest message of the book is its uninhibited recommendation to enjoy life. Here is no lover of fasts, long prayers (5:1-2) or self-inflicted pain (11:10). It is in this that Qoheleth affirms the goodness of human life, even if it is a very fleeting thing.

Qoheleth believed that the desire for joy which is in human nature was placed there by God himself; the fulfilment of that desire is the will of God. It is joy, not suffering, which is the solution to the human dilemma. And it was good news of great joy which God eventually sent (Luke 2:10). Some three centuries after Qoheleth our Lord would do many of the things which this book recommended. Jesus enjoyed food and drink, avoided scheduled fasts and spoke of himself as a piper calling people to dance (Luke 7:31-35). Some of the pious and religious people of our Lord's time, still feeling that God loves misery, protested that one who said he acted on behalf of God should be so obviously enjoying life.

## Chapter 18c The Song of Songs (Canticle of Canticles or Song of Solomon)

The recommendations of Qoheleth that people should relish what joys God has given in life find expression in the Song of Songs. The poetry of the Song revels in all that can be sensed: sound, colour, taste, form, aroma, texture, movement, pain, ecstasy. All of these are made to serve the celebration of love. The joy of love between a man and a woman is praised and recommended by the wisdom tradition: " _Find joy with the wife of your youth'_ ' (Prov 5:18f); " _Enjoy life with the wife whom you love_ " (Qoh 9:9). The positive attitude towards human nature found in the wisdom writers expresses itself in an appreciation of the beauty of the human person and the goodness of the pleasure given by the senses, especially the passion of love.

The love of which the Song sings is that mysteriously powerful attraction between man and woman, a powerful attraction which helps create a bond which is stronger than death (Cant 8:6-7). This attraction and the bond it creates can only take place in freedom on the part of both the man and the woman: " _Were a man to offer all his wealth to buy love, contempt is all he would purchase_ " (Cant 8:7).

The poems in the Song make full use of the emotions that accompany love: the pain of separation, the agonizing fear of losing the beloved, the unbounded joy of being together, the ecstasy of embrace. Sexual pleasure is referred to in poetic imagery which never becomes tawdry or less than noble.

There are many questions about the Song which cannot be answered with certainty. Who wrote it? When was it written'? How was it interpreted from the beginning? On the author we can only say that Solomon might well have had a hand in some of the poems. He could have had something to do with the earliest versions. As it stands in the Bible, the Song shows traces of language which appears to be much later than Solomon. Scholars have dated the Song anywhere from as early as the time of Solomon (960 BC) to as late as 230 BC. For our purposes here, the date is of little consequence. What is important is the question of interpretation.

The first point to consider is whether the Song is a drama or simply a collection of love songs without dramatic unity. If the Song is a drama, then it should have some development, some tension which is eventually resolved. It does not seem to have such a development. Attempts made to find a dramatic plot that is unravelled seem forced, artificial. Some interpreters, beginning with the Septuagint translators, have seen not a drama, strictly speaking, but a kind of "recitative" with different persons playing various roles: Bride, Groom, Daughters of Jerusalem and/or Chorus. Many modern translations (eg. JB, NAB, NEB), following the lead of the Septuagint, have inserted roles into their translation, but they are absent in the Hebrew text. There is, however, very little agreement on who gets what lines (compare JB with NAB). It is true that the Hebrew text indicates different speakers at times, but there seems to be no clear convincing way of assigning all the lines.

Other interpreters do not assign any roles other than the ones which are clearly in the Hebrew text (eg. 2:10, " _My Beloved. . . says to me_ "). These interpreters are more likely to see the Song simply as a loose collection of love songs (poems), with no clear dramatic structure or plot, and no elaborate set of roles. While we consider the Song to be a loose collection of poems, we recommend that you follow the interpretation which your favourite translation uses.

The second point on interpretation is more important. Is the Song about human love alone? Is it a parable on the love between God and his People? Is it an allegory on the love between God and his People? We will illustrate each of these interpretations in our comment on the reading.

" _My Beloved lifts up his voice . .. see winter is past . . . The flowers appear on the earth. The season of glad songs has come, the cooing of the turtledove is heard in our land_." Cant 2:10-12

Reading Song of Songs (Cant) 1:2-4

Comment

If human love alone is the meaning, then what we have in these verses is the musing of a girl in love. She refers to her lover now in the third person: " _Let him kiss me_ ", now in the second person: "Your love is more delightful than wine", and finally as a king who brought her into his private rooms. The verses bring us into the imagination of the girl whose heart is full of thoughts and longings for her beloved. There is no clear logic to be found in the verses.

If the Song is a parable on the love of God and his People, then the musings of the girl are the thoughts of the People concerning the Lord who is the beloved.

If the Song is an allegory, then the girl is the People, the Lord is her beloved, the maidens can stand for the foreign nations who also love the Lord, and the rooms of the King represent the Temple.

There is something to be said for all three interpretations. All three have a long history and many defenders. The human love interpretation seems the most natural and least forced. It presents the Song as a beautiful set of poems exalting human love in the bond that is stronger than death. The parable-on-divine-love interpretation accepts the basic images as having to do with human love, but raises the images to the level of the love between God and his People. This interpretation justifies itself by the fact that the prophets, beginning with Hosea (Hos 2:8-22), spoke of God and his People in terms of marriage. The allegorical interpretations expand the parabolic interpretation, making most of the images refer to various events or things in the history of God with his People.

All three basic approaches to the Song have their weaknesses. If the Song is only about human love, then it becomes a most exceptional (almost shocking) book: there is not one single reference to God under any title or image in the Song of Songs. This would make the Song the only book in the Bible in which God is not mentioned. This, of course, is not an impossibility, but it certainly is unique. •

•There is a possibility that Cant 8:6 refers to the Lord. JB translates it as such, but the NAB, NEB and RSV do not translate the Hebrew of 8:6 as referring to the Lord. If these translations are correct, and we believe they are, then there are no direct or indirect references to God in the Song. (The Hebrew version of the Book of Esther has at least one allusion to God in 4:14; the Greek parts of Esther have many references to God.)

If the Song is a parable, based on the natural imagery of human love, then, of course, God is referred to everywhere in the book. In our opinion these first two interpretations can work together very well and can provide a good basis for interpretation. The Song would originally have been made up of poems on love between man and woman. These poems (or songs) could have originated in wedding celebrations or even in the fertility cults of ancient peoples. But the love between man and woman can and did express the love between God and his People. According to our view, the Song would have been preserved as part of the sacred books both because of its beautiful expression of human love and because this fine poetry could be used so powerfully to express the love between the Lord and his People.

The third type of interpretation sees the Song as originally composed as an allegory on the love between the Lord and his People. This interpretation has been the all-time favourite among both Jews and Christians. As an allegory the Song offers almost endless possibilities to the believing imagination. While the allegorical intepretations can offer the richest variety of commentary, they also can become the most complicated, intricate and confusing explanations imaginable. Very few, if any, of the Jewish allegorical interpretations agree with each other in detail; none of the Christian allegorical interpretations agree in detail. The allegorical interpretations are never sure of the limits of the allegory. For example, if the rooms of the King in 1:4 stand for the Temple and the little foxes in 2:15 stand for enemies of the People, do the breasts of the beloved in 7:4 have to refer to the two mountains of Samaria, Ebal and Gerizim?

Christian interpreters, such as St. Bernard and St. John of the Cross, have applied the Song to the love between Christ and the Church, Christ and the individual Christian, or God and the Blessed Virgin. In recent years some Christian scholars have interpreted the Song as an allegory of the love between the Lord and his People set in the context of the Old Testament. Perhaps the best of these allegorical interpretations is that to be found in the notes of The Jerusalem Bible. These notes generally keep the allegory within reasonable limits.

The Song is beautiful and meaningful on every level, no matter what the interpretation. Our recommendation is that it be read first as a series of poems on human love. Since human love is a gift of the Lord, then it is rather easy to move from the level of human love, to the level of a parable on the love between the Lord and his People (Israel-the Church). Human love cannot help but reveal something of the Lord who created it. If you wish to probe the third level of interpretation, we recommend beginning with the introduction and notes in The Jerusalem Bible.

We do not have the space required to give a selection of readings with a commentary on each. The introductory remarks given in the preceding pages, along with the introductions and notes in your own Bible, should provide sufficient background for your reading of the Song. We hope that you will allow the beauty of the poems to carry you through the book. You might find some of the images a little strange or quaint, but they are no more strange than the images used in today's language of love.

## Chapter 18d Wisdom meets the Law (Sirach)

The Book of Sirach is also called Ecclesiasticus, a term which means "church book". It was a title given to the book by Christians who used it a great deal in their catechesis. Largely because of the confusion that is so easily caused by the similarity of the traditional names for Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes) and Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), the custom has arisen in recent years to give the books the names which the books themselves give to their authors (see Qoh 1:2 and Sirach 51:30).

The best introduction to Sirach is to be found in the preface which the translator has left us. This preface (foreword or introduction) is not considered to be part of the sacred book; it is not seen as inspired, strictly speaking. Since it provides interesting details about the book, and since it is very old, the preface is usually included in translations.

Reading Translator's preface to Sirach

Note: This passage has no chapter number; it only has verse numbers. This is an indication that it was not traditionally considered to be part of the sacred book.

Commentary

_"The Law and the Prophets and the later writers_ " (vss 1, 7, 24). The grandson of Jesus ben Sirach who translated the book already is familiar with the three-fold division of the sacred books into the Law, the Prophets (Early and Later Prophets) and the Writings. The Writings refer to books which have been written later than the others; they are usually considered to be the product of post-exilic times.

The translator tells us that his grandfather was a student of the Law, the Prophets and the other writings which had come down to him from former writers. He tells us that his grandfather (Jesus ben Sirach) wanted to combine the promotion of wisdom with the service of the Law (vs 13).

The translator asks us to appreciate how difficult and uncertain the work of translating something from Hebrew to Greek really is (vss 14-26). Ben Sirach wrote this book in Hebrew. But it has been preserved in the Church only in its Greek translations. The Hebrew text of this book was not known for centuries; but since 1896 various Hebrew manuscripts of the book have been found. None of these covers the whole book; taken together they cover about two-thirds of the book.

_"In the thirty-eighth year of the late King Euergetes_ " (vs 27) would be 132 BC. Allowing some forty to sixty years between the translator and his grandfather, we can suggest a date between 175 and 200 BC for the composition of the original. The historical references within the book confirm these approximate dates.

_"In Egypt . . I found a copy (of a book_ ). .(vss 28-29). The translator was part of the great community of the People of God in Alexandria in Egypt. Alexandria had become a Greek-speaking city, and the People there had probably already translated parts or all of the Hebrew sacred books (the Law and the Prophets, and possibly even some of the Wisdom books) into Greek (the Septuagint). In the verses quoted above the translator may be referring to the Septuagint. In any case he saw the need of translating his grandfather's book into Greek. The Alexandrian community of the People of God, it would appear, had few members who could read Hebrew properly.

_"For those living abroad_ .....(vs 34). The translator is thinking not only of the Alexandrian community but of all the many communities of the People of God living outside of Palestine whose language by now had become Greek.

The sacred author, whom we call Sirach after his father's name, was very much aware of the threat which Hellenism posed for the People of God generally. Greek culture had many things to recommend it. Its art was unquestionably beautiful, its architecture imposing; the design of Greek cities was both practical and elegant. Greek philosophy such as that of Plato and Aristotle was most impressive. These philosophers had arrived at the conclusion that God was one, true, good, the summit of beauty, the noblest object of the highest human activity - contemplation. The theatre of the Greeks could boast of the finest drama of the day. Many of the laws and the ethical practices of the Greeks expressed high ideals, ideals which were in many ways similar to the ideals of the Law. These were some of the best qualities of Hellenism; but Hellenism never came in its purest forms.

The popular brand of Hellenism still involved the worship of various divinities, divinities which the great Greek philosophers had ceased to accept, but which most of the common people stilt worshipped. While the morals of great thinkers, such as Aristotle, were very high, they did not reach the level of the Law. The good and the bad in Hellenism came together; it was at once attractive for the good it promised, and repulsive for the evils it also carried. Sirach was very much aware of the temptation posed by Hellenism. In his book he does not so much attack it, but he attempts to counteract it both by praising the Law of Moses and by advocating the greatness of the traditional wisdom of the People of God. He lays a great deal of emphasis on the importance of worship of the Lord. The Temple is central, and the high priesthood of Jerusalem is praised.

Sirach's work shows us the meeting of the wisdom tradition with the historical traditions as represented by the Law and the Prophets. While the intellectual tradition of the wise men does encounter the traditions of historical revelation in the Book of Sirach, it must be said that the book is first of all a book of the wisdom tradition. Sirach must have been a scribe learned in the Law, but he does not use his book so much to teach the Law as to recommend it and affirm that the Law and the wisdom tradition in no way contradict one another.

Reading Sirach 1:1-10 (NAB 1:1-8

Note: The chapter and verse numbers given refer to the JB, RSV and NEB translations. The NAB differs in a number of places. When this occurs, we will indicate the NAB numbers in brackets. The reason for the difference is that NAB follows the Hebrew text at times; the other translations follow Greek manuscripts only.

Comment

True wisdom is only to be found in its fullness in God; he alone is wise. The Lord has, however, poured wisdom out on all of the human race (vs 10; NAB vs 8). Those who love the Lord are the ones who will truly discover wisdom. Sirach uses language which is very similar to Proverbs 8:22-31. Wisdom was created by God and placed in all that he had made. The new dimension which Sirach brings to the traditional thought of the wisdom tradition is that one's love of God is what opens a person to the wisdom of God. He then goes on to describe what this love of God really is.

Reading Sirach 1:11-20 (NAB 1:11-18)

Comment

Those who love the Lord are those who fear him. This passage gives a fine description of what is meant by fear of the Lord. It is clear that for Sirach " _fear of the Lord_ " is not dread of the Lord; it is not being afraid of the Lord. True fear of the Lord is a joyful acceptance of the guidance of the Lord. In this passage Sirach is giving the traditional teaching: wisdom is given to all people " _from the womb_ " (vs 14; NAB vs 12), but it is reverent obedience to the will of the Lord as revealed in creation and expressed in the tradition of the wisdom writers which will make wisdom come to life in people. While at this point in his work Sirach makes no clear mention of the Law, it can be presumed that he intends " _fear of the Lord_ " to include obedience to the Law.

Sirach is well aware of the struggle the People of God are having in resisting the errors of Hellenism. Those who strive to follow the Lord will certainly find it difficult. In the following reading Sirach gives guidance and encouragement.

Reading Sirach 2:1 18

Comment

The one who desires to serve the Lord will be seriously tempted, tested, tried. He urges trust in the Lord, and, using a message which we have heard often before in the wisdom tradition, he assures the faithful that they will be rewarded for their good service (vss 8, 10).

Sirach, however, departs from the traditional way of wisdom writers when he appeals to the certainty of judgment. He never makes it clear exactly what he means; he simply says that all will be judged on the day of God's visitation (vs 14). He also moves beyond the older wisdom writers when he clearly shows that what he means by fear of the Lord is obedience to the Law (vs 16). The Books of Proverbs, Job and Qoheleth never stated the matter so clearly.

The next reading is a good example of the meeting of wisdom and the Law. The Law insisted on the honour to be given to parents; the wisdom tradition insisted on the same thing. Sirach comments on the Fourth Commandment through the wisdom tradition.

Reading Sirach 3:1-16

Comment

Sirach uses the language of liturgy to recommend the Fourth Commandment: obedience to the obligation to honour one's parents is like offering a sacrifice for sins (vss 3, 14); such obedience makes prayer effective (vs 5). He speaks of the daily obedience to the commandment in terms which suggest the 'liturgy of life'. For Sirach who was devoted to the Temple and its worship, the very soul of true worship was obedience to the commands of the Lord in everyday life.

In the next reading Sirach turns to the question of the poor. Like wisdom writers before him he urges generosity towards the poor; but he goes beyond the older wisdom tradition by the awareness which he has that some poverty at least is caused by injustice. He also goes beyond older wisdom by recommending that the poor be rescued from oppression.

"Do not repulse a hard-pressed beggar, nor turn your face from a poor man." Sirach 4:4

Reading Sirach 3:30 - 4:10 (NAB 3:29 - 4:10)

Comment

Sirach calls on his readers to be " _like a son to the Most High_ " by acting like a father to the orphan, like a husband to widows (vs 10). The language recalls Psalm 68:5 (NAB 68:6) where the Lord is called the " _father of orphans_ " and " _defender of widows_ ". It also brings to mind the ideals of both the Law (Exod 22:21) and the wisdom tradition as expressed in Job's final speech, where he claims to have lived the ideals of wisdom by being like a father to orphans and a provider for widows (Job 29:11-17). (When he said that 'those who love their enemies would be like sons of the Most High', Jesus was using the language of Sirach. See Luke 6:35.)

The next reading also considers the proper approach to the poor. This reading, however, ends with a reference to a kind of judgment that is made of persons at the end of their lives.

Reading Sirach 7:32-36

Comment

Sirach recommends the ordinary virtues which make life in a community decent and humane — caring for the poor, burying the dead, sharing grief, looking after the sick. In vs 36 he tells his readers to " _remember the end_ ", or " _remember your last days_ ". Sirach has no clear notion of reward and punishment after death (see 14:11-19), but he does seem concerned with the assessment of a person which can only come at the end of that person's life. A person's true worth can only be known at the end of his days on earth (11:28). (Note how our Lord once again used expressions similar to Sirach's when he spoke of the last judgment as the day when people would be judged on the basis of their treatment of the poor and the sick. See Matt 25:31-46.)

In 5:1-B (NAB 5:1-10) Sirach warns against becoming rich through injustice; he also warns against a false trust in God's mercy which people could use to dull their sense of the horror at the injustices they commit. In the next passage to be read Sirach turns to sin again, this time with a different concern. It would seem that some people in his day were saying that since God is in control of everything, then he is the one who is responsible for wrongdoing.

Reading Sirach 15:11-20

Comment

Sirach is supplying what was lacking in Job's logic (Job 12:14-25), the freedom of human beings. God made mankind free from the beginning, giving one the power to choose good or evil, life or death. The choice is in the hands of humans. A good life is possible, but so is an evil life. God never commanded evil to be done; he cannot be blamed for it. This text is probably the clearest statement on the free will of the individual and of the whole human race to be found in the Bible. The language recalls Deuteronomy 11:26-28 and 30:11-20.

In chapter 17 Sirach gives us a meditation on the history of the human race from creation to the election of Israel. He has, as is typical of the wisdom tradition, a very positive view of the human race, but he is also aware of their ability to sin.

Reading Sirach 17:1-32 (NAB 17:1-27)

Comment

Sirach is familiar with the Book of Genesis: " _the Lord fashioned man from the earth_ ", " _made them in his own image_ " (see Gen 2:7; 1:27). He refers to the covenant on Sinai and the Law which was given through Moses (vss 12-14; NAB 10-13). Sirach has no sense of reward and punishment after death; for him Sheol is the traditional place of neutrality where the dead live a shadowy existence incapable of praising God (vss 27-28: NAB vss 22-23). Sirach feels that since nothing can be expected after death, it is all the more important to realize during one's lifetime just how much the Lord values the good that people do and just how horrendous sin is in his eyes (vs 22; NAB vs 17). (The thought that God treasures every single good thing that people do is one which always needs emphasis. It is somehow easier to see God as the one who notices sin than to see him as the one who " _cherishes goodness . . . as the apple of his eye_ ".)

Sirach is certain of the judgment of God on each person's performance; but he is not at all clear as to the time of judgment. It would appear from phrases such as 11:28 and 7:36 that a person is judged by God at death, but this is not very clear in his teaching. Sirach uses an image which expresses both the greatness of the human race and its possible downfall: " _Is there anything brighter than the sun? Yet it can be eclipsed_ " (vs 31; NAB vs 26). The possibility of forgetting one's greatness, and of forgetting the great mercy of God is always present; it is characteristic of the human race to have evil thoughts and desires (see Gen 6:5; 8:21).

In the next reading we have a beautiful expression of the greatness of the Lord and of his love and compassion for mankind.

Reading Sirach 18:1-14 (NAB 18:1-13)

Comment

It is precisely because God knows just how small and short-lived humans are that he is compassionate towards them, and so patient.

We turn now to Sirach's finest poem. It expresses most clearly how Sirach saw the relationship between wisdom acquired by reason and the wisdom acquired by obedience to the Law. He tells us that the wisdom which has been planted in all of creation from the beginning, and which can be discerned by reason and experience, is one and the same as the wisdom which God has given in history to his People through the revelation on Sinai. Wisdom is one; there is no contradiction between the wisdom in creation and the wisdom given in revelation, because the wisdom of God ultimately given by God in the Law of Moses is that same wisdom through which God created all things.

Reading Sirach 24:1-23 (NAB 24:1-22)

Comment

Wisdom speaks in the presence of God before anything was created. She speaks of having been the spirit (wind) of God hovering over creation at the beginning of creation (Gen 1:2), and present in every aspect of creation from the highest to the deepest parts of it, and present also in every people and nation on earth (vss 3-6). Wisdom pictures herself as soaring over the peoples of the world looking for a resting place, a place to pitch her tent (vss 7-8). Wisdom, by divine decree, makes the holy Tent of the People of God her dwelling place. The Temple in Zion, the successor of the Tent in the desert, also becomes her place of rest (vss 10ff). The Temple, built by the model of the wise man, Solomon, was the place from which the Law of the Lord was to be made known. Wisdom and the Law are united in the Temple. The main section of the poem ends with the clear statement that the wisdom of God is the Law given through Moses (vs 23; NAB vs 22). (If you read John 1:1-18, you will notice just how much the evangelist was influenced by this passage: the Word of God, through whom all was made, came to dwell among God's People. John shows that this wisdom did not cease to express itself in the Law of Moses, but reached its perfection in Jesus, the Wisdom of God made flesh.)

The next selection shows us that Sirach was influenced by the prophets. It is clear that he considers the worship at the Temple to be the summit of the life of the believer; but he has no illusions about what makes any act of worship acceptable to the Lord. From the following passage we know that our author has studied Amos and Isaiah; their injunctions against worship without justice can be heard in the background (see Amos 5:21¬27; Isaiah 1:11-17).

Reading Sirach 34:18-26

Comment

Injustice is not covered over by sacrifices offered to God; sacrifice offered out of funds acquired unjustly is as horrible as murdering a child in sight of his father; neglecting to feed the poor is tantamount to killing them; withholding wages is like taking a person's life. These are statements as strong as those of the prophets.

Sirach then moves to another aspect of worship. He develops more clearly the theme of the "liturgy of life" which was mentioned in connection with the Fourth Commandment (3:1 ff). The daily observance of the commandments of the Law is "sacrifice", true worship. Sirach, however, is careful not to leave the reader with the impression that a virtuous life dispenses a person from offering ritual sacrifices.

Reading Sirach 35:1-10

Sirach goes on in the next verses (35:11-24) to repeat the traditional teachings of both the Law and the Prophets on caring for the poor, the orphan and the widow. It is this kind of obedience to the Lord which will guarantee the Lord's mercy for his People.

Sirach, as a true patriot, clearly resents the fact that the People of God in Palestine (and for that matter in Egypt) are still under the domination of foreigners - the Greeks. The Seleucid rulers, up to the time of Sirach, had been average rulers. They were not known for being especially cruel or demanding, but they were still foreigners imposing their will on the People and exacting the submission of their subjects. Sirach prays for the freedom of the compatriots but he does so in a new way: he prays that the Lord will act with strength in order to bring the foreign nations to the realization that only the Lord is God. Sirach reflects that once (probably by the time of the Exile) God had raised his hand against his own People and had brought them to realize that he alone is God. Sirach prays that the Lord should do the same for the foreign nations and bring them to a knowledge of the true God.

Reading Sirach 36:1-17

Comment

Sirach is praying for a day when God will be known by the nations and God's People will be rewarded by proof that their prophets had been right. Prophets such as Second-Isaiah had shown the People that God wanted to make himself known to the nations through them. Sirach prays for that day, and, at the same time, he prays that this great future event will be the day of the great "ingathering" ' of all God's People from every part of the world in which they have been scattered since the Exile. In his own language Sirach is hoping for the " _Day of the Lord_ ", that final time in the future when all the nations will know the Lord, and God's People will be wholly restored.

The final two passages chosen from Sirach illustrate the way in which he was able to unite the traditional wisdom, based on observation and admiration of creation, and the traditions received from the history of the People of God. The first passage (42:15-25) shows Sirach praising the wisdom of God in nature; the second passage shows him praising the wisdom of God as it showed itself in the best of mankind in history. Since the human race is the pinnacle of God's creation, then the best of humans show the greatness of the wisdom of God even more than do the sun, moon and stars.

Reading Sirach 42:15-25

Comment

In vs 15, the Hebrew text of Sirach has " _By the word of the Lord did all his works come into being_ ". Gen 1 had referred to God's creative power as coming from the word he spoke, " _God said . . . and so it was_." According to the Hebrew of Sirach, the idea of the Word of God as having creative power is being clearly stated. This passage shows just how much Sirach admired nature: " _How beautiful_ ", "How desirable".

Sirach goes on to speak of the sun, moon, stars, rainbow and a variety of other works of God. God is to be praised for all these wonders (43:27-33; NAB 43:28-35). Then he passes to the subject of great people.

Reading Sirach 44:1-15

Comment

Sirach praises God for all the wonders he has worked in great people, both known and unknown. It is interesting that he does not praise God for his extraordinary acts in history - such as the Exodus or the return from Exile. He gives his whole attention to great personages who could be said to be models of humanity. His concern with models of humanity, rather than with unique events in history, makes Sirach more typical of the wisdom tradition than of the tradition of the Prophets and of the Law.

Sirach proceeds with a list of great men ranging from Enoch to a high priest who was his contemporary, Simon son of Onias (220-195 BC). In his history of their ancestors (Chs 44-50), he spends most verses on the priests (Aaron and Simon). This indicates both his high opinion of the priesthood and the importance of the high priesthood in his own day.

The Book of Sirach, as you have no doubt noticed, wanders from one subject to another with no apparent order. He touches on almost every topic of significance for the daily life of his day. On the whole he shows great balance, though at times he seems a little excessive in his judgments (eg. on women in 25:13 - 26:18; NAB 25:12 - 26:18).

Sirach is first and foremost a man of reason, one who has great respect for wisdom acquired through learning and reflection and handed on from one generation to the next through people of learning. And yet, as we have seen, Sirach is very much a faithful follower of the Law and has also been strongly influenced by the teachings of the Prophets. Of all the trades and professions he mentions, the scribes' profession is the noblest (38:1 - 39:11). We see then in Sirach the meeting between the wisdom teachers of the past, and the scribal teachers who began to take on importance after the return from Exile. The work of Ezra, the scribe, and his successors was to study and teach the Law; the work of the wisdom teachers was to study and hand on the tradition of wisdom. Both the scribe and the wise man were men of study and teaching. It was inevitable that they should come together, and in Sirach they did.

Sirach wrote his book at a time of relative peace. The Seleucid king was not a vicious tyrant. But in the next few decades events would develop unlike any which the People of God had ever experienced. The People of God who lived in Palestine became the victims of a cruel and systematic persecution. This persecution of the just and faithful would bring to a head all the debates of the wisdom tradition about reward for virtue and punishment for sin. The days of martyrdom through which the descendants of Sirach suffered would also give rise to a form of writing which we call "Apocalyptic". Chapter 19 will consider these developments.

## Appendix 7 on Old Testament Canon

Differences exist between the Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions as to what books make up the Old Testament. The Catholic tradition recognizes 46 books in its Old Testament Canon (the word "canon" applies to the list of sacred books that is recognized as inspired) while 39 books are accepted by the Protestant tradition as canonical. How did this difference arise?

We must return to those of the People of God who lived in Palestine in the few centuries prior to the birth of Christ. All of their writings were written in Hebrew and Aramaic. It was not until c. 100 A.D. that the Community of God's People in Palestine finally decided which of these were to be accepted as canonical. These sacred books which made up the Hebrew Canon were separated into three divisions: The Law (the 5 books of The Pentateuch), The Prophets (Early Prophets, Later Prophets) and The Writings (Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Qoheleth, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, 1 & 2 Chronicles.)

During the same period, beginning in the third century BC, the People of God outside of Palestine were in the process of making translations of the Hebrew and Aramaic scriptures into Greek. Since more than one translation was made by the various Communities outside of Palestine, different lists existed in Greek. Some of these Communities translated and accepted books not used by other Communities. However, with regard to the first two divisions of the Old Testament (The Law and The Prophets), the list most widely accepted outside of Palestine was the same as the Hebrew list used in Palestine. But discrepancies cropped up between the Hebrew Canon and the Greek list as to what comprised The Writings.

Both the Hebrew Canon and Greek Scriptures included in The Writings those books already listed (Psalms, etc.). However, other books and additions to books preserved only in Greek were included in The Writings by the People of God outside of Palestine. These books and additional passages were never accepted into the Hebrew Canon. The most common of these were:

\- 1 & 2 Maccabees

\- Tobit

-Judith

\- Sirach

\- the Book of Wisdom

\- Baruch (including the letter of Jeremiah)

\- small additions in the books of Esther & Daniel

-1 & 2 Esdras

\- Prayer of Manasseh

The entire list of books and additions to books that were recognized by the Greek-speaking Communities as sacred writings was called The Septuagint (LXX).

The Septuagint was known and widely used by the early Christian communities because so many of its members were Greek-speaking. Many centuries later at the Council of Trent (1546 A.D.), the Church accepted the LXX - excluding 1 & 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh - as canonical.

"~~~~~~~~~~"

##  

## Chapter 19 Persecution And Hope

**Introduction**

From the beginning the People of God had to deal with the cultures of the peoples among whom they lived. Upon entering the Promised Land, the problem of dealing with the Canaanites presented itself. Kingship brought with it the influence of both Canaanite and Egyptian patterns of monarchy. The domination of the Assyrians brought the People into contact with that culture. The Babylonian period, and the Exile in Babylonia, brought a forced exposure to this flourishing civilization. Then Persian rule brought them both the freedom to return home, and with it the temptation to adopt Persian ways and customs. After the Persians came the Greeks. Perhaps more than any other culture with which the People had had to deal, Hellenism posed the most serious threat because it offered so much that was good. Hellenism, however, as we said in the last chapter, did not come in its purest, most exalted forms.

Hellenism, as Alexander and his first successors saw it, was the promotion of the best of Greek culture to the "uncivilized" masses in the newly conquered nations of the Greek empire. Conquered peoples, however, have a way of getting back at their conquerors. While many aspects of Hellenism attracted the conquered peoples, the reverse also proved to be the case: there were many aspects of the cultures of the conquered which became very attractive to the Greeks. By the year 200, Hellenism was no longer the exalted and beautiful thing it was intended to be; it was in fact a very confusing mixture of things Greek and things non-Greek. The conquest of the eastern parts of the Persian empire had opened a way for all kinds of eastern religious practices. Hellenism became in fact a hodgepodge of Greek and eastern thought and customs. On the popular level of everyday life it was not the refined thinking of a Plato which touched the people, but Greek-style hats, hair styles and dresses, and athletic games mixed in with strange and attractive eastern cults and astrology.

In Palestine the People of God responded to Hellenism basically in two predictable ways. A "broad-minded" upper class in Jerusalem was only too willing to go along with the promotion of Hellenism. It was the latest thing to do, and it assured them a place of favour with the ruling Hellenist kings, the Seleucids. Since the high priesthood belonged to this upper class, it was very much influenced by Hellenism and, at times, actually promoted it. The high priests were by now being appointed by the Seleucids; it had become an office to be bargained for by winning the favour of the Seleucids. (This upper class group, led by the priests, would give rise in time to the group known as the Sadducees.) The Temple was central to this group.

Among the People of God, probably in every social class, but especially among the laity who were not in the ruling classes, there arose a very strong movement of protest against the Hellenization which was going on. This group, known as the Hasidim, held for the purity of their traditional religion. The more Hellenization spread, the more strict they seem to have become in the practices of the Law and the traditions of the forefathers. (This group would eventually develop into what came to be known as the Pharisees.) The Hasidim movement, while it supported worship in the Temple, found its real life centered in the synagogues where the laity were in charge.

In Palestine, a rival temple had been built by the Samaritans. It appears that Alexander the Great or one of his successors had given permission to have this temple built. A second temple to the Lord was too much for the devout worshippers of the Lord in Jerusalem. The split between the Samaritans and the rest of the People of God became permanent.

Outside of Palestine, especially in Alexandria, Hellenism was making inroads among the People of God, and this in turn was causing a reaction similar to the reaction of the Hasidim in Palestine. Once again the wealthier members of the community in Alexandria were inclined to be very accepting of the latest fashions in dress and thought coming from Hellenism. And once again the reaction against these adaptations came largely from the poorer members of the People. We can assume that the tensions within the Alexandrian community were also felt in the other communities of the People of God. In many cities and towns in the Mediterranean countries there were communities of the People of God being held together in each place largely by their synagogues.

In the world at large things had changed radically. While Hellenism was still the rage culturally, the real power in the world lay in the hands of the Romans. They were now beginning to dictate policy to lesser kings, such as the Seleucids. It would not be long before the rule of the successors to Alexander the Great would be over and the Romans would be in charge of almost every kingdom and nation within a thousand miles of Rome.

In this chapter we consider the events and the literature which developed around the issue of Hellenization. We have literature from within Palestine (Daniel and 1 & 2 Maccabees) and a book from outside of Palestine (Book of Wisdom, written in Alexandria). The events considered in this chapter go from the last bitter drives for power made by the dying Seleucid dynasty to the inevitable conquest of Palestine by the Romans. Through these events we shall see the tragedy of "freedom fighters" whose descendants turn into vicious tyrants oppressing the very people their fathers liberated.

## Chapter 19a Martyrs and Rebels

In this section we shall be using readings from the First Book of Maccabees. This book was written around 100 BC. It covers the events in Palestine between 175 and 134 BC. It was written in Hebrew by one who probably lived through most of the events he recounts. His book is not simply a history book (none of the "histories" in the Bible are); it is a religious interpretation of the events. While it is generally reliable in its facts, it can easily leave out details which a historian would want to have, or add details which can get in the way of straight history. The Second Book of Maccabees covers some of the same events as First Maccabees; it is not a continuation of First Maccabees. Second Maccabees is a digest of a five-volume work, which was written in Egypt. This five-volume work was written around 140 BC. The digest (i.e. 2 Maccabees) was probably made around 124 BC (see 2 Macc 2:19-32). The purpose of Second Maccabees is to build up the faith of the People of God by a narration of the heroic acts of the martyrs. History is not his concern. We shall indicate readings from First Maccabees and give references to Second Maccabees where it deals with the same events.

In the last chapter we indicated that around the year 200 the Seleucids had gained control of Palestine. The People of God in Jerusalem had to bow to Seleucid rule. At first, under Antiochus III, this subjection was not too humiliating. In fact Antiochus Ill was, as tyrants go, rather easy on the People. The Seleucids ruled from their capital city, Antioch, in northern Syria. They were desperately trying to gain control of as much territory as possible in order to be able to resist the power of Rome. But it was not possible to resist Rome. The Romans imposed their will on the Seleucids by exacting a heavy tribute; and to make certain that the tribute was paid, the Romans took the son of Antiochus III to Rome as a hostage until the tax was paid. Antiochus III did not manage to pay the tribute in full. His successor Seleucus IV did not manage either, even though he had the Temple in Jerusalem plundered for that purpose. Seleucus was killed by one of his own men. The Romans decided to release the hostage who now was in line for the throne of the Seleucids. This hostage took the throne name of Antiochus IV Ephiphanes. The name said it all: Epiphanes means "manifestation", in this case, the manifestation of the supreme Greek god Zeus. He laid claim to a divine role, if not to divinity itself. (His unwilling subjects in Palestine changed his name from Epiphanes to Epimanes, the Madman.)

Antiochus IV Epiphanes wanted to unite all his subjects in a common Hellenistic culture. He was happy to know that there were many in Jerusalem itself who were in favour of Hellenism.

Reading 1 Maccabees 1:10-15 (2 Macc 4:1 - 5:10)

Comment

Antiochus began his reign in 175 BC. The " _group of renegades_ " (vs 11) in Jerusalem was led by one Jason, the brother of the high priest Onias Ill. This Jason (notice the Greek name) was anxious to promote Hellenism and win the favour of Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc 4). Jason " _bought_ " the office of high priest by offering a large sum of money to Antiochus Epiphanes, deposing his brother Onias Ill. But Jason's position was not secure; a man called Menelaus offered Antiochus a higher price for the priestly office, and got it. Menelaus had Onias assassinated and Jason had to run for his life. Jason got a band of mercenaries together and attacked Jerusalem; after causing considerable bloodshed he lost the battle and had to run for his life again. (See 2 Macc 5.)

The gymnasium which the Hellenist faction wanted built in Jerusalem was a Greek style sports "palace" and cultural centre, where athletics, worship and study went together. To the faithful members of the People of God a gymnasium in Jerusalem was a shocking and scandalous thing.

Antiochus Epiphanes was not satisfied with having control of Palestine. He wanted control of Egypt as well. As you will see in the next reading, he did attack Egypt and did win the battle, but from what we know in other sources, he was not allowed to keep control of Egypt - the Romans would not allow it. He was victorious over Egypt, but his victory did not yield all the wealth he wanted. He decided to make the best of his return trip to Antioch through Palestine.

Reading 1 Maccabees 1:16-24 (2 Macc 5:11-21)

Comment

This event took place in 169 BC. Kings considered themselves free to enter the temples of subject peoples. Now that Jerusalem's upper classes were pro-Hellenists, and the high priest, Menelaus, was probably still owing money to Antiochus, the king came and took whatever he could find or tear out that was of any value. (Robbing temples was a family trait among the Seleucids. Antiochus Epiphanes' father died while robbing one.)

Antiochus Epiphanes was not content with robbing the Temple of its treasures. He was hatching a plot to put down all possible rebellion in Jerusalem, and to make certain that the cause of Hellenism triumphed in Palestine. Some two years after the plunder of the Temple, Antiochus sent the commander of his Mysian mercenaries, called the mysarch, into Jerusalem. What is recorded in the next reading took place in 167 BC.

Reading 1 Maccabees 1:29-35 (2 Macc 5:24-26)

Comment

Treacherously, Antiochus' man caught the people of Jerusalem off their guard. He rendered the city defenceless by knocking down parts of its walls. He also built a stronghold, a fortification to house a garrison of Seleucid soldiers and the renegade citizens of Jerusalem who had gone over to the side of the soldiers of Antiochus.

Now Jerusalem was being watched night and day by soldiers of the king. The fortification was built high enough to overlook the Temple. This was a great humiliation for all the devout members of the People of God; but the worst was yet to come.

Reading 1 Maccabees 1:41-64

Comment

Many individual members of the People of God in the past had suffered much; some had even given their lives for the true faith, but never before had there been an outright religious persecution of the People. They were being persecuted now precisely because of their faith and religious practices. Those who died rather than commit idolatry were true martyrs for the faith. By the decree described in the reading, Antiochus Epiphanes was revoking the Law of Moses as the official law of the People of God in Palestine and imposing his own Hellenistic law. (The Persians, you will remember from Chapter 16, p. 13, had granted permission to the People to have the Law of Moses as their official law. Antiochus III, the father of this "Madman", had approved of the Law of Moses as well.) Antiochus Epiphanes revoked the Law of Moses making its observance illegal and punishable by death. In spite of the cruelty of this edict, there were still some members of the People who sided with the forces of Antiochus (vs 52).

The crowning indignity was the " _abomination of desolation_ " (vs 54). On December 7, 167 BC, a pagan altar was built on top of the sacred altar of sacrifice in front of the Temple of the Lord (vss 54, 59). To all of the devout members of the People this was sacrilege. But there were still members of the People of God who went along with it. If we try to put ourselves into the frame of mind of the Hellenizers, we can understand a little better how they were thinking. They wanted the People of God to be "modern" and "up-to-date"; they felt that exclusivism was bad (see 1 Macc 1:11). To them the devotees of the strict separation between the People and the pagans were simply stubborn, narrow-minded purists who wanted to prevent Jerusalem and its citizens from having an impor¬tant place in the winning movement of Hellenization. "After all," they thought, "the supreme God is the supreme God, whether we call him Lord, God of Heaven, or Zeus." On December 17, 167 BC, sacrifice was offered on the abominable pagan altar; at least it was abominable to the faithful members of the People. It no doubt was quite acceptable to the more liberal minded Hellenists.

The movement in favor of adopting Hellenistic ways had a greater following in Jerusalem than in the small towns, but the decree of Antiochus Epiphanes affected the towns and villages as well. The first signs of open resistance to the decree came from one of the small towns.

Reading 1 Maccabees 2:1-28

Comment

The Law did not allow any sacrifice, even to the true God, outside of Jerusalem. Mattathias, a priest, would rather die than offer a sacrifice outside the holy Temple. The story does not name the god to whom the sacrifice was to be offered, but that mattered little. The sacrifice was to take place outside of Jerusalem, and it was being commanded by an official of a pagan king. To Mattathias that was idolatry. The other man who did come to offer his sacrifice had probably made a number of subtle distinctions in his mind to justify his actions. Mattathias fled to the deserted hills with his sons, leaving all his possessions behind.

There were others who refused to cooperate, but who were not ambitious or courageous enough to organize a resistance movement. These devout souls fled to the hills as well (1 Macc 2:29-30). When the king's men found out about these deserters, they attacked them, and since these protesters were almost fanatical observers of the Law, and the king's forces attacked on the Sabbath, they offered no resistance and all were killed. Mattathias and his group heard of this and vowed to fight even on the Sabbath (1 Macc 2:39-41). A terrorist campaign began against those who went along with the decree of Antiochus.

Reading 1 Maccabees 2:42-48

Comment

Violence was met with violence. Mattathias was joined by a group of the Hasidim (or Hasideans) devout followers of the Law. The resistance, though still very small and weak, was getting organized and making itself notoriously well-known. Mattathias was not to live to see any improvement in the lot of the People. He died in 166 BC, the year after the decree. He left the leadership of the resistance group in the hands of his sons (1 Macc 2:65-70). We shall return to these sons in section three of this chapter.

## Chapter 19b Courage for the times (Book of Daniel)

The People of God in Palestine lived morning till night with the threat of death. Should they compromise and make life easier and at least stay alive until the days of horror had passed? Should they refuse to compromise and risk persecution and even death? Should they take to the desert and join those who had escaped the towns and cities? Should they join the "freedom fighters" who were beginning to get organized under the sons of Mattathias? These decisions had to be faced by all of the faithful members of the People of God in Palestine. But these were basically practical questions; once made they had to be lived with regardless of the consequences.

There were the more wrenching, agonizing questions: what to say of those women who had been murdered with their dead infants round their necks (1 Macc 1 :60f; 2 Macc 6:10)? Why would God allow his most faithful to be treated in this way? How to explain these horrible events? Had God completely abandoned his People? Anyone whose heart bled for his brothers and sisters, and who felt that there were some things to be said on these questions, had to face a further problem: how to speak to his brothers and sisters in a time of spies, investigators and traitors? How could a person communicate without risking both his life and the lives of those who would accept what was said? Saying the truth could cost one's life.

The times demanded prophets, but a prophet who spoke out openly as the ancient prophets did would have his head cut off after his first oracle. Was there another way of being a prophet, a way that offered a better chance of staying alive and which offered those who accepted the prophet a good chance of survival? Someone thought of a way, a way which is known to all persecuted minority groups fighting for life under powerful oppressors — a written message in secret code.

The Book of Daniel is just such a written message in secret code. The book falls into two parts with an appendix. The first part (Chs 1-6) consists of stories about Daniel and his companions. The second part (Chs 7-12) consists of visions reported by Daniel. The appendix (Chs 13-14) contains two popular stories about Daniel (Susanna; the Dragon).

Stories with a purpose (Chs 1-6)

The first part of the Book of Daniel (Chs 1-6) contains six stories. All are set in the period during or after the Exile in Babylon. They are associated with either Babylonian or Persian kings.

Ch 1:a story about fidelity to the rules on clean and unclean foods.

Ch 2:a story of Daniel, the wise man, interpreting the king's dream.

Ch 3:a story of fidelity to the Law demanding worship of the Lord alone.

Ch 4:a story in which Daniel interprets a dream for the king.

Ch 5:a story about Daniel's interpretation of mysterious handwriting on a wall.

Ch 6:a story on fidelity in worship of the Lord and its costs (lion's den).

In each of these stories Daniel (and his companions) have high positions in the king's court. In each Daniel shows wisdom and ability above and beyond his pagan peers; he manages to keep his position in court (and even rise in honour) in spite of being faithful to the Law and to the traditional practices of his religion. In each story the Lord is present in his saving power, giving Daniel great insight and wisdom, and saving him in times of persecution. (The stories have much in common with the Joseph stories in Gen 37-41).

The origins of the stories (Chs 1-6) are uncertain. There are signs that they could go back several generations to the community of the People of God in Babylon, where they would have been used to teach those who had high positions in the Persian (or later) government that fidelity to the Lord was possible in high positions. They could be more recent stories developed in the Jerusalem community at the time when the threat of Hellenism was growing. The stories would have had the same purpose in the Jerusalem community - a plea for integrity in religion made to those who held positions of importance in the government under the Seleucids.

The "code" in these stories is simple: the situation of the minority group of faithful followers of the Law in Babylon is essentially the same as the situation of the minority group of faithful followers of the Law in Palestine. The faithful members of the People of God in Jerusalem and Palestine find themselves in a kind of "exile" in their own homeland. The irrational and idolatrous demands of the Babylonian or Persian kings, and the role of the evil counsellors of the kings, are basically the same as those of the times of Antiochus Epiphanes.

There is, however, more to some of these stories than meets the eye. We shall use one story to illustrate. In chapter 2 Nebuchadnezzar has a disturbing dream. He wants to know its meaning. He doubts the abilities and the sincerity of his wise men, so he insists that they first tell him what his dream is, and then interpret it for him. The wise men know that this is beyond their abilities. They are faced with execution if they fail. Daniel was one of the wise men faced with death. God grants Daniel a "night-vision" which shows him both the dream and its interpretation. Daniel gets permission to approach the king with his version of the dream and its interpretation. All of this appears to be simply a popular, interesting and harmless piece of entertainment; but in fact it is a decoy, a distracting little prelude for the prophetic message which is contained in the following passage

Reading Daniel 2:3145

Commentary

Daniel accurately describes the king's dream, then interprets it: the great statue in the dream stands for empires of this world. When the writer tells us that the golden head of the statue stands for Nebuchadnezzar, we can then give the rest of the metals their meanings. Each of the different materials stands for a particular empire: gold, for Babylon; silver, for the Medes; bronze, the Persians; iron, the Greeks under Alexander and the iron mixed with clay for the Seleucids and Ptolemies (compare 8:20). The stone " _untouched by human hands_ " (vs 34) stands for the Kingdom of God. Here we have a characteristic of apocalyptic literature: it is symbolic. The various things, people, animals, beasts, metals, numbers, stand for something else; they are symbolic. The way to interpret apocalyptic writings is by way of allegory. There can be some dispute about the exact symbolic meaning of the silver and bronze, but these two do not matter a great deal. What does matter is that the last kingdom (iron mixed with clay) is the kingdom of the Seleucids (and the Ptolemies), that is, the kingdom ruling Palestine at the time when this prophecy was written. We have here a second characteristic of apocalyptic writing: it is prophetic in that it is speaking to the people who are the contemporaries of the writer. The writer of this prophecy is speaking, not about Babylon, but about Palestine in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. The Apocalyptic writer speaks to his own people, in his own time.

A third characteristic of apocalyptic writing can be seen in this passage: the writer places his message in the past, as though it were spoken by a person (Daniel) who lived a long time ago. This ancient person is presented as making a prediction about the distant future. All of this is a device meant to make the message safe to circulate. On the surface it is a message, a prophecy, coming from ancient times; only those who know the "code" can understand what it really means.

What is his message? His message or prophecy is that all the kingdoms of this world, including that of the reigning Seleucid king, are doomed to total and absolute destruction. In spite of all their semblance of permanence, they all pass away. The other and more important part of his prophecy is that God will establish his Kingdom, and in so doing will bring all world empires to nothing. The Kingdom of God will bring in the end of history, that is the end of history as it had been, with earthly empires cruelly dominating peoples and nations. The Kingdom of God will be the work of God - untouched by human hands - and it will fill the whole earth (vss 34, 44-45).

The stories in the first part of Daniel (Chs 1-6) are not very hard on the kings. The kings are shown as arbitrary, surrounded mostly by stupid or evil counsellors, and very, very arrogant. But there is a theme which runs through these stories which again and again brings out the hope that even such kings could possibly be converted to the true God. (See 2:46f1; 3:24ff; 4:33ff; 6:26ff; also 14:10ff.) In Ch 4 we have a further elaboration on the theme of the conversion of the kings. In this story it is said (in a very apocalyptic way) that kings who rule without faith in the true God become like animals; they are madmen, bestial and ugly. These stories express a kind of hope that is often expressed in the People of God, the hope for the conversion of a wicked person. This more or less hopeful attitude about foreign kings indicates that these stories probably circulated before the outbreak of total persecution in 167 BC. The writings we are now about to see, however, show no such merciful hope about Antiochus Epiphanes.

Visions with a message (Chs 7-12)

The second part of the Book of Daniel (Chs 7-12) is made up of four visions:

1.the beasts and the son of man (Ch 7)

2.the ram and the goat (Ch 8)

3.the seventy-two weeks (Ch 9)

4.the end of time (Chs 10-12)

Each of the visions is concerned primarily with the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes. It is in these chapters that we see most clearly the characteristics of what is called apocalyptic literature. The word apocalyptic comes from a Greek word, apokalypsis, which means revelation. As a verb in Greek it means to unveil, to reveal, to make known what was not known. In these chapters of Daniel we have four visions which reveal, unveil realities hitherto unknown. The unveiling takes place in dreams or visions. The dreams open up a world of secrets about the direction and meaning of history. Recalling the allegorical interpretation of the four metals in Ch 2, standing for the kingdoms of the Babylonians, the Medes, the Persians and the Greeks, you should be able to succeed in "decoding" the following vision.

Reading Daniel 7:1-8

Commentary

" _In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon_ " (vs 1). The vision is cast back in the period of the Exile, and is presented as though it had been experienced then by Daniel, a man who is represented as having lived in the Exile. This device hides the real author who lived during the persecutions under Antiochus Epiphanes. The device is the same as in chapter 2, and for basically the same reasons (to make it safe for circulation). Daniel has a dream in which there are visions. The vision is written down (vs 1). This too is characteristic of apocalyptic literature: it is not delivered orally, but in writing.

" _Four winds churning up the great sea_ " (vs 2). The number four is generally symbolic. It usually signifies "all", or "everywhere", as in the expression "the four corners of the earth". In this sense the four beasts not only stand for four historical kingdoms, but for all kingdoms of the earth. The "great sea" that is all churned up refers to chaos. The author could intend us to understand that the raging waters are those above the firmament of heaven (see Ezek 1:24). These are the waters of chaos which God controls by his mighty power. But from these raging waters issue four beasts. The first is a winged lion (Babylonia), which is said to lose its wings and become human (probably a reference to the story in Ch 4 where Nebuchadnezzar turns from being animal-like to being human). The second was like a bear, with three ribs in its mouth. This most probably represented the Medes who conquered other kings. The third beast, a winged leopard with four heads, refers to the Persian empire. (The significance of the images - leopard, wings, heads - is not known.) The fourth beast is only described as terrifying, strong and having iron teeth with which it crushed everything in sight. This is the empire of Alexander the Great, which "sprouted" ten horns, the kings of the Seleucid dynasty, heirs to parts of Alexander's kingdom.

The " _little horn_ " which causes three other horns to be uprooted stands for Antiochus Epiphanes who had to get rid of rivals to the throne of Antioch in order to make himself king. This monstrous horn has eyes to spy and see all that is happening, and it has a mouth which boasts blasphemously (referring to Antiochus' claim to divinity and to his insolent desecration of the Temple, see 1 Macc 1:21, 24, 45). The kingdoms of the world are represented as animals, more or less monstrous in appearance. They are subhuman, inhuman, beastly; they are born of chaos (the churning waters). The vision continues in the next reading.

Reading Daniel 7:9-12

Comment

Looking above the waters above the heavens, the visionary sees into the presence of God himself (vs 9; see Ezek 1:24ff). God is symbolized as an old man with white hair. The idea is not to imagine God as an old man; in this type of literature we must read the symbols, and not take the images literally. God is wisdom itself (symbolized by age and white hair). Because he is wise, he is the only one who can pass judgment from his throne. God is the king and the judge. The images of fire and the thousands upon thousands who surround the throne recall Ezek 1, the vision of the glory of God. " _The books were opened_ " is symbolic of the "record" which God has of all that goes on in order to pass judgment on the world (see Jer 17:1).

The judgment unfolds; the horned beast is killed and destroyed. The other beasts are allowed to survive for a short while. The reign:of Antiochus will be short; the reigns of the other kingdoms will be allowed to last a little while longer. The beastly kingdoms will not endure, but this is not the end of the judgment.

Reading Daniel 7:13-14

Comment

" _Coming on the clouds of heaven_ ". While the text does not make it clear, it would appear that the " _one like a son of man_ " is rising on a cloud towards God. The first thing to note is that " _son of man_ " simply means a human being, and as such it symbolizes a human and humane thing in contrast to the beastly things which came before. It is to the human, the son of man, that God's Kingdom is given over completely and perpetually. It will, like the stone untouched by human hands in 2:34, have dominion over the whole world. The author then goes on to explain in more detail what the vision means.

Reading Daniel 7:15-28

Comment

In this passage it is quite clear that the author's interest lies with Antiochus Epiphanes and his persecution of the People of God in Palestine in his day (vss 20-22, 25). His reign will be very short. This is what is meant by the number three and a half (vs 25). Seven means fullness; half that is a very short time in apocalyptic language. We also learn in this passage that the " _one like a son of man_ " was a symbol for the " _saints of the Most High_ ", that is, the faithful members of the People of God (vs 27). The human and humane kingdom which God will create out of his People will receive eternal sovereignty (vs 27; compare vs 14).

Chapter 8 contains another vision using the symbols of a ram and a he-goat. The message is basically the same as that in Ch 7. Chapter 9 enters into an apocalyptic-style prophecy using the seventy years of exile which Jeremiah had predicted (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). Jeremiah had intended the number seventy to indicate a lifetime. The sacred author of Daniel, however, feels that the Exile really has not yet finished, and so he gives the prophecy of Jeremiah a new meaning, extending it to his own day. He feels that he and his comrades are at the end of the _"seventy years_ ". Seventy is a symbol for fullness, as is the number seven. The sense is that the time is now ripe for the end of domination by beastly foreign powers.

The last and longest vision is in Chs 10-12. This vision enters into many more details about Antiochus Epiphanes (Ch 11). What is of importance for us here is the preoccupation with the end of time. The disorder, the violence, the horror of the period of persecution is seen as the necessary disastrous period which ushers in the end of all history. This is very much a concern of apocalyptic literature.

Reading Daniel 12:1-4

Comment

The author has just finished presenting a rather detailed account of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes which ends with the prediction of his death (1 1:45). The end of this horrible king is seen as the time of the end of the world and the establishment of the Kingdom of God. Michael, the angel who is patron of the People of God, will be there representing them when the end comes. A time of great turmoil will come immediately before the end. This is a characteristic of the thought of apocalyptic writers. Just before the end, it is thought, there will be a time of unprecedented terror. But when the end comes " _all those whose names are written in the book_ " will be spared. These are the ones who have been judged virtuous and faithful among the People of God. The just who are still alive when the end comes, according to our author, will not die; they will go on living their human lives right into the Kingdom. The just who are already dead will be brought back to human life and shine as brightly as stars in heaven. The wicked among the People will also be raised back to human life, but only in order to live forever in shame and disgrace.

Finally, after so many centuries of struggle with the question of reward and punishment, we find elements of an answer. This passage does not teach a general resurrection of all peoples of all times, nor does it clearly teach a general judgment for all people. What it does teach is that the wicked among the People who have died without receiving their punishment will receive it at the end of time. It also teaches that all the just, especially the martyrs who died during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, will rise to receive their reward. The author also teaches that the life of the resurrected will go on forever. While he does not clearly teach that the just will be " _glorified_ ", as we would say, he does imagine a life that is human, good and everlasting.

In the passage which concludes the Book of Daniel (12:5-13), attempts are made to calculate exactly when the end will come. The number of days given do not agree with earlier ones. It could well be that at some stage the numbers were changed by editors or transcribers (8:14 speaks of 1150 days to the end; 12:11 says 1290; 12:12 says 1335). Since the visions of the Book of Daniel were placed in the time of the Exile, centuries earlier, the author continues the technique by having Daniel instructed to keep these visions sealed and secret until the end comes. Since the death of Antiochus is near and it marks the end, the visions can now (that is in about 165 BC) be made known.

(The Book of Daniel, in the version accepted as inspired by the Church at the Council of Trent, includes the story of Susanna, and the stories about Daniel and the Dragon (Chs 13-14). These popular stories illustrate virtues of Daniel in much the same way as the stories in Chs 1-6.)

The Book of Daniel, especially in chapters 7 to 12, is prophecy in a new form. It contains a message of judgment and a message of consolation. The author expresses God's judgment on the kingdoms of this earth, in particular on the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. He is as roundly condemned as the Assyrians and Babylonians were condemned by the ancient prophets. The traitors and the apostates among the People of God are also condemned for their faithless behaviour. The author consoles the faithful with the message that the reign of terror will be short and that God will destroy and condemn the monstrous king. He tells them that the Kingdom of God will surely come, and that the faithful will have a place eternally in this good, humane kingdom, whether they are alive or dead when it comes. The People are told that God is mysteriously but surely in control of history; they are to take courage from that. He will guide it to its fulfilment and they shall be part of that fulfilment.

## Chapter 19c From freedom to oppression

These were terribly difficult times for the members of the People of God in Palestine who refused to accept the Hellenistic way of life and culture. Their refusal grew into a full scale revolution after Mattathias and his sons made their stand at Modin. The revolution began as a movement for religious freedom but inevitably developed into a struggle for political independence. It took this turn under the leadership of Mattathias' third son, Judas Maccabeus, an inspiring, courageous and intelligent warrior. (This period of the People's history is very complex. We are only able to point out and briefly describe the highlights. The chart on p. 21 , on the religious and political leaders of the People of God in Palestine during this time is included to lend greater clarity.)

The movement for religious and political freedom is organized under Judas Maccabeus from 166 BC:

His love for the Law and hatred for the oppressive policies of Antiochus Epiphanes and his supporters motivated Judas to carry on the rebellion. Antiochus Epiphanes underestimated the strength of Judas and his followers and at first Antiochus sent only small forces to quell the disturbances they created. The Seleucid forces were easily defeated by Judas. Antiochus, realizing the strength of the rebels, sent Lysias as regent and placed a sizeable army under his charge. Each of Lysias' three generals - Ptolemy, Nicanor and Gorgias - were defeated by Judas. Even when Lysias himself led a large force against Judas, he was defeated. Sensing the weakness of the Seleucids, Judas and his followers made their boldest show of strength in December, 164.

The Temple is seized and much of Jerusalem is controlled by Judas in December, 164 BC:

Reading 1 Maccabees 4:36-61 (2 Macc 10:1-8)

Comment

While some of Judas' men diverted the attention of the Seleucid forces occupying the citadel (vs 41), the remainder set about cleansing the Temple of all that was used for pagan worship. They dismantled the pagan altar and erected a new one (vss 43-47). When the work of restoring the Temple was completed, the faithful came for the dedication of the new altar (vs 54) and other festivities that lasted eight days (vs 56), the same length of time as the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev 23:33-36). (Thus the name Feast of Tabernacles in the month of Chislev. See 2 Macc 1:9, 18. The feast was also called " _The Feast of Lights_ " because of the lighting of candles during the feast days. It is still celebrated by the Jews under the name "Hanukkah" which means dedication.)

The cleansing of the Temple gave courage to other anti-Hellenists throughout Palestine and the Transjordan. They likewise revolted in a number of Greek cities, often receiving support from Judas and his men.

Antiochus Epiphanes died sometime late in 164 BC. Under his successor, Antiochus V, Lysias was again given the responsibility of putting an end to the rebellion. Lysias defeated Judas at Bethzechariah in 163 (1 Macc 6:43-46), but Judas was still able to maintain control of Jerusalem and the People were allowed to practice the Law openly (1 Macc 6:59). For a time the persecutions ended.

Still, there was little rest for Judas and his followers. Within the Community of God's People, there were numerous struggles for power between Judas and the pro-Hellenist faction, particularly over the appointment of a high priest. The pro-Hellenists were joined by the anti-Hellenist Hasideans and scribes in support of Alcimus (163-159). The Hasideans supported Alcimus in spite of his strong Hellenist leanings because he was of a priestly family. Later, Alcimus turned on the Hasideans and killed a number of them in order to secure his position. Judas never trusted Alcimus and opposed his nomination as high priest. As brave as they were, Judas and those with him were not able to withstand the pressures as they increased both from within and outside the Community. As their struggle for religious freedom evolved into an outright war for political independence, the Seleucids under Demetrius I Soter reacted with a full show of strength. Under the leadership of his general Bacchides and the high priest Alcimus, a large Seleucid force met Judas and his supporters in battle north of Jerusalem in 160 BC.

Reading 1 Maccabees 9:1-22

Strong leadership under Jonathan and Simon makes political independence a reality by 142 BC:

Jonathan (160-143) was the brother of Judas Maccabeus and his successor to the leadership of the Maccabean party. He continued to give courageous and clever leadership. Power struggles within the Seleucid ranks were constant. Jonathan was able to remain on top of things and in the end managed to back the one who won the struggle and became the new Seleucid king, Alexander Bales. Alexander rewarded Jonathan by giving him the positions of general and governor of Judea as well as that of high priest (1 Macc 10:20,65). To ensure his positions of leadership Jonathan developed political relations with other powers in this part of the world, including Rome and Sparta (1 Macc 12:1-23). Jonathan's ability to walk the political tightrope did not last. He was imprisoned and before his brother Simon could free him, Jonathan was murdered (1 Macc 13:23¬30).

Simon (143-134) succeeded Jonathan and in 142 BC the territory belonging to the People of God (Jerusalem and surrounding territory) was declared independent by Demetrius II (1 Macc 13:41). Simon was succeeded by his son John Hyrcanus I (134-104 BC). His line of descendants was called the Hasmoneans (the name probably came from Hasmon who was the great-grandfather of Mattathias.)

John Hyrcanus I extends the territory under his control to include Idumea and Samaria:

During the reign of John Hyrcanus I (134-104), the Seleucid forces under Antiochus VII invaded Judea and regained control for a short time. The next Seleucid king, Demetrius II, was occupied with uprisings elsewhere in his empire, thus enabling John Hyrcanus Ito take back control of his territory and even expand it into ldumea to the south; he obliged the Idumeans to practice the Law, an enforcement they would never forget. The forces of John Hyrcanus I struck northward into Samaria as well, where they destroyed the Samaritan temple at Mt. Gerizim. Samaria was added to his domain by 107 BC.

_Aristobulus I further extends the territory under his control to include Northern Galilee_ :

Aristobulus I (104-103) stepped in to rule for only a year after his father's death and tried to ensure his power by imprisoning and even arranging for the deaths of family members. His main military conquest was that of Northern Galilee. He fought against Hellenism and made the Law of Moses the official law of the territory (the effects of this policy in Galilee lasted even to the time of Christ). Alexander Janneus, who had been jailed by Aristobulus I, was freed and became the next ruler.

The Hasmoneans enjoy their greatest political power at this time but under a corrupt and tyrannical leader:

Alexander Janneus (103-76) was not satisfied with having control of the territories he inherited. He engaged citizens and many foreign mercenaries in numerous wars that eventually expanded the territory to its largest size since the old Davidic empire. Alexander Janneus was hated by the Pharisees (the descendants of the Hasideans) because of his greed for power and they sought support from the Seleucid king, Demetrius Ill to get him removed. Alexander was nearly defeated but ended up with enough supporters to fend off his opposition. Janneus sought vengeance and quickly turned on those of the People who wanted him dethroned, killing many of them in the most cruel ways he could devise. His wife, Salome Alexandra (76-69) ruled for a while after his death. She gave the position of high priest to the weaker of her sons, Hyrcanus II. He received support from the Pharisees and they enjoyed greater powers until Salome's death.

Independence for the People of God in Palestine is lost in 63 BC:

Another son of Salome's, Aristobulus II (69-63 BC), who had the support of the powerful Sadducees, imprisoned his brother Hyrcanus II and made himself king and high priest. The Idumeans to the south and their neighbours, the Nabateans, promised support to Hyrcanus II for certain concessions to which he agreed. However, they were unsuccessful in their bid to dethrone Aristobulus II due to the intervention of Rome.

During this time the Romans had entered Syria and were preparing to place the remainder of the Seleucid territories under their rule. Both Aristobulus II and Hyrcanus II sought the ear of Pompey, the Roman commander. Pompey eventually gave his support to Hyrcanus II. John Hyrcanus II remained in Jerusalem but only as high priest. Pompey amalgamated Palestine with the Roman province of Syria (63 BC) and any political independence enjoyed by the People of God in Palestine came to an abrupt end.

Judas Maccabeus and his immediate successors had struggled hard and courageously to win religious and political freedom for the People of God in Palestine. It did not take very long, however, for those who followed them (the Hasmoneans) to lose sight of the original goals of the freedom fighters. With few exceptions the Hasmoneans were harsh rulers of their own people, favouring Hellenism and making a show of promoting the Law of Moses by imposing it by force on the Idumeans, the Samaritans and the peoples of Northern Galilee. They were generally more interested in power than in the integrity of the religious life of the People. For the citizens of Palestine the shift from being oppressed by their own rulers to being oppressed by the Romans involved only some minor adjustments.

## Chapter 19d Hope and love (The Book of Wisdom)

The Book of Wisdom was written in Greek, by a learned and devout member of the People of God, around 50 BC. It is most probable that he was a member of the Community in Alexandria in Egypt. His is the last of the sacred books to have been written in this first part of our history (the Old Testament).

The main purposes of his book appear to be firstly, to build up the faith of his community and secondly, to provide an understandable and attractive presentation of the faith to persons outside the People of God. His presentation supposes the goodness of creation, as taught by other wisdom writers, and it focuses on the great event of history, the Exodus. In this way he sums up the two great themes of the faith - creation and redemption.

The writer is an educated man of his day; he is familiar with Greek philosophy (eg. Plato and the Stoics). He uses words and phrases which echo Greek thought, and, on occasion writes as though he had adopted Greek ideas (eg. the body-soul distinction in 9:15). In spite of these traces of Greek thought, the author is every bit a traditional man of faith. He is more of a poet and preacher than an orderly thinker. He does not give us a neat summary of all his thoughts; nor do all of his ideas fit together into a clear system. It is not easy to say exactly what he thought on certain subjects.

Hope of immortality

The bloody persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes forced the writer of Daniel to find an answer to the long-standing and agonizing question concerning the justice of God: are the virtuous rewarded and the wicked punished? As we saw in Daniel 12:1-3, the answer came in the form of a belief in the resurrection on the last day, when the just would rise again as human persons to live forever happily; the wicked would rise again to shame and disgrace. The author of Daniel was thinking mainly of his own people, and not of a general resurrection or of a final, general judgment on the last day.

The writer of Second Maccabees held basically the same position expressed in the Book of Daniel: the martyrs who died for their faith would be raised up again to receive a new and everlasting life (2 Macc 7:9, 14, 23, 36). In both of these books, Daniel and Second Maccabees, the thought is very much in keeping with the notion that the human person is a body filled with life (breath, spirit). If a person is to be given life again in order to receive reward or punishment, this must involve the raising up of that person's physical body.

The author of the Book of Wisdom does not speak of resurrection, but he saw in the Greek ideas of body and soul a possibility of speaking about reward and punishment after death. Some Greek philosophers held that the human person was made of a body and a soul: the soul was immortal, the body mortal. To these thinkers only the soul was really valuable; the human body was a passing thing which would be discarded in death, leaving the soul free at last to exist eternally. The sacred author of the Book of Wisdom actually expresses this opinion in one passage: ". . _. for a corruptible body weighs down the soul, and this tent of clay burdens the mind_ . . ." (9:15). This remark, however, is only one passing comment in his work; it reads more as a concession to Plato than as a summary of his own thought. Our author holds the same positive view about the goodness of creation and the goodness of the human body as was held by older wisdom writers. He does not accept the negative view of the Greeks who held that the body was bad and only to be tolerated. Neither does he hold that the human soul (spirit) goes on living happily after death regardless of how the human person behaved in this life. As we see in the first selection to be read from the Book of Wisdom, our author maintains that God made all things good from the beginning and that the fundamental thing in human life is justice (virtue). It is the practice of justice which will determine what happens after death.

The author addresses rulers (judges, Wis 1:1). He might well have had in mind the upper class people who led the community in Alexandria, and who were inclined towards Hellenism and who probably even harrassed the devout followers of the Law of God. He urges them to live lives dedicated to what is right and warns them that lives of injustice lead to death.

Reading Wisdom 1:12-16

Commentary

" _Death_ " is twofold: death of the spirit through immorality, and physical death which expresses the consequences of sin (vs 12). He reminds them that death was not God's intention from the beginning; God did not create death (vs 13), nor does God rejoice in the fact of death. God's original intention when creating all things was to have all things live (vs 14). God created all things well, healthy, good from the beginning. Created things, material things, such as the human body, are not evil; they do not have some deadly poison in them which God himself placed there from the beginning (vs 14). Death, personified as Hades, is not what God intended, and therefore death does not rule the world. It is virtue (justice) which is everlasting, stronger than death therefore, and the ultimate answer to life after death (vs 15).

The wicked are the ones who by their sinfulness invited death into the human race. Death is the result of human sinfulness; God never willed sin, therefore God never willed death from the beginning. Human wickedness called death into existence (vs 16). Since it was God's will that all he made should live (vs 14), then those who do God's will by living a virtuous life will enter into God's original plan \- they shall live. (This last point shall be developed later by our author.)

The author then goes on to describe the thinking of the wicked (2:1-9). It is quite possible that he wanted to show the weakness of Qoheleth's thinking. He seems to put into the mouth of the wicked the kind of " _eat, drink and be happy_ " philosophy which Qoheleth recommended in moderation but which some Hellenists carried to excess (claiming to be followers of the Greek philosopher, Epicurus). To them death was final, and there was no reward or punishment after death. So they sought to get the most out of life, regardless of its consequences for other people (2:5-9).

Our author then pushes the matter one step further (2:10ff); he parodies these "fun-lovers", showing that they are not satisfied with enjoying orgies, but are usually led further to persecute and even plot the death of just and honest people. (He could well have been thinking of Alexander Janneus, one of the rulers in Palestine, who lived a life of luxury and had some 800 good men crucified because they opposed him.)

Reading Wisdom 2:10-20

Note: There are striking similarities between this passage and the passion of Christ. See Matt 27:39-43, for example. Some people have thought that this part of the Book of Wisdom must have been written by Christians. No serious scholar today holds such a view.

Comment

A life of immorality and sensual abuse leads to cruelty and hatred of those who live lives of devotion to the Lord. The wicked taunt the just, making fun of the claim that God is a father to those who serve him. The Greek word pais (vs 13) can have two meanings: it can mean "son" or "servant", much as the French word -garcon".

The author goes on to show just how mistaken the wicked are in both their behaviour and their thinking.

Reading Wisdom 2:21 - 3:9

Comment

The author argues that since God is immortal and mankind was made in his image (Gen 1:26ff), then mankind is intended by God to share in his immortality. The human race is, from the beginning, called to everlasting life. In this passage the author lays the blame for the existence of death on the devil. This is the first mention of the devil in the Bible, that is, of the devil as a force of evil, bringing both sin and death into the world. It would appear that our author is interpreting the serpent in Gen 3:1 ff as representing the devil.

Only the virtuous will enter into God's original design. They will enter into the everlasting life of peace which God planned for the human race from the beginning (3:1ff). The suffering of the just, and even their death is simply a passing test, a purification, a prelude to a life of love with God that will last forever (3:9). (We have in vs 8 a reference to the role of the just as judges of the nations; an idea which was implicit in Daniel 7:27, and which recurs in the Gospels. See Matt 19:28.)

The author then goes on to describe the hopeless emptiness of the future of the wicked (3:10-12). He writes that it is in fact better to be childless and virtuous, as a virtuous eunuch or as a saintly person who dies in youth, than to be wicked and have many children (3:13 - 4:19). He goes on to contrast the wicked and the virtuous as they stand before God to be judged (4:20 - 5:23). The wicked will be blown away as dust in the wind (5:14), but the virtuous will live forever, rewarded with glory and splendour by the Lord himself (5:15-16).

Thus ends the first section of the Book of Wisdom (Chs 1-5). Its central theme revolves around the hopeful future of the just who will live forever with the Lord, and the hopeless, empty future of the wicked who will be blown away from the Lord when the time of judgment comes. While our author was influenced by Greek thought his teaching is not Greek; it is firmly based on the conviction that the Lord is good, made all things good, and will see to it that goodness will be rewarded by bringing into everlasting life all those who live according to his will. The author does not speak of the resurrection of the body, but neither does he deny it. He uses the Greek idea of the immortality of the soul, but reshapes it according to his faith: it is God's justice which will make things right in the end.

Wisdom, the image of God's goodness

In the second section of the Book of Wisdom (Chs 6-9) the sacred author considers the nature of wisdom and just how necessary it is to have it. Wisdom in humans is a life of virtue; without this life of virtue there is no entry into everlasting life. He states his position very clearly in a few verses.

Reading Wisdom 6:17-19

Comment

He urges rulers to seek wisdom and to practice it (61 -21), telling them that wisdom is their only assurance of everlasting prestige and sovereignty. To him wisdom is to be found first by those who long for discipline; the practice of discipline means a love of wisdom; a love of wisdom brings observance of the laws of wisdom, and keeping the laws of wisdom leads one close to the Lord himself. Wisdom expresses the will of God who is the source of all wisdom. Wisdom comes from God and has all the qualities of God.

In the next passage Wisdom is represented almost as a person distinct from God (7:22 8:1). Our author is drawing upon the tradition which was established in Proverbs 8:22 —9:6 and further elaborated in Sirach 24:1-23. He adds to these passages by describing Wisdom in terms which really describe God himself. His theme is that all that God is in himself is reflected in Wisdom; in effect Wisdom is God himself as he is seen and grasped by humans on earth. (In this passage we have elements of thought and vocabulary which one day would be used to describe the divine Persons in the Trinity.)

Reading Wisdom 7:22 - 8:1

Commentary

It is true that our author is probably influenced by the Greek idea that there was such a thing as a " _world-soul_ " (Wis 1:7). This world-soul was in itself one, but manifested itself in many different ways throughout creation. They held that this world-soul emanated, or flowed out of the supreme Being, giving order and meaning to everything. Our author, however, is much more influenced by his predecessors in the faith: the writers of Proverbs 8:22ff and Sirach 24:1ff. If there is such a thing as a " _world-soul_ " it is in fact Wisdom itself (herself). Building on his forerunners, he goes on to describe Wisdom using 21 (3 times 7, the most perfect number) adjectives (7:22-23). (One of these translated as "unique", or "singly-born", is the word which lies behind our "unigenitum'', " _only-begotten_ ", in the Creed.) In verse 25 Wisdom is referred to as the _"breath_ " or " _spirit_ " of God. This recalls the image of Wisdom in Sirach 24:3, where Wisdom is compared to the wind, or breath of God, which hovered over creation (Gen 1 :2).

(The New Testament used this passage to describe the Lord Jesus as the image of God himself. See Colossians 1:15 and Hebrews 1:3, as well as John 1.)

Our author praises Wisdom in order to draw people to her. He speaks of Wisdom as a marvellously beautiful woman with whom one is in love, and with whom one wishes to live. The word used in 7:28 is one which means to live in the same house with a woman.

In the remaining parts of this second section of the Book of Wisdom (8:2 - 9:18) the author continues to urge people to seek Wisdom and he writes a beautiful prayer for Wisdom (9:1-18).

The Lord is the lover of life

The third section of the Book of Wisdom (Chs 10-19) turns to the action of God in the history of the human race. The author begins with Adam (10:1 ff) and goes as far as the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan (10:15-19:21). He includes a section against idolatry (Chs 13-15) which breaks the flow of this section somewhat. His main concern, however, is the Exodus. As a man who probably was born and lived in Egypt all of his life, and who was interested in explaining his faith to his fellow countrymen who were outside of the People of God, he had to present the great deed of God in which the Egyptians were destroyed, and at the same time he had to be careful not to turn God into a hater of Egyptians. He does this in two ways: he presents the Egyptians (and Canaanites) as representing all wicked and idolatrous people, regardless of their nationality (see 13:1ff), and he lays a great stress on the love which God has for all peoples of every race. To our author the real mystery of God lies not so much in the way in which he punished the Egyptians and Canaanites, but in his long-suffering patience and mercy towards these and all wicked and idolatrous peoples. The loving mercy of God is, in fact, a necessary expression of his power.

Reading Wisdom 11:21 - 12:2

Note: The passage is part of a meditative prayer to the Lord.

Commentary

God is all-powerful and could, if he wished, destroy the wicked immediately and in many different ways (11:17ff). The facts of history, however, make it quite clear that God is by no means quick to punish. The wicked can and do thrive and live long; this fact is not a proof that the Lord is unjust, but a proof that he is as merciful and patient as he is powerful. The reason the Lord is so merciful is that he knows just how small humans really are in the whole scheme of creation and he is therefore prepared to wait patiently for conversion (11:22-23).

Our author pushes the matter still further. The real reason why God is so merciful is that he created all people and therefore loves all people (11:24). The very fact that people exist proves that God loves them, for if he did not love them they would not have come into existence and they would not be kept in existence. God cannot hate anything he has made; that would be a contradiction (11:24-25). The Lord is the one who loves all people; he is the lover of life, the lover of all souls, because his own imperishable spirit (life, breath) is in all. It is therefore in keeping with the power of God that he should also be merciful in the extreme. He is slow to anger and quick to forgive (Ps 103:8). He admonishes, corrects little by little, waiting for the sinner to turn to him in trust. He is only too ready to forgive and show his mercy. (The author, you will have noticed, is reviving a theme which the Yahwist presented centuries before in his treatment of Adam and Eve, Cain and Lamech in Gen 3-4: the Lord does not kill sinners immediately.)

Happily, these readings from the Book of Wisdom sum up much of what was said in the other books of the Bible which we have studied. It is clear that the writer of this book held to the conviction about the goodness of creation and of the human race; a message which was first stated in Gen 1, and repeated again and again especially in the teaching of the wisdom writers. The question of God's justice, so often preached by the prophets, and causing so many problems for men such as Jeremiah and the author of Job, finds a beautiful response in the Book of Wisdom: God's justice will reach beyond the grave and give to each his due; also if the wicked seem to live long, it is a proof of both the power and the mercy of the Lord. The love of God for all people of all time has been expressed from the first pages of the Bible. It was this love which prompted God to call Abraham and to form from him a people of his own. This People was to be a blessing to all the nations of the earth. The Covenant too expressed the same purpose; the People were to be a nation with a priestly function for all nations. Second-Isaiah saw that the People were called to serve the nations. The author of the Book of Wisdom is steeped in his faith and is able to sum it up simply and powerfully: the Lord is the lover of all.

Conclusion

This chapter is the last in this part of the JOURNEY course to offer history. It is evident even from the little sketches of history given in this chapter that there exists a great deal of information about the last two centuries before the birth of Jesus. This is largely due to a Jewish historian called Josephus Flavius who wrote histories of his people. He lived most of his life in Palestine (c. 37 to 100 A.D.), but ended his days in Rome where he did much of his writing. From his writings and from the information which has come down to us through the Romans, we have detailed information about the events which led up to and which followed from the Roman conquest of Palestine in 63 BC.

Very briefly, the Romans controlled Palestine as part of their Syrian province, through their own appointees. They naturally controlled the office of high priest in Jerusalem. Through a complicated series of intrigues, assassinations, marriages and battles, involving such famous people as Julius Caesar, Antony (and even Cleopatra) and Octavian, a man called Herod got himself appointed " _King of Judea_ " in 40 BC. A rival " _king_ " was occupying Jerusalem at that time. Herod, with the help of Roman troops, stormed Jerusalem, conquered it and became " _King of Judea_ " in 37 BC. This Herod was from an Idumean family. (Hyrcanus I had imposed the Law on Idumea around 128 BC. Herod was a descendant of one of the families who had been forced to adopt the Law.) He was an ambitious and ruthless man. He undertook vast building projects in his kingdom; the most significant of these was the rebuilding of the Temple. The Temple which had been built around 515 BC must have needed repairs. Herod completely remodelled it, making it one of the most outstanding buildings in the Roman Empire.

For the ordinary faithful members of the People of God in Palestine, these were times of "oppression as usual". They were free to worship in the Temple and in their synagogues, but times were hard. Taxes were everywhere and seemingly on everything. Tax collectors of every sort plagued them. The longing for the end of time and the final coming of God's Kingdom grew stronger and stronger.

The Book of Daniel (165 BC) had begun a trend in literature. Many books were written imitating its apocalyptic style and message. Many of these books have been preserved, though they never found their way into the Bible. Among these the First Book of Enoch (from after 164 BC), The Book of Jubilees (c. 150 BC), part of the Sibylline Oracles (Bk III, from after 150 BC), The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (c. 120 BC), The Psalms of Solomon (c. 48 BC). In most of these books the main preoccupation was the end of time, the coming of the final great intervention of God in history and the establishment of his Kingdom. Some of these books developed the image of the " _Son of Man_ " which Daniel had presented (Dan 7:13). This Son of Man seems to have become more and more important in apocalyptic literature. In some of these books the coming of the final reign of God was associated with the coming of the Messiah, the descendant of David who would bring about the final destruction of the enemies of God's People and establish them securely in freedom. In much of these writings nationalism and faith went hand in hand.

Sometime in this period (between 150 and 75 BC) a group of protesters broke away from the mainstream of the religion of Jerusalem, and set up their own community on the north-west end of the Dead Sea. This group established a kind of monastery there based largely on the idea that the end of time was about to come. They lived for the final day when the great battle between the forces of light and darkness would take place; they prepared themselves to be part of the army of the _''sons of light_ ". This group is often called the Qumran Community, sometimes ''The Covenanters". (Many of their writings have been discovered since 1947. These writings are referred to as "The Dead Sea Scrolls''.)

The movement of the Pharisees continued to grow in popularity in these years. This movement promoted piety for the majority of the People in Palestine. Their base of operation was the synagogue, and synagogues were spreading to every town and village in the country, even in Jerusalem. The Pharisees also hoped in the coming of the Messiah who would bring an end to oppression and would usher in the reign of the Lord.

Outside of Palestine the communities of the People of God had spread to almost every part of the Roman Empire, from Babylon in the east to Spain in the west. It seems that by the year 20 BC almost every sizeable city in the whole Mediterranean basin had a synagogue. The thought and practices of the Pharisees spread to these communities as well. Hope and expectation seemed to be everywhere in the People of God.

Only the ruling class in Jerusalem (and probably the upper class in the communities outside of Palestine) did not hope in a final and definitive end to oppression by the Romans and the establishment of the reign of the Lord. The families of the high priests worked hand in hand with the Roman administration; they could hardly be expected to promote an end to their position of prestige. The upper class of the priesthood centered in Jerusalem were almost all of the group called the Sadducees. They held a very conservative position, denying validity to all writings except the five books of Moses (the Law). These hoped for a continuation of their comfortable situation, not for an overthrow of Rome which would necessarily threaten their privileges.

The lower classes of priests lived throughout Palestine, earning their living in various acceptable trades and serving the Temple when their turns came. When Herod began rebuilding the Temple around 20 BC, one of these priests Zechariah and his wife Elizabeth were living in the hope of having a child. Their hope would be fulfilled in the birth of John the Baptist. It is very likely that around this time too, Joseph and his future wife Mary, were already born.

## Chapter 20- Praise Of The People
Introduction

Prayer is the expression of a relationship to God. How one prays, what one prays, depends on the understanding of the relationship. The prayer of a community is determined by the opinion it has of God and of itself in relationship to God. Knowledge, understanding and experience of the relationship between God and the ones praying, is the stuff out of which prayer is made.

The history of the People of God is a history of a growing and maturing understanding of the relationship between them and their Lord. The Exodus and the Covenant were the foundations of all later growth in knowledge; these events coloured everything else. The memories of the patriarchs, Abraham. Isaac and Jacob developed their understanding further. Occupation of the land of promise, the struggles in the time of the kingship of David, the first Temple and the prophets. The Exile and the return the second Temple, the traditions of the wise men, the scribes and their devotion to the Law, all of these events and developments brought the People to a deeper and clearer knowledge of the Lord and of their relationship Through all of this the necessary contact with the nations among whom the People lived, from the Egyptians and Canaanites to the Persians and Greeks, forced them to sharpen their understanding of themselves and their Lord.

Out of all these experiences came prayer, thousands of prayers over the centuries. The Bible contains hundreds of them. Almost every book contains at least one prayer. The Book of Psalms, however, represents a special collection of prayers. It is what we might call today a collection of "all-time favourite" songs to the Lord. The Book of Psalms is a collection of sacred songs which stood the test of generations of use, In this collection we have the voice of the People of God, not of one generation, not of one movement or tendency within the People, but of the whole People.

The Book of Psalms is therefore a summary of the faith of the People: it gives us an overview of the People's understanding of themselves and of their God. All that is most important to the faith of the People of God finds expression in the Psalms. The psalms are a record of revelation that "caught on", revelation that succeeded in penetrating the very heart of the People. The greatness of the sentiments expressed in the psalms is witness to the fact that the history of the People of God under the Covenant made through Moses is a history of the Lord's success in forming a People like unto himself, holy and distinctive as he is holy.

Because the psalms present a summary of the whole faith and experience of the People, what they say has already been said and commented upon in the previous nineteen les-sons. The explanation of the psalms which we will give is basically a summary of what you have already seen. For this reason we have omitted all practice questions and the self-test from this chapter.

Opening psalm

The psalm suggested for the beginning of this chapter. Ps 117, is a good example of what was said in the Introduction. It is the shortest of all the psalms, yet in its simplicity and brevity it sums up the best in this period of our history. This little prayer could not have been written if the faith of the People had not absorbed the conviction of Gen 1 that the whole of the human race was made good by the Lord, a conviction which is expressed in different words by the author of the Book of Wisdom: " _You love all that exists . Lord, lover of life_ " (Wis 11:24-26). This psalm could not have been written without the revelation of the Exodus and the Covenant. The qualities of the Lord which it singles out are those underlined, for example, in Exod 34:6 where the Lord proclaims himself to Moses: " _The Lord (YHWH), the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, rich in kindness (_ _hesed_ _) and fidelity (_ _emet_ )" The background of the song also includes the mission of the People to all the nations of the world, a mission mentioned as early as the call of Abraham (Gen 12:1-4) and as late as Second-Isaiah and the Book of Jonah (Isa 42:4; Jonah 1:2). The psalm is an invitation to all the nations of the world to praise, the Lord.

Psalm 117

"Alleluia!

Praise the Lord, all nations,

Extol him all you peoples!

For strong toward us is his love,

the fidelity of the Lord lasts forever. Alleluia!"

Comment

The nations of the world are invited to join in the People's praise of the Lord. The People seem to be telling the nations not to fear, because they themselves are witnesses to the fact that the, Lord is powerful, heroic, in his love for them (hesed) and that his fidelity (emet) is everlasting and sure. Through the witness of the People, the nations will be drawn to praise the Lord (Zech 8:20-23).

## Chapter 20a Origins the Book of Psalms

The origins of the psalms are as obscure as the origins of folk songs in any culture. King David must have composed psalms and he might well have collected psalms written by others. His name appears often in the titles which are placed at the head of many psalms, but it is not certain whether the expression "of David" means "written by David" or "belonging to a collection of Psalms known as David's collection". (See titles to Pss 3- 41.) The titles also refer to Asaph, a choirmaster in 1 Chronicles 25:1ff (see Pss 73-83), and to a group called "Sons of Korah" (eg. Pss 42-49; 84-85; 87-88). Again, as in the case of the references to David in the titles, it is not clear whether Asaph and the Sons of Korah are composers or collectors. Many of the psalms must have come into existence and been preserved in the way folk songs come to be and are handed on: some unknown author of genius created a psalm; its beauty and power guaranteed that it would be remembered. The "Negro Spirituals," the "psalms" of early Black American culture, had their origins in much the same way.

At various points in the history of the People smalls collections of psalms were made. These are the early collections within the Book of Psalms (eg Pss 42-83) seem to represent a collection which favoured the divine Name Elohim. Sometime between the return from Exile and the year 200 BC these early collections were put, together and some psalms which had circulated separately were added to the Book of Psalms. The Book of Psalms itself is set up into five little books, h ending with a praise of the Lord (doxology). (See Pss 41:13; 72:19; 89:51; 106:48; 150:6.) It seems very probable that this final work of compilation was done by people connected with the Temple.

## Chapter 20b The Psalms and worship

The ritual of the Temple underwent great changes over the centuries. Under Hezekiah (2 Kings 18) and under Josiah (2 Kings 22-23) serious reforms were made in the liturgy. The renewal of worship in the second Temple after the Exile was made along the lines of the reforms begun under Josiah and expressed in Deuteronomy. The Book of Psalms seems to be very closely related to the worship in the second Temple, though what psalms were used in this or that ritual is not clear.

It is certain that after the Exile at least, there were daily sacrifices in the Temple (Exod 29:38-42; Num 28:2-8); a lamb was offered in the morning, and one in the evening. There were also further sacrifices offered on each Sabbath (Num 28:9-10) and on the first day of each new lunar month (new moon, Ezra 3:5; Num 28:11-15). Besides the regular ones there were sacrifices which could be offered on various occasions according to the needs of the people. Someone might have made a vow to have a sacrifice offered (Lev 22:18-23; Ps 50:14; 65:2); some particularly happy occasion might prompt the offering of a sacrifice, (Pss 107:22; 116:17). A woman would have a sacrifice offered after childbirth(Lev 12:1-8), a leper after being cleansed (Lev 14:10-32).

Sacrifices when properly understood, fostered profound sentiments of faith, of self-gift and joyful union with the Lord (Chapter 6, pp. 8-10), The sacrifices known as "peace offerings" involved a banquet eaten " _before the Lord_ ", that is, in the Temple area, In these sacrifices part of the victim was burnt, part was shared with the priests, and the remainder was eaten by the offerers. The participants felt that they were at table with the Lord, sharing the banquet to which he had invited them. These were very joyful celebrations (Deut 12:7, 12, 18; see also Exod 24:11, Chapter 5, pp. 10-12).

Sacrifices could also be the occasion for the expiation of sins (Lev 7:1ff). Sorrow, the desire for reunion with the Lord, prayers for forgiveness, rejoicing at having been forgiven - these would be sentiments associated with such sacrifices.

There were also the great feast days: the Passover (Chapter 3, pp. 1 Off), the Feast of Weeks (Lev 23:15-21) and the Feast of Tents (Tabernacles, Num 29:12-39). (The timing of these feasts originally marked the three main phases of the harvest: Passover-Unleavened Bread, the beginning of the grain harvest; Weeks, fifty days later (Pentecost = fifty in Greek), marked the end of the grain harvest; Tents (Sept-Oct), the end of all harvesting.) In time these three ancient feasts all came to commemorate the Exodus and/or the Covenant. They were very joyful feasts with much singing.

Some scholars have proposed that in the period before the great liturgical reforms of Josiah there had been other great feasts. One suggestion is that there had been, in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles, a New Year's festival in which the reign of the Lord was celebrated. The liturgy could have involved processions and acclamations of the Lord as king. Psalms 47, 93, 96, 99 would especially fit such a ceremony. Another suggestion is of a yearly Covenant renewal ceremony at the Temple. Psalm 50 would be especially reminiscent of this festival. Still another suggestion is that there had been a festival in which Jerusalem, and the kingship of the House of David were celebrated. This could have involved processions with the Ark, songs in honour of Zion (Jerusalem) and a renewal of the promises made to David. Psalm 24 would recall the processions; Psalms such as Pss 46, 48 would celebrate Jerusalem, and Psalms 132 would recall David. If such feasts ever did take place, they were cast aside in the liturgical reforms. There is no clear trace of them in the liturgy of the second Temple.

There was, at least from the time of the Exile onward, the Day of Atonement (Lev 23:27- 32). This was a solemn fast day, a day of complete rest in which sorrow for sins and prayers for God's mercy were dominant themes. Later, after Judas Maccabee rededicated the altar in 164 BC (Chapter 19, p. 17 ), the Feast of Dedication was celebrated yearly. (The Feast of Purim, featuring the brave deeds of Esther and Mordecai, was a synagogue celebration.)

Song was part of worship (eg. Amos 5:23; Ps 27:6). Cantors and choirs sang (1 Chronicles 25) and the congregation gathered for worship also sang. The great feasts brought pilgrims to Jerusalem in large numbers. On their way they sang psalms (eg. Pss 120- 134). Once in Jerusalem there would be processions (eg. Ps 118:27), dancing (Ps 149:3), music (Pss 81:1-4; 150) and singing (Ps 26:7). When the worshippers had learned a psalm they could, and no doubt did, use them as their mood and needs dictated. It cannot be proven that all the psalms were used in the liturgy, but it would seem safe to say that the majority of them were so used.

A few difficulties in using the psalms

Numbering: Two traditions of numbering exist: one based on the numbering of the Hebrew text, the other based on the numbering of the Greek (LX X). The differences lie in the fact that one tradition treats certain psalms as one psalm, and the other treats the same psalm as two.

Hebrew Greek (LXX)

1 to 8 same as 1 to 8

9 and 10 become 9

11 to 113 are 10 to 112

114 and 115 become 113

116 becomes 114 and 115

117 to 146 are 116 to 145

147 becomes 146 and 147

148 to 150 same as 148 to 1 50

Most older Catholic translations followed the Greek numbering. Today, however, almost all modern translations follow the Hebrew numbering. (We follow the Hebrew numbering in these chapters.)

Verse Numbering: Many of the psalms have a title preceding the first line of the psalm. (See Ps 4: " _For the choirmaster. For strings. Psalm. Of David_ ". These titles were added by editors. They are not considered part of the sacred text. Some translations omit them altogether.) Some translations number the title as verse 1 (eg. NAB), some give no number to the title and begin verse 1 with the first line of the psalm itself (eg. JB). We follow the numbering used in JB, RSV, NEB. If you use the NAB and notice that our references do not seem to be accurate, add 1 to our verse number and you will probably have the correct reference (eg. our Ps 22:1 will be 22:2 in NAB).

Curses in the psalms: While it would be possible to write at length about the sometimes violent prayers for justice, for vengeance, and the occasional curse in the psalms, it seems better simply to say that they reflect the fact that the love of one's enemies which was already taught in the Old Testament did not penetrate all of the psalms (Exod 23:4f; Sir 28:1-7; Tobit 4:15). We today can and do think the same thoughts, but we would not dare express them in liturgy. It is perhaps best to follow the example of the official Prayer of the Church and avoid them altogether. Their omission, however, can destroy the force of the poetry of some psalms, and can deprive us of sensing the agony of the poor and oppressed. in any case, these desperate cries, the last resort of the helpless, occupy a very small space in the Book of Psalms.

##  Chapter 20c Commentary on selected Psalms

The 150 psalms represent the broadest possible spectrum of prayer. There are very simple prayers, easy to grasp and use, expressing sentiments which all people of faith can understand. There are others, however, which are so profound as to be meaningful only to persons whose faith has been tried by fire and whose experience of God is therefore more refined. Within the great variety it is possible to discover that there are certain types of psalms, psalms which have common characteristics of style, form and content. Not all the psalms, of course, fall neatly into these categories; a great number of them defy any category.

Research in the last century has led many scholars to hold that the psalms can be classified according to the following types:

Hymns

\- hymns (general)

\- hymns on the Lord - hymns on Zion

Thanksgiving psalms

Confidence psalms

Laments

Royal psalms (on the king)

Wisdom psalms

Historical psalms

Prophetic psalms

Liturgical psalms

Psalms on the Law

These types are useful in studying the psalms, but they should not be taken as firm and final divisions. Some scholars propose divisions which are quite different. We shall consider at least one psalm in each of these categories, taking them in reverse order beginning with psalms on the Law and ending with the hymns. (For a list of psalms and their classification, see the Appendix.)

Psalms on the Law

The Law of the Lord was valued as the best of God's gifts to his People. We must not confuse the Law with laws. The Law contained in the first five books of the Bible (Gen, Exod, L ev, Num, Deut) covers everything from creation to the death of Moses. It records incidents in the lives of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the great achievements of Joseph. It contains the account of the slavery in Egypt, the calling of Moses when he encountered the Lord in the burning bush and received his holy Name. The Law records the mighty act of God saving his People out of the " _house of slavery_ ". The Law also recounts the making of the Covenant of love and fidelity where the Lord bound himself to his People, promising them a future of greatness and dignity. The Law contains the wise and noble instructions given by the Lord to his People, guidance which was to make them the special People, distinct from all others, holy as the Lord himself is holy. These instructions were to help them become the Lord's own boast, and bring about the admiration of the nations. The Law presents Moses, the model of leadership, the ideal of holiness in unselfish and dedicated service of his People and of unflinching loyalty to the Lord. The Law is not to be understood cheaply as a simple collection of rules and commandments.

A very large part of the Law was dedicated to celebration. All the rules and regulations about liturgy (eg. Leviticus) seem at first glance to show a finicky concern with exact ceremonials; on closer examination it becomes clear that these regulations are mainly concerned with making sure that the People of God gather together to rejoice, to celebrate, to enjoy the company of their Lord and of each other. The Law made it quite clear that the Lord's will was that his People enjoy being his People. Ezra knew what the Law meant when he said, " _Do not be sad: your strength is in the joy of the Lord_ ' (Neh 8:9-- 12). Anyone who had come to understand the Lord's will in the Law, especially his will to have the People.) celebrate, would share the psalmist's longing to be with all his brothers and sisters, ''amid cries of joy and praise in the rejoicing crowd- (Ps 42:4)

The love of the Lord cannot be separated from love of his Law, because the Law, in all its dimensions, reveals the Lord himself. In the psalm we are about to consider, the emphasis is not placed first on obedience to the Law, but on enjoying the Law. This psalm does not promote a dry, mechanical obedience to rules, but love of the Law, which is love of the Lord.

Reading Psalm I

Commentary

The ideal of the Law was not the production of unthinking robots of the Lord; it was not sheer obedience that was the goal. The goal was loving the Lord with all one's strength, all one's heart (Deut 6:4-9), that is, a love lull of affection for the Lord. Psalm 1 stands at the beginning of the Book of Psalms as a reminder of the ideal: " _Blessed is the one who delights in the Law of the Lord_." It is, of course, understood that obedience to the laws of the Lord will follow; but the emphasis is not placed on the level of obedience alone. The truly happy, blessed, grace-filled person, is the one who finds pleasure in the Law, and therefore in the Lord himself. This kind of person will enjoy meditating on the Law, singing its lines in a quiet murmur (vs 2). It is to this type of person that the blessings of the Lord will come.

You will notice that the blessings are described in very personal, interior terms: such a person is like a strong, healthy tree with its roots drinking deeply from the holy streams of the Lord (vs 3). The Hebrew word used for "water streams" refers to hand-made water courses, canals. The poet who wrote this psalm wanted to convey the personal concern of the Lord: the water streams of the Law were dug out by the Lord himself to provide living water for his People. Those who drink from this stream will produce fruit in season, and will stand ever green and strong. The psalmist is suggesting that there is life, a life that is fruitful, strong, solid, for the one who loves the Law and the Giver of the Law.

The wicked person on the other hand, is empty fluff; just so much chaff blown away by the wind (vs 4). When the time of reckoning comes, the wicked will not be able to stand the test. Their future is doomed to be as empty as their sinful lives were in the past (vss 5- 6).

It is difficult to date this psalm. It uses the same image of the tree by the water stream as Jeremiah uses (Jer 17:7-8); but the psalmist also seems to share the thoughts of later wisdom writers. Sirach speaks of associating with others who love the Law and enjoy meditating on it (Sir 6:34-37), and he also speaks of the devout person who grows " _like a rose on the bank of a watercourse"_ (Sir 39:13ff) He also shares the thoughts which the author of the Book of Wisdom had: in the end, when all is said and done and the Lord assesses the worth of each person, the wicked will be like chaff, like smoke in the wind (Wis -5:14-16); but the just will stand firm, strong. The author of Psalm 1 probably did not quite understand clearly that the just would _"live forever_ " (Wis 5:15), but he was very close to saying it.

This same love of the law is shown in many, many psalms. Psalm 19 has a wonderful combination of the revelation of the Lord in nature (vss 1-6), followed by the revelation of the Lord in the Law (vss 7-14). In nature the Lord is truly revealed, but the revelation is "without speech" (vs 3); it is impressive, but not clear. The revelation given in the Law, however, is marvellously clear (vs 8). The sun gives life and healing to all it touches (vss 5-6), but it is only a symbol of the life-giving power of the perfect, trustworthy, upright, clear, pure, true, golden, sweet Law of the Lord (vss 7-10).

Psalm 119 is also a song praising the Law. This is the longest of all the psalms (176 verses). Rejoicing in the Law recurs throughout (eg. vss 24, 77, 143, 174). Psalm 111 is a hymn in praise of the Lord and his great deeds. Among the deeds for which praise is due to the Lord is his gift of the Law in the Covenant (vss 4-10), Psalm 112 praises the person who " _fears_ " the Lord by " _joyfully_ " obeying his commandments. Such a person is blessed because he knows the Lord and behaves as one of his children. Like the Lord he is a light to others, he is merciful, tender-hearted (vss 4-5), He follows the rules which forbid taking interest on loans, and he is generous to the poor (vss 5-9). (Psalms 111 and 112 do not belong to this type of psalm, but reference is made to them here because of their bearing on the Law)

The Law is never treated as a cold, thing-in-itself. It is always related to the Lord himself. The Law, in this sense, is always a personal thing, never separated from the Lord. To treasure the Law is to treasure the Lord; to love the Law is to love the Lord, for the Law is the sum of all the Lord's greatest deeds - creation and redemption - and all that accompanies these (creation: Gen 1-2; redemption: Exod 14-24).

The Law, as Jesus would one day say, can never pass away; all else in heaven and earth can disappear, but the Law, the very basis of all that the Lord has done for his People, can never pass away. It can only be brought to perfection and fullness (Matt 5:17-19).

Liturgical psalms

Psalm 1 clearly presented two ways of living, one of love for the Law, the other of hatred for the Law. Wickedness at its worst was the wickedness of those who knew the Lord and his Law, but rejected it, scoffed at it (Ps 1:1). The prophets often spoke out against the hypocrisy of those who went into the Temple to worship the Lord, but whose lives were full of wickedness (Amos 5:21ff; Isa 1:11ff; Jer 7). The priests and Levites in charge of the Temple were certainly sensitive to the moral requirements of proper worship.

It was the custom in ancient times to set certain rules and regulations for participation in the worshipping assembly. These varied a great deal from country to country. Even within the People of God these could vary from the simple requirements of ritual purity (eg. Lev 11), to the very demanding moral perfection described in the next psalm. This psalm presents an "entrance ritual" where the pilgrim coming to worship in the Temple was reminded of the way of life which the Lord demanded of those who gathered to worship in his presence.

Psalm 15

Commentary

Verse 1 asks, "what _kind of person has the right to be received as a guest in the Lord's tent (Temple)? What qualities of life should a person have who wants to set up house on the mountain of the Lord (Zion)?"_ The psalmist does not answer the question by saying that one must first be a blood descendant of Abraham, nor does he give a list of things demanded by ritual purity, The psalmist goes to the heart of the matter: what is required of the true worshipper is justice in daily life. Even the non-Israelite, the stranger or foreigner in the land could qualify for entrance if he lived a life of justice according to the law.

In his description of the just person (vss 2-5), the psalmist goes beyond the minimum required by the Law (eg. the Ten Commandments) and reaches to those areas of justice which were so very difficult to impose, let alone to assess. Verse 2 gives the basic interior dispositions of the just person: a blameless way of life, doing justice and being truthful from the heart. Verses 3-5 go into details. The just is very careful not to injure a neighbour in the slightest way; is most appreciative of the fellowship of the community. Verse 4ab has this meaning: the just person will feast, celebrate with those who fear the Lord and keep his ways; but he will by no means approve of the behaviour of the wicked.

He continues very much in the spirit of the prophets (see Isa 33:14-16) and the Law: there can be no true justice if a person violates either the spirit or the letter of the Law concerning money and property (Chapter 6, pp. 11-13). The person of integrity stands by an oath (pledge) at any cost, does not charge interest on loans, and never accepts bribes (Exod 23:8). The honesty and integrity of such persons is proven by the fact that greed for money has no power over them. Nothing can shake such persons (vs 5). They become as solid as the Lord, who is the Rock unshakeable (Pss 31:3; 42:9).

Psalm 24 is also an "entrance ritual". To appreciate it we should picture the liturgy that is involved. We might imagine pilgrims gathered at the gates of the Temple (or the city); the priests intone the entrance hymn (or, more likely, they have choirs sing the hymn). The same question is posed as in Ps 15: " _who has the right to go up the mountain of the Lord_?" (vs 3). The answer is given in more general terms than in Ps 15: the one whose action (hands) and heart are pure, and who does not worship idols (vs 4). The song then expresses a blessing on all who meet such high standards of conduct (vs 5). The good pilgrims are the ones who are worthy to seek " _the face (the presence) of the God of Jacob_ ". At this point the song calls for the gates to be opened. Poetically the gates are referred to as old persons who are stooped over. They are told, " _lift up your heads_ ", " _rise_ ", expressions which in plain speech mean "cheer up" or "get excited". The gates open and the song asks the pilgrims to profess their faith in the presence of God (symbolized very probably by the Ark of the Covenant which was carried through the gates): "Who is the king of glory?" They answer: " _The Lord!"_ (vss 8-10). (This psalm is used today to celebrate the Ascension of our Lord.)

Psalm 134 is also a liturgical psalm. It is the last of the pilgrim psalms (Pss 120-134). Possibly this psalm represents the pilgrims encouraging the priests (servants of the L Lord) to these is the Lord 1-2). The last verse (vs 3) expresses the blessing which the pilgrims receive from the priests(see Num 6:22-27).

Prophetic psalms

For well over four hundred years there were great prophets among the People of God (Elijah c. 850, to Malachi c. 400 BC). Their influence penetrated into the hearts of countless numbers of the People in every generation. The great prophets placed a strong emphasis on integrity, on being wholeheartedly loyal to the Lord. They each had had profound personal experiences of the Lord, knew his greatness and holiness, felt his love and kindness, and understood him to be a demanding God directing history to its goal. To them he was the God of judgment, but he was also the God who gave them a future full of hope (Jer 29:11). The prophets, like the best of those who promoted the Law, were especially concerned with the victims of injustice, the poor who were the casualties of the hard-hearted greed and calloused ambitions of societies' overlords. The thoughts and feelings of the prophets can be found in a very large number of psalms (eg. Pss 52, 83, 9, 10, 22).

Furthermore, the special concerns of certain prophets can be felt in many psalms. No doubt Hosea is one who lies behind the great popularity of the word hesed (love, kindness, mercy) in the psalms. This Covenant virtue (hesed) is referred to well over a hundred times in the psalms. Isaiah must have had some influence on the psalms in praise of Jerusalem (eg. Pss 46, 48, 76). It is quite certain that Jeremiah had a strong influence on many of the psalms of lament (eg. Pss 6, 22). Many other examples could be given, but these few should suffice to illustrate the fact that the thought and spirit of the prophets entered the life of prayer of the People of God. The prophets did not always stand alone against the rest of the People; they had, in fact, many supporters, and in time they touched the lives of all who prayed the psalms.

The next psalm to be considered, Ps 95, is strongly marked by the concerns of the prophets. it begins like a hymn of praise (vss 1-2) and goes on to single out the greatness of God who made all of creation, and who also made his People (vss 3-7). The psalm then moves to a prophetic oracle warning the People against the greatest of dangers, and of the consequences of falling victim to this danger.

Reading Psalm 95

Commentary

"Harden not your hearts as at Meribah, as in the day of Massah in the desert." ps 95:8

This psalm has something of the character of Pss 15 and 24 - it appears to be a kind of "entrance ritual". The setting for it, we suggest, might be the beginning of a liturgical service where the Law was to be read aloud and possibly preached on. The psalm begins by inviting the congregation to worship the Lord who made all things and who in a special way created his People vss.1-6). Then the congregation is urged to listen to their shepherd " _today_ " (vs 7). There follows a stern warning concerning the greatest of all the dangers which can afflict the People of God - hardness of heart (vs 8). Hardness of heart means allowing one's self to be first of all indifferent to what the Lord has done (vs 9), and then disobedient to his ways (vs10). Those who allow themselves to become both indifferent to the Lord's deeds, and unfaithful to his ways will be treated as the generation of rebels in the desert were treated: they will not enter into the " _rest_ " which the Lord has in store for them (vs 11). (See Exod 17:1-7; Num 20:2-13).

This psalm is rich in allusions to thoughts found in the Law. The expression " _today_ " (vs 7) recalls the " _today_ " of the liturgy in Dent 4:4, 10. the liturgy the congregation was not thought of as simply being reminded of the ancient deeds and the ancient Law of God. The liturgical celebration made present the actions of God and the demands of his Law. (See our Lord's use of " _today_ " in Luke 4:21, during a synagogue liturgy.) The " _rest_ " of God refers primarily to the entry into the land of promise (Deut 12:9), hut its use here suggests a more profound rest to come for those listening to this song in the Temple. (See Hebrews 3:7-11; 4:4-10.)

Psalms 14, 50, 52, 53, 75, 81 are also considered to be prophetic psalms.

Historical psalms

The references to incidents which took place during the wandering in the desert in Psalm 95 are an example of how easily the composers of the psalms could make use of the history of the People of God. Time and again the psalms contain references to events and persons in history (eg. Exodus and conquest in Ps 114; Abraham in Ps 47:9; Moses in Ps 103:7). The next psalm to be considered is a hymn praising the Lord for all that he had done, from the days of his promises to Abraham to the days when these promises were fulfilled.

Reading Psalm 105

Comment

In almost every line from vs 10 onward, the subject is the Lord: " _He said ... he called . he sent . . he gave_ ". The Lord is faithful to his word; that is the central theme of this review of history.

Psalm 68 is a strange and powerful old psalm in praise of God in history. it uses some very ancient expressions, calling God " _Shaddai_ " (vs 15, often translated simply as " _God_ "), and the " _Rider of the Clouds_ " (vs 4). At the same time the Lord is referred to as the one who has proven in history that he deserves the titles "Father of orphans" and "Defender of widows", who also gives a home to the lonely and who leads prisoners to dance (vss 5-6). The psalm centers on the presence of the Lord in his Temple (vss 28- 35). It is, in the strict sense of the word, a psalm inspiring awe for the greatness of God.

Psalms 78 and 106 are based on history, but this time on history from the side of the People. Their behaviour In history is not the admirable thing that God's behaviour is. These two psalms are a historical confession of sins. (It would be great if today we could be so candidly honest about our record in history.)

Wisdom Psalms

The tradition of wisdom was present within the People from very early times. It received strong affirmation in Solomon and reached its height in the Books of Proverbs, Job and Qoheleth, The attitudes of this tradition, especially its convictions on the goodness of creation and the greatness of the human race, found their way into the psalms. The glory of creation and the even greater glory of the human race is praised in Psalm 8; the greatness of God seen in the harmony of creation is celebrated in Psalm 104, The love of the Law which developed in the later wisdom writers. Sirach and the author of the Book of Wisdom, is shared by the writers of Psalms 1, 111, 119. In the psalms we are about to consider we shall notice these and other concerns typical of the wisdom tradition.

Psalm 73 deals with the ever-nagging problem of justice on this earth. It brings back the question posed so often by the wisdom writers: why do the wicked prosper? (See Job 21:7ff.) This question was also asked by Jeremiah (Jer 12:1ff). Psalm 73 goes further both in describing the problem and in pushing towards an answer. The psalmist here has absolutely no illusions about how comfortable and trouble free the lives of the wicked really are. He does not harbour the superficial opinion that deep down in their hearts prospering sinners are miserable. The psalmist treats of the problem of the "peace" of sinners on the profoundly personal level of his own terrible temptation to abandon God, to start sinning and become as rich and comfortable as the sinners.

Reading Psalm 73

Commentary

" _God is truly good_ . ." (vs 1), This is the author's basic conviction; without it he could not have resisted the temptation he describes in this psalm. The psalmist appears to be addressing an assembly of the faithful in order to tell them of his ordeal and the way in which it was resolved. He begins with a statement of faith on the goodness of God. As we will see later in the psalm, this is not a philosophical or abstract statement; for the psalmist the goodness of God means that God is most precious to him.

_"... to pure hearts_ " (vs 1). This expression refers to what we might call integrity; people who are faithful, obedient to the Lord right from their innermost thoughts and feelings are " _pure of heart_ ". The "heart" is one of the keys to this psalm. The word recurs several times (vss 1, 7, 13, 21, 26). What the author wishes to say is based on the deepest of personal experiences, experience on the level of the heart. He will not speak about the problem of the prosperity of the wicked on the level of ideas or principles, but on the level of what he experienced in a moment of extraordinary insight.

In vss 4-12 he describes what he sees: the wicked are not only getting richer, but they also enjoy a comfortable life. He. This is evidently clear for everyone to see. What is worse, they boast that God does not see and does not care about right and wrong.

Even though he believed in the goodness of God, he was very near to the point of abandoning God (vs 2), because he saw just how prosperous and well-off the wicked were (vs 3). His temptation was made even more acute by the fact, also very clear, that in spite of his own purity of heart, he suffered (vs 13), and underwent difficulties which to him seemed like punishment at the hands of the God he sought to serve (vs 14). He was on the verge of rejecting the Lord.

Very humbly he admits that the reason he did not give in to the temptation was the fear of falling out with the community of the faithful (vs 15). At the moment of crisis he was saved by his love for the community. was the strong sense of belonging to his people that saved him and gave him enough time to probe more deeply into the mystery (vs 16). With this verse the temptation is Over; it has turned into a challenge, a problem to be tackled.

"I tried to analyse the problem, hard though I found it.."Ps 73:16

Verse 17 can be translated in different ways: the same Hebrew expression can be translated as " _mystery_ " (mysteries), or as " _sanctuary_ " (sanctuaries, courts). If we use the word mystery, then the author is speaking of an experience in which he felt drawn into a deep mystery and given insight. If we translate the expression as sanctuary, then the author is speaking either of an experience which he had in the Temple in Jerusalem, or an experience in which he felt taken up into the sanctuary of God in Heaven. Whatever translation is used, the insight he received had to do with the end or final destiny of the wicked (vs 17) and his own final goal (vs 24).

In his moment of insight he grasped the terrible truth: the wicked are on a slippery path bound for destruction. God may seem to be asleep at the moment, but the day of his awakening will come and then the sinners will be like dreams, phantoms, without substance (vss 18-20). The future of the wicked is nothingness. The author says that he just cannot understand how he could have been so stupid as not to see this when he was being tempted (vss 21-22).

The verses which follow have caused a great deal of difficulty in translation. The sense which seems most acceptable is that the author realized that what really mattered to him all along was to be close to God. Nothing on earth, no wealth, health, fame and painless life could ever possibly replace the joy of being close to God (vss 25 and 28).

There is debate among commentators concerning the hope which the psalmist expresses about his own end, his own future. Many believe that his notions of life after death were not clearly developed. These hold that the psalmist simply realized just how precious the presence of the Lord was to him, and he knew without a doubt that this is what he wanted most of all. The wicked do not enjoy the presence of God; their future therefore is bound to be empty by comparison to his future which will be full of the joy of god's presence. Other commentators believe that this writer was one of the first to break through to faith in life after death. These hold that vss 23-28 express the hope of being taken into the presence of God forever in glory (vs 24). Both interpretations are possible.

The important point, however, is the profound sense of the goodness of God which the writer has and shares with us, To him there is nothing on earth that can come near to the joy of being close to the Lord. This experience is real, solid and more fulfilling than any treasures on earth.

Psalm 91 expresses some of the same sentiments. The goodness of God and his loving care for his faithful People runs through the whole psalm. The author states his trust in the Lord's protection (vss 1-13) and then quotes an oracle from the Lord (vss 14-16). The Lord will surely give an answer to the prayers of those who obey him; he will fill them with life and make it clear to them that he can save (vs 16).

Psalm 139 is another psalm which shows the influence of the wisdom tradition. It is a beautiful example of the warm devotion which could come from a combination of reason and faith. From reason and reflection the wise men could arrive at the truth that God is everywhere present, and that God knows everything, even the most personal thoughts and feelings of each person. But a God who is all-present and all-knowing can be a cold, distant Being, or even worse, a "spy in the sky" type of God (Job 7:16ff). In this psalm, however, faith in the personal, loving God, known through his Covenant and through the prophets is wedded to the thoughts about God known from reason. The omnipresence of God becomes the personal presence of God with the believer wherever the believer may find himself. Wherever he goes, whatever he experiences, the psalmist is certain that the Lord holds him by the hand (vs 10). The psalmist knows that from the very first moment of his existence in his mother's womb, the Lord was there close to him, watching over him (vss 14-15). He wishes there were no sinners anywhere (vss 19-22). These are strong emotional statements, but they are quite acceptable if we take them as statements of one loves the Lord and is both angered and baffled by the fact that some people do not love him.

A number of other psalms express the thoughts and feelings of the wisdom tradition: Pss 1, 37, 49, 112, 127, 128, 133. This tradition, however, affected many other psalms as well.

Royal psalms

These are psalms which have to do with the role of the kings in the history of the People. Long before they had an earthly king, the People believed in the Lord their God as their king. When the proposal to have an earthly king was first made to Samuel, he saw it as a rejection of the rule of the Lord as king (1 Sam 8:7). The Lord, however, gave in to the People's request and granted them a king. Saul, the first king, failed to gain victory over the Philistines, failed to unite all the Tribes. His failure was understood as God's rejection of Saul as his chosen king. All that Saul failed to do was accomplished by David. His victories over all the People's enemies, his ability to unite all the Tribes, his great respect for the ancient traditions of the People, his concern for making the Lord himself the centre of his city and his rule, his just way of ruling, justified the prophecy which was made to him through Nathan (2 Sam 7; see Leson11 -19). The promise which the Lord made David was expressed in a covenant, which bound himself to David and his descendants forever. If David or his successors sinned, they would be punished, but the Lord would never withdraw his choice of David and his descendants as rulers of his People.

As the faith of the People matured they came to understand more clearly that the Lord was not only their king, but the king of all nations (Amos 1-2), creator of heaven and earth. Lord of all. If the Lord is such, then his chosen earthly king must in one way or another reflect the heavenly King. It would seem that the expectations which the People had of their earthly monarch grew with their more perfect knowledge of the heavenly King whom he represented.

The descendants of David who ruled over the People did not only have to attempt to live up to the standard set by their ancestor, but they also had to try to live up to the ever greater expectations which arose from their being the earthly representative of the Lord. The prophets, especially Isaiah (Isa 7, 9, 11), expressed their firm hope that the day would come when the truly ideal ruler would reign and be like God himself among his People and in the world. The prophets were not alone in expressing the great expectations which the People had of their kings. Some of the poets who wrote psalms also expressed these hopes. Psalm 72 (Chapter 10, p. 2) was probably written to be sung at the coronation of the kings of Judah, and possibly at ceremonies commemorating their reign. This psalm speaks of the absolute ideal of kingship, an ideal which no earthly king could ever possibly fulfill. But the psalm makes clear just how high and noble the hopes of the People were.

Even when the kings of the house of David ceased to reign as a result of the Exile, and even when no kings of the line of David reigned after the Exile, the prophecies of an Isaiah and the ideals expressed in the royal psalms continued to sustain a hope that some day the great king would come. Second-Isaiah's re-interpretation of the promises made to David (Isa 55:3-5; Chapter 15, pp. 34-35) does not appear to have become widely accepted. The very fact that the royal psalms were preserved when the line of David no longer ruled, indicates that there still hopes for a new David, a new " _Anointed One_ ".

Psalm 2, which we will now consider, is probably a very old psalm, going back long before the Exile. This psalm has the king speaking. He is making clear that the basis for his claim to kingship lies in the fact that the Lord himself has made him his Anointed. The psalm was very likely sung at coronation ceremonies.

Reading Psalm 2

Commentary

The song begins with a reference to the self-assured amazement of the king as he considers reports that subject nations are in revolt against his rule (vss 1-3). (It was quite usual for vassal kings to revolt when a king died and a new king was about to be crowned.) The rebellion of lesser kings is seen as a rebellion both against the Lord and against his Anointed (vs 2). The self-confidence of the king was in his faith :power of his Lord heaven. All these revolts of petty kings makes the laugh (vs 4). Sternly the Lord rebukes the rebels and declares that this man is in fact the king, the one he has installed on Zion.(vss 5-6).

In the king's name the psalmist then incorporates into his song the official decree which legitimated the king as the true ruler chosen by God himself. The decree reads: " _You are my son, this day have become your father.._ ." (vs 7). Accession to the throne of David was understood as divine adoption. The kings of the house of David were not considered to be divine; they were not gods, even little gods. But they were considered to hold a most special relationship to the Lord; they were his sons, and he was their father. This relationship is often expressed in terms of love. (See another royal psalm, Ps 18:1, 19, 50.)

The remaining verses of the psalm (vss 8-12) express the tendency of wanting the rule of the earthly king to be as universal as God's own rule.

_Psalm 89_ is a royal psalm which celebrates the great deeds of God. The covenant with David is central, but the greatness of God in choosing his People and in creation is also mentioned (vss 1-18). Then the psalmist sings of God's choice of David and his descendants, admitting that God had said they would be punished for their sins, but that God would always save them (vss 19-37). When this psalm was written the king of the line of David must have suffered either great losses in battle, or must have been overcome by his enemies, because the psalm ends with a prayer for the king and a lament over his situation of humiliation (vss 38-51).

_Psalm 110_ is probably a very ancient poem. The Hebrew text is extremely difficult to translate; most modern translations follow the LXX. In spite of its difficulties, two things are quite clear in the psalm: it is, like Ps 2, a psalm in which the Lord declares the king to be his own choice: " _Sit at my right hand_ " (vs 1), the position of singular honour beside the heavenly king. The second point is that the king of the Davidic line has a priestly role: " _You are a priest_ " (vs 4). According to the traditional translation, known already by the writers of the New Testament; the priesthood of the king is not of the line of Aaron, but of the line of Melchizedek (Gen 14:18f), the priest-king who met with Abraham (see Heb 5:6).

_Psalm 132_ recalls the transfer of the Ark into Jerusalem. It sings the praises of the Lord, making reference to the promises of 2 Sam 7 (Ps 132:11f). The last verses (vss 17-18) seem to be looking forward to the coming of the new king who would fulfill the promises of God to David. (Ps 144:1-11 is sometimes classified as a royal psalm as well.)

Laments

At least 50 of the 150 psalms are laments. These psalms are prayers beseeching God for help. God is usually addressed directly, even abruptly, without any attempt being made to list his qualities or to sway him with compliments. The psalmists "sway" God by giving him a very forceful description of the seriousness of their condition - they are alone, abandoned, sick, persecuted, ridiculed, being attacked, falsely accused or on the point of death. Often the psalmist is blunt in speaking to God: he will tell him to wake up, ask him just how long he intends this suffering to continue, or simply cry out, " _Why_?"

Very often these laments present a picture of the "enemy", usual in highly poetic language. The "enemy" is imagined as an attacker or army laying siege to a city; or as a hunter who sets traps, nets, snares, or digs pits; or as animal , a bull, a lion or other ferocious beast. These images stand for the people who are slandering, or persecuting or violently attacking the person praying in the psalm. In some cases the enemy is one who has made false accusations against the person praying and has brought him to court to be tried, and, if the verdict goes against him he may suffer the penalty of death or rejection by the community.

The laments often turn to God and remind him of the advantages he (God) stands to (lain by answering the psalmist's prayer (for the glory of your Name, for the sake of fidelity to your promises). Sometimes the laments include the rocking of a vow, usually a promise to praise the Lord in the Temple. Occasionally the laments conclude with an expression of thanksgiving, as though the petitions had already been heard.

In many ways the laments are the prayers of the poor and oppressed. The psalmists of the laments prefer to call themselves "poor-, -needy", "oppressed"; these have almost become titles of honour giving the most direct access to God. Behind this, of course, lies centuries of reflection on God as he revealed himself in the Exodus, in the laws of the Covenant and through the prophets. The Lord was the one who heard the cries of his People when they were poor and oppressed in Egypt. The Lord was the one who gave laws and instructions to protect the poor, the stranger, the orphan and widow. The Lord was the one who moved Amos and Isaiah and the other prophets to speak out in defence of the oppressed. The authors of the laments knew this welt. They also knew very well that the person who finds himself to be poor, oppressed, defenceless, also experiences a wrenching tension within: to be poor is to be preferred by the Lord, but to be poor is also to experience the absence of God. To know by faith that being crushed makes one close to God does not take away the agony of feeling abandoned by the same God.

_Psalm 22_ on which we are about to comment, is very unusual. It is a lament which concludes with an extraordinary kind of exaltation. We are considering it among laments because in its first sections (vss 1-21) it offers one of the best examples of the lament. Psalm 22 begins with the deep personal pain of feeling rejected by God, but ends with the praises of the whole world; its scope is astounding. Though it shows no clear dependence upon Second-Isaiah, its theme cannot help reminding us of the Suffering Servant (Isa 52:13 53:12).

Reading Psalm 22

Commentary

The psalmist begins with the pain of abandonment by God, and the feeling that his prayers are utterly useless (vss 1-2) He places no trust in the value of his prayers. With faith stripped of all emotional support he turns to what he has been told is true: the Lord dwell among his People, and past generations trusted in him and were heard. In his emptiness he has no choice, but to rely on the faith of his forefathers (vss 3-5).

He then describes his misery and what appears to be the most painful aspect of his suffering. Just at the moment of his feeling deserted by God, his enemies threaten to snap what shreds of faith he has left: " _He trusted in the Lord, let the Lord save him_ " (yes 6-8).

In the next verses he turns to his personal experience of God in the past (vss 9-10). He has known from his youth that the Lord cared for him; right from the womb of his mother. God had been close. He pleads for the same closeness again (vs 11). In yes 12-21 he describes in vivid imagery the suffering he is enduring. It would appear that he has been falsely accused and is sentenced to death. He has been stripped and, as was the custom, his clothing was being divided by lot.

The psalmist then makes a promise to the Lord to sing his praises in the assembly at prayer in the Temple (vss 22-24). The tone of the psalm changes completely. It is now full of certitude that the Lord will rescue him. The last verses (vss 25-31), written in different rhythm, appear to have been composed after he was delivered from the jaws of death. The psalmist is in the assembly at prayer, fulfilling the promise he made, sharing a cormmunion sacrifice with others of the poor (vs 26). The conclusion is most extraordinary: the psalmist claims that his rescue will be cause for praise by the whole world, literally all of mankind — the future generations, the present generations, and the generations of the past, the dead (vss 27-31). (This psalm is often quoted or alluded to in the New Testament. See, for example, Matt 27: 35, 39, 43, 46; John 19:24, 28.)

_Psalms 42 and 43_ form one song; the same theme and the same refrain runs through them both. This is an example of the fine lyrical poetry that can be found in the psalms. The psalmist sings his lament to God but from time to time he directs his words to himself. Using the simplest of poetry he conveys the depths of loneliness and depression: the feeling of being alienated from his God, from his people and even from his own self. He does refer to enemies, but he does so in such general terms that it is impossible to tell whether they are real people or whether it is simply the terrible temptation to despair which is within

"Why so downcast, my soul

why do you sigh within me?

Put your hope in God.

Ps 42:11

him and which he sees expressed in the unbelievers among whom he is obliged to live. The pain that is really at the basis of his lament is expressed in the first lines. He tells us that he is like a doe moaning as she searches for water in a dried-cut river bed.

Reading Psalms 42-43

Commentary

The psalmist seems to be living away from his home, unable to take part in the worship at the Temple. He finds himself utterly dried up, parched, his faith slipping away from him. The joys he once had in worshipping the Lord are gone; they are only a memory (vss 4- 6), but a memory which still has the power to move him a little. He speaks to his " _soul_ ", trying to give it encouragement. " _Put your hope in God ._ ." (vss 5, 11; 43:5), He urges himself to remember the joys that the Lord once gave him, and he tries to bolster his courage by making himself dream of being in the presence of God again (43:4). The psalm ends without a clear resolution of the suffering; there is only the fact that he is still able to say of God, " _my saviour_ \- (43:5), and this is enough.

The prayer has universal meaning. The service of God brings with it times of desolation in which one can only be sustained by memories of the past and hopes for the future; the present seems to offer nothing but emptiness and parching thirst.

The laments we have treated here are in the group called Laments of individuals. There are also Communal Laments, sometimes called National Laments. These latter have much the same characteristics as the Laments of Individuals, except that they are spoken in the first person plural (usually) and express the supplications of the community at large. The Laments of Individuals, while they are in the first person singular, were most likely used in a communal sense as well.

"By the streams of Babylon we sat and wept." Ps 137:1

Confidence psalms

This group of psalms is characterized by an extraordinary sense of trust in God. Trust and hope are really one for the psalmists here. Trust expresses the certitude that the Lord is the saviour, the helper, the one who cares very much about what happens to his friends. Often today when we say, "I hope" we really mean "I wish". There is a large degree of uncertainty in the expression. The same can also be true of our saying, "I trust that The psalmists who wrote these songs were not expressing wishes, or feeble reliance on God; they firmly believed that God would come to their aid. Also, they placed their hope in no one and nothing other than the Lord himself. We also find in these psalms the sentiments found in many other psalms: joy in the presence of God and the desire to be with him always. These psalms include at least these six: Pss 4, 11, 16, 23, 62, 131. Some authors also include Pss 27 and 121. Confidence, hope and trust are expressed in many other psalms, but the ones mentioned have these ideas as their main theme.

Reading Psalm 131

Comment

This simple and moving hymn expresses absolute trust. The psalmist says he has found out from experience that reaching out for great-sounding and lofty ideas about God and the world and any other supposedly important matters, is not what really counts. He is satisfied with the sense of security and warmth which he has from being with the Lord. The image he uses says it all: he feels like a child after nursing, sleeping calmly in his mother's arms.

_Psalm 16_ , apart from the first four very verses, is a clear and powerful statement of trust in the Lord. U expresses hopes very similar to those of Psalm 73. Like that psalm this one seems to be drawing very close to the notion of life with God forever after death (vss 9-11). Some commentators believe that it actually does profess faith in life after death, and even possibly resurrection (vss 9-10),

_Psalm 23_ (Chapter 8, p. 2) is another beautiful poem, based on two images of God: the shepherd and the host at table. The images could well be directed to God as the king who both guards and feeds his people. The image of the good shepherd is made more effective if we recall that shepherds in Palestine did not have the luxury of special pastures full of green grass for their sheep. Shepherds were obliged to pasture their sheep on the borders of the good land, that is, on the edges of the desert. Green pastures were very hard to find, and running streams, for most of the year, were hard come by. Only a most extraordinary shepherd could find pasture and water aplenty. Such is the Lord. The image of God as host at table could well be a reference to the communion sacrifices at the Temple, where the offerers were invited (by the Lord) to eat and drink of the sacrifice they had given to the Lord. But this is not the point of the psalm. The psalmist is describing the Lord as every bit as extraordinary a host as he is a shepherd, He treats his guests with every(brand) putting scented oil on their heads, filling their cups to overflowing.

There are also Communal Psalms of Confidence: Pss 115, 125, 129.

Thanksgiving psalms

In the Bible thanksgiving can hardly be separated from praise; the two are very closely related. About the only distinction that can be made between thanksgiving and praise is that thanksgiving usually refers to some specific thing which God has done on behalf of the one praying and even this does not always apply. It is possible, however, to distinguish some psalms as thanksgiving psalms, They generally begin by expressing the intention to give praise (eg. "it is good to give thanks ."). Usually there is a description of the situation of need from which one has been rescued. There is always the expression of thanks, often with reference to celebration with friends or the assembly. What probably underlies many of these psalms is the sacrifice of thanksgiving.

Psalm 30 is one of these. It has all the traits of the thanksgiving psalm.

Reading Psalm 30

Commentary

The language of this psalm indicates that it is very old. (The title, " _Song for the Dedication of the House"_ , refers to its use when Judas Maccabee rededicated the altar. See 1 Macc 4:52ff. Though it is written in the first person singular, it was used as a communal psalm.) Vss 1-3 state the intention to give thanks (praise) and the motive is given in general terms: " _you healed me . . . brought me up from Sheol (death)_ ". He then invites those who are with him to join him in singing his thanks and reminds them of the goodness of the Lord who leads people from tears to joy (vss 4-5). In the next lines he recalls that once he was well and prosperous, but the Lord brought him down from his lofty position (vss 6-7). Then he had to call out to the Lord, reminding him that the dead cannot praise him (vss 8-10), and therefore, the Lord stood to gain nothing from his death. Finally he sums up again what the Lord has done for him, and continues with his thanksgiving.

It is nowhere clear just what his ordeal was. It might have been illness or financial misfortune, but it is not certain. The psalm was used so often and by so many groups that any specific reference to the troubles of the original author have been worn away (if they ever were there). The universal value of the psalm is in its statement of faith that life with God goes from tears to joy, from mourning to dancing. In other words, life with the Lord is a life full of hope; even the most desperate situation has within it the possibility of rescue. In the light of faith in the resurrection of the just to life with God, this psalm is always true.

"He drew me out of the pit of destruction." Ps 40:2

_Psalm 32_ is also a psalm of thanksgiving. Its subject is quite different from the previous psalm. It is one of the traditional seven penitential psalms (Pss 6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 140). It is written in the spirit of the wisdom tradition with its typical introduction (" _Blessed is_ . ."), its penetrating description of a personal experience (yes 3-5) and its reference to teaching others (vs 8). Only Psalm 51 comes close to the emotional level of this psalm as it describes the pain and isolation which come from refusing to admit one's sinfulness, and the great joy of confessing one's sin and receiving assurance of forgiveness.

Other psalms of Individual Thanksgiving are Pss 9, 10, 34, 40, 41, 92, 107, 116, 138. Communal thanksgivings include Pss 65, 66, 67, 118, 124. Psalm 118 deserves special mention because of its beauty and because it is so often referred to in the New Testament. It was a psalm sung at the Passover and, by New Testament times, it had taken on strong overtones of hope for the coming of the Messiah: " _Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord_ " (vs 26).

Hymns

The hymns are those psalms in which the centre of attention is the Lord himself; little or no reference is made to the ones singing the psalms. In this sense they are more selfless than most others. They usually begin with an invitation to give praise, sometimes adding reasons why praise is fitting. These psalms are never flattering, that is, they never try to win God over by paying him compliments and listing his great qualities (as many pagan hymns do). The hymns take for granted that the Lord is good, that he is amazing in his splendour, great, powerful, admirable. The hymns are full of joyful fascination with the Lord; they express the feelings of those who are drawn to him and who rejoice in his presence.

The hymns are of three sorts: Songs of Zion, Songs of the Reign of the Lord and hymns Ain their purest form which we simply call "Hymns".

Songs of Zion

These celebrate the Lord in his presence in the Temple of Jerusalem. It is his presence which makes Jerusalem the strong and great city that it is (Ps 46), the city that the forces of chaos cannot overcome. It is his presence which makes Jerusalem beautiful, the city of peace (Ps 122). Underlying these psalms is the long history of the city. From the day that David conquered it and made it both his city and the city of God by bringing the Ark into it (Ps 132), Jerusalem became the sign and symbol of God's abiding presence with his People. Isaiah had a great love for Jerusalem, because he had a great love for the Lord. He hoped in Jerusalem — wanted with all his heart that it should be a place worthy of the presence of the Lord (Isa 1:21-26), the City of Integrity. He also showed an immovable faith in the indestructibility of God's city (Isa. 33:4-9). It was not long before Jerusalem began to represent not simply a physical place, but the whole People of God. So the Songs of Zion, while they praise God in his holy city, are also really praising God for being among his People. The Songs of Zion, therefore, praise both Jerusalem and the People because the Lord is with them.

Comment

This psalm is one which was sung by pilgrims as they were approaching Jerusalem for the great feasts. It is full of love and admiration for the Lord and his holy city, where the only proper sentiment to have is a prayer for peace.

_Psalm 84_ is another Song of Zion sung by pilgrims on their way to the presence of the Lord. The psalm sings of the almost passionate love of the People for their Lord. Going to Jerusalem is going "home" for them, like a swallow finding its nest.

Reflection on the meaning and purpose of Zion in God's plan went hand in hand with reflection on God's will for the People of God themselves. Already in the promises made to Abraham (Gen 12:1-4), the People were called to be a blessing to all nations. The Covenant, too, had invited them to be a nation acting as priests for all nations (Exod 19:3-8). The prophets built on this faith and looked forward to the day when Jerusalem, the city of peace, would become the centre for universal peace: the Lord would receive all nations in her, rule them all with justice and bring about the end of wars (lsa 2:2-5; Micah 41-3). Second-Isaiah went further and described the function of the People as that of the servant and prophet to the nations (Isa 42:1-4). Later prophets spoke of the day when the gentiles would come to the Lord and to join the People of God (Zech8:20-23). The Book of Jonah went so far as to say that the Lord loved the enemies of his People and wanted to save them. Psalm 87, with utter simplicity, summarizes all of this thinking.

Reading Psalm 87

Commentary

Zion, loved by the Lord, stands for the People of God. The Lord promises to bring his People to the point of perfection, to the goal which he intended for them from the beginning - that they should be a blessing for all nations. The nations of the world will come to know the Lord, and in so doing, will be enrolled as full citizens of Jerusalem (the People). it is noteworthy that the two nations mentioned first, Egypt (Rahab) and Babylon, stand for the ancient enemies of the People. They are the nations which oppressed the People before the Exodus and the "new Exodus". These shall come to know the Lord and will be born, not adopted, into his People. The People of God will become "mother" to all the nations. The old enemies, the Philistines, will also be there, and Tyre (that doubtfully helpful old partner, eg. 1 Kings 9:10-14) as well. The people of Ethiopia (Cush) will be born into the holy city. (Cush represents the black nations of Africa. Very early in their history the People of God expressed their acceptance of black people. In Numbers 12:1- 10 we are told that when Miriam criticized Moses for marrying a black woman. Miriam was punished by being turned white with leprosy. See also the bride in the Song of Songs who proclaims, " _I am black and beautiful_ ". Cant 1:5. Acts 8:26-40 commemorates the first black to enter the People of God of the New Covenant by being born through faith and baptism.) This psalm is already speaking of the "new Jerusalem", the People of God fulfilled (Gal 4:26; Rev 21:1-8).

Other Songs of Zion are Pss 46, 48, 76.

"Assemble, come, gather together, survivors of the nations."

Isa 45:20 (see Ps 87)

Hymns of the Reign of the Lord

These hymns all proclaim, " _The Lord is king_ ". They express the faith of the People in the kingship of God over all of creation and all the nations in it. They also hope for the day when God would intervene to bring all of human history to its fulfilment, that is, the day when the Lord's good will would be done everywhere. They are the psalms of the reign or kingdom of God. Loving, joyful obedience underlies the words of these hymns sung by people who knew themselves to be blessed because they knew that the Lord who is both mighty and good was their one and only sovereign king.

Reading Psalm 93

Comment

The Lord is king over all the powers of chaos (skies, ocean, sea); he is the creator-king who put order in chaos and who continues to(help)also the creator of his People through the Covenant in which he gave them decrees, vs 5).

In the next psalm the reign of God is clearly intended to be universal.. All nations and everything in all of creation are invited to acknowledge the rule of the Lord.

Reading Psalm 96

Comment

The coming of the fullness of the reign of the Lord will bring about a judgment on all nations (vss 10,13), that is, the justice of God will be made clear and all of history will finally make sense (Chapter 19, p.15 ). These psalms are very much in the spirit of apocalyptic literature, especially as expressed in Daniel 2 and 7-12. They express a faith and a hope in the coming of the kingdom of God, a reign which will bring to nothing all of the terrors of earthly kingdoms.

Pss 47, 97, 98, 99 are also psalms of the Reign of the Lord.

Hymns (general)

This last category of psalms covers at least 19 psalms (see Appendix). They are the best examples of what the Lord meant to his faithful People. They also let us know how the People saw them-selves. The most distinctive characteristics of the Lord are that he is great, good, kind, powerful, merciful, wonderful. Knowing him makes his People glad and frees them to be themselves, respectfully free, liberated in his presence. They are filled with freedom from Adam's senseless fear (Gen 3:8-10) and can sing, dance and make a holy noise " _before his face_ ". The freedom to be at ease with the Lord brings about the freedom to be at one with others in the community of the Lord. Freedom unites the People to form a great chorus of praise.

"The Lord, forever faithful." Ps 146:6

While the best of the traditions of people of reason, such as the Greek philosophers, would say that the greatest human activity is the use of the highest faculty (intellect) in the contemplation of the most noble object (God), the biblical tradition tells us that the highest human activity is to forget self and to be taken up with the praises of the Lord. The image of the ideal condition of humans remains: David singing and dancing without shame before the Lord.

Psalm 146 praises the Lord and refers to all his qualities revealed in the Law and through the prophets.

Reading Psalm 146

Comment

You can recognize Isaiah 49:9 and 61:1 in the " _liberty to captives_ " and references to the Law protecting strangers and widows (Exod 22:20ff).

These hymns often begin with Alleluia (allelu=let us praise; ia=short form for Yahweh, Lord). The Alleluia may well have been intended to be repeated after each line or verse, maintaining the tone of praise at a very high level throughout the psalm.

Psalm 148 indirectly gives us a description of the meaning and purpose of the human race. To be "lord" of creation (Gen 1:26-28) is to be the director of the universal orchestra and choir of praise which should go up to the Lord. The meaning and fulfilment of humanity is to be found in being the director of the celebration of the Lord by all of creation.

Reading Psalm148

Comment

The People of God as priests of the Lord for the whole of creation (Exod 19:3-8), lead everything, even the angels (vss 1-2), to celebrate the Lord. Made in the image of God, and only a little less than a god (Ps 8:5), humanity finds its purpose in being the voice of creation singing its love and admiration of the Lord. Without the voice of people directing it to the Lord, creation would have no sense or reason.

The Book of Psalms ends as it should with the whole of creation in a celebration.

Reading Psalm 150

" Let everything that breathes praise the Lord."

## Appendix 8

##   Bibliography

The bibliography includes only the major books used in the preparation of JOURNEY, Lessons 1-20. With a few exceptions, the bibliography is limited to books in English.

### One-volume commentaries

Brown, R. et al., ed. _Jerome Biblical Commentary_. Toronto, Prentice-Hall, 1968

Buttrick, G. ed. _The Interpreter's Bible_ , N.Y. Abington, 1952-57

Fuller, R. ed. A _New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture_ , London,

Nelson & Sons, 1969

Laymon, ed. Interpreter's One Volume Commentary on the Bible, N.Y.

Abington, 1971

### Dictionaries

Buttrick, G.A. ed _The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible_ , N.Y., Abingdon, 1962

Crim, K. et al., ed. _The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible: An Illustrated Version_ (Supplementary Volume). Nashville, Abington, 1976

Hartman L.F. ed _. Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible_ , Toronto, McGraw-Hill, 1963

McKenzie, John L. _A Dictionary of the Bible_ , Milwaukee, Bruce, 1965

### Old Testament: Introductory

Eissfeldt, 0 _The Old Testament An Introduction_ , Oxford, Blackwell, 1965

Fohrer, G. _Introduction to the Old Testament_ , N.Y. Abingdon, 1968

### Old Testament History

Anderson B.W. _Understanding the Old Testament_ , 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs Prentice-Hall,1975

Bright, J. _A History of Israel_ , Philadelphia, Westminster, 1972

Noth, M. _The History of Israel_ , London, Black, 1958

Vaux, Roland de. _Histoire Ancienne d'Israel_ , 2 vols. Paris, J. Gabalda, 1971

### Bible Atlases

Aharoni, Y. and Avi-Yonah, M. _The Macmillan Bible Atlas_ , rev. ed. N.Y., Macmillan Publishing; London, Collier Macmillan,1968, 1977

Grollenberg, L.H. et al. _Atlas of the Bible_ , Camden, Thomas Nelson & Sons,1956

### Culture of Old testament Times

Pedersen, J. Israel. Its Culture. N.Y. Oxford 1947

Pritchard, J. B. ed. _Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament_ , Princeton University Press, 1969

Vaux, Roland de. _Ancient Israel_ , London, Darton & Todd, 1961

### Old Testament Theology

Eichrodt, W. _Theology of the Old Testament_ ,2 vols. Philadelphia, Westminster, 1967

Jacob, E. _Theology of the Old Testament_ , New York, Harper and Row, 1958

Kohler, E. _Old Testament Theology_ , Philadelphia, Westminster, 1957

Leon-Dufour, X _Dictionary of Biblical Theology_ , New York, Désclée, 1967

Von Rad G. _Old Testament Theology,_ 2 vols. N.Y. Harper & Row, 1965

Vriezen, T.C. Outline of Old Testament Theology, New ed. Newton Centre, Me, Branford1974

### The Law (Lessons 1-6)

ClementsR.. E. _God's Chosen People_ , London,SCM Press,1960

McCarthy, D. J. _Treaty and Covenant_ , Rome, Pont. Bib. Institute, 1963

Mendenhall, G. _Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East_ , Pittsburgh, Bib. Colloquium, 1955

Nielsen, E. _The Ten Commandments in New Perspective_ , Naperville, Allenson, 1968

Noth, M. _Exodus: A Commentary_ , London, SCM Press, 1962

_______, _Numbers: A Commentary_ , London, SCM Press, 1968

Plastaras, J _. Creation and Covenant,_ Milwaukee, Bruce1968

_________ _The God of the Exodus_ , Milwaukee, Bruce, 1966

Von Rad, G. _Deuteronomy_ , London, SCM Press, 1966

_________ _Genesis_ : A Commentary, rev. ed. London,SCM Press 1973

_________ _Moses_ , London, SCM Press,1960

_________ _Studies in Deuteronomy,_ London, SCM Press, 1966

Westermann, C. _Creation_ , Fortress, 1974

### Early Prophets (Lessons 7--10)

Lesson 7

Boling, R. G. Judges(A.B.6A) Garden City, Doubleday, 1975

Mayes, A.Israel in the period of the Judges, Naperville, Allenson, 1974

Mckenzie, John L. The World of the Judges, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, 1966

Lessons 8-10

Ackroyd, P.R _The First Book ofSamuel_ , Cambridge, U. Press, 1971

Brueggemann, W. _In Man We Trust_ , Richmond, John Knox, 1972

Gray, J _. I & II Kings,_ London, SCM Press, 1964, rev. 1970

Hertzberg, H.W. _I & II Samuel: A Commentary_, London, SCM Press 1964

McKane, W. _I & II Samuel_, London, SCM Press, 1963

Whybray, R.N. _The Succession Narrative_ , London, SCM Press, 1968

Wifall, W. _The Court History of Israel_ , St. Louis, 1975

Later Prophets (Lessons 11-16)

Prophets: General

Heaton, E.W. _The Old Testament Prophets_ , Baltimore, Penguin, 1961

Heschel, A. _The Prophets_ , N.Y., Harper, 1969-71

Lindblom, J. _Prophecy in Ancient Israel_ , Oxford, Blackwell, 1965

Scott, R.B.Y. _The Relevance of the Prophets,_ N.Y., Macmillan, 1968

Vawter, B. _The Conscience of Israel_ , N.Y., Sheed & Ward, 1961

Von Rad G. _Old Testament Theology_ , vol. 2, N.Y. Harper & Row, 1965

Lesson 11

Cripps, R.S. _A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Amos_ , 2nd. ed. Naperville, Allenson, 1955

Driver, S.R. _The Books of Joel and Amos_ , Cambridge U. Press, 1934

HammerschaimbE. _The Book of Amos: A Commentary_ , N.Y. Schocken, 1970

Harper, W.R. _Amos and Hosea,_ Edinburgh, Clark, 1910

Kapelrud, A.S. _Central Ideas in Amos_ , Oslo, Scand. U.Books1956

Marsh, J. Amos and Micah, London, S.C.M. Press, 1959

Mays. J.L. _Amos: A Commentary_ , Philadelphia, Westminster, 1969

_______ _Hosea.: A Commentary,_ Philadelphia, fortress, 1969

McKeating, H. The Books of Amos, Hosea and Micah, N.Y. Cambridge U. Press, 1971

Ward, J M. _Amos and Isaiah Prophets of the Word of God_ , Nashville, Abingdon, 1969

________ _Hosea: A Theological Commentary_ ,N.Y., Schocken, 1966

Lesson 12

Gray, G. B. _A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah_ , EdinburghClark1912 (1962)

Kissane, E.J. _The Book of Isaiah_ , Dublin, Browne & Nolan, 1962

Mauchline, J. _Isaiah 1-39_ , London, SCM Press, 1962

Lesson 13

Bright, J. _Jeremiah_ (A.B. 21).Garden City, Doubleday, 1965

Overholt, T.W. _The Threat of Falsehood: A Study in the Theology of the Book of Jeremiah,_ London, SCM Press, 1970

Skinner, J. _Prophecy and Religion: Studies in the Life of Jeremiah_ , Cambridge U. Press, 1922

Welsh, A.C. _Jeremiah, His Time and His Work_ , N.Y. Oxford U. Press, 1928

Lesson 14

Carley, K.W. _Ezekiel among the Prophets_ , London S.C.M. Press, 1975

EichrodtW . _Ezekiel A Commentary_ , Philadelphia, Westminster, 1970

Stalker, D.M.G _. Ezekiel: Introduction and Commentary,_ London, SCM Press, 1968

Lesson 15

Bonnard, P.E _. Le Seconde Isaïe: Son Disciple et Leurs Editeurs Isaïe 40-66_ , Paris, J. Gabalda, 1972

Knight, G.A.F. _Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary_ _on Isaiah_ 40-66, Naperville, Allenson, 1965

North, C.R. Isaiah 40-55: Introduction and Commentary, Naperville, Allenson, 1964

Stuhlmueller, C. _Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah_ , Rome, Pont. Bib. Inst.1970

Westermann, C. _Isaiah 40-66_ ,Philadelphia, Westminster, 1969

### The Writings (Lessons 16-20) Lesson 16

Ackroyd, P. _Exile and Restoration_ , Philadelphia, Westminster, 1968

Campbell, E.F.J. Jr. _Ruth_ (A.B. 7), Garden City, Dobleday, 1975

Meyers, J.M. _Ezra- Nehemiah_ (A B.14), Garden City, Doubleday, 1975

### Wisdom General

Murphy, R _Seven Books of Wisdom_ , Milwaukee, Bruce, 1960

Scott, R.B.Y. _The Way of Wisdom in the Old Testament_ , N.Y., Macmillan, 1971

Von Rad, G. _Wisdom in Israel_ , London, SCM Press, 1972

Whybray, R.N. _The Intellectual Tradition in the Old Testament_ , N.Y., de Gruyter, 1974

Lessons 17-18

Dhorme, E. _A Commentary on the Book of Job_ , London, Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1967

Gordis, R Koheleth, _The Man and His World_ , 3rd. ed N Y. Schocken,1968'

Jones, E. _Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, Words of the Wise_ , London, SCM Press, 1961

KissaneE. J. _The book of Job_ , Dublin, Brown & Nolan, 1939

McKane, W. _Proverbs,A New Approach_ , London, SCM Press 1970

Pope, M. H _Job_ (A..B.15), Garden City, Doubleday, 1965

_________ _Song of Songs_ ,(A.B. 70) Garden City, Doubleday,1977

Rowley, H.H. ed. _Job_ , London, Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1970

Scott, R.B.Y. Proverbs-Ecclesiastes (A.B. 18), Garden City, Doubleday,1965

Snaith, J.G. _Ecclesiasticus_ , Cambridge U. Press, 1974

Whybray, R. N. _The Book of Proverbs_ , N.Y. Cambridge U. Press, 1972

Lesson 19

BartlettJ. R. _The First and Second Books of the Maccabees,_ Cambridge, U. Press1973

Geyer, J _The Wisdom of Solomon_ , London, SCM Press, 1963

Goldstein, J. A _1 Maccabees_ (A.B. 41), Garden CityDoubleday, 1976

Hammer, R. _The Book of Daniel_ , Cambridge, U. Press, 1976

Larcher, C. _Études sur Le Livre de La Sagesse_ ,Paris, J. Gabalda, 1969

Montgomery, J.A. _The Book of Daniel_ ,Edinburgh, T & T Clark,1927

Reider, J. _The Book of Wisdom_ ,N. Y. Harper & Brothers, 1957

Rowley, H.H. _The Relevance of Apocalyptic_ , rev. ed.N.Y., Association, 1963

Russell, D.S. _The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic_ , Philadelphia, Westminster, 1964

_________ _Between the Testaments,_ Philadelphia, Fortress, 1960

Lesson 20

Briggs, C.A. _International Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms,_ Naperville, Allenson, 1951-2, rep. 1907

Castellino, D. G. _Libra Del Salmi_ , Rome, Marietti, 1955

Dahood, M. Psalms, (A.B. 16, 17, 17A), Garden City, Doubleday, 1966

Drijvers, P. _The Psalms, Their structure and Meaning_ ,N. Y. Herder and Herder, 1965

Harvey, J. _Les Psaumes: Introduction, éxégese., théologie biblique_ , Montreal, 1974 (unpublished manuscript)

Jacquet, L. _Les Psaumes et le coeur de l'Homme_ , Paris, Duculot, 1975

Kissane, E.J. _The Book of Psalms_ , Dublin, Browne & Nolan, 1964

Kraus, H. _Worship in Israel_ , Oxford, Blackwell1966

Ringgren, H. _The Faith of The Psalmists_ , London, SCM Press, 1963

Sabourin, L. _The Psalms, Their Origin And Meaning_ , N.Y. Alba House, rev. 1974

Weiser, A. _The Psalms, their Origin & Meaning_, Philadelphia, Westminster, 1962

Westerman, C. the Praise of God in the Psalms, Richmond, John Knox Press, 1965

##

## "~~~~~~~~~~"

##

## 

## About the Author

Archbishop Gervais was born in Elie Manitoba on September 21 1931. He is the ninth of fourteen children. His family came from Manitoba to the Sparta area near St. Thomas Ontario when he was just a teenager. He went to Sparta Continuation School and took his final year at Saint Joseph`s High School in St. Thomas. After high school he went to study for the priesthood at St. Peter's Seminary in London , Ontario. He was ordained in 1958.

He was sent to study in Rome. This was followed by studies at the Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem. He returned to London to teach scripture to the seminarians at St. Peter's Seminary.

In 1974 he was asked by Bishop Emmett Carter to take over as director of the Divine Word International Centre of Religious Education. This Centre had been founded by Bishop Carter to provide a resource for adult education in the spirit of Vatican II.

This Centre involved sessions of one or two weeks with many of the best scholars of the time. Students came not only from Canada and the United States but from all over the globe, Australia, Africa, Asia and Europe.

By the time Father Gervais became the director Divine Word Centre was already a course dominated by the study of scripture to which he added social justice. This aspect of the course of studies was presented by people from every part of the "third world"; among which were Fr. Gustavo Gutierrez and Cardinal Dery of Ghana.

In 1976 the Conference of Ontario Bishops along with the Canadian conference of Religious Women approached Father Gervais to provide a written course of studies in Sacred Scripture for the Church at large, but especially for priests and religious women. This is when Fr. Gervais began to write _Journey,_ a set of forty chapters on the Bible. He was armed with a treasure of information from all the teachers and witnesses to the faith that had lectured at Devine Word.

He was assisted by a large number of enthusiastic collaborators: all the people who had made presentations at Divine Word and provided materials and a team of great assistants, also at Divine Word Centre.

The work was finished just as Father Gervais was ordained an auxiliary bishop of London (1980). He subsequently was made Bishop of Sault Saint Marie Diocese, and after four years, Archbishop of Ottawa (1989).

He retired in 2007, and at the time of this writing, he is enjoying retirement.

" to see other works by Marcel Gervais

go to "www.journeywithbible.com

_JOURNEY_ a series of 40 chapters on both the Old and New Testament

**"The Word Made Flesh** "- A commentary on the Gospel of John

" **The Teaching of the Church on the Bible"** A commentary on "Dei Verbum"

**"Pocket Journey (2)"** The complete commentary on the New Testament.

"~~~~~~~~~~"

