Fallen Into Knowledge

Rhetorical function of the book of Daniel, possibly:

1. Hero Tale: How to not worship idols or be tainted by the foreign oppressors.
2. New Exodus: Daniel is the new Joseph, who - by his wisdom - obtains high position in the foreign ruler’s court. The implication is, perhaps, that soon after the people will prosper.
3. Superiority of Israel over the Nations: Even in captivity, the Israelites wield power - because of God’s favor - over the captors.
4. The narrative is a frame around with the prophesies can be hung, the narrative serves to build the prophet’s reputation for the reader.

Question: For the first half of the book at least, are we to understand Daniel as a proxy for Israel, or for the “ideal Israelite?” (cf. Jonah)

I’ll be the first to admit that I am not very familiar with the book of Ezekiel. So, my observations may be wacky.
I think it is interesting that the book of Ezekiel ends with I kind of “Pentateuch in miniature:” We get a description of the temple, a lay of the land (the tribal inheritance), and some laws. This miniature seems to happen, narratively, after the return from exile. It is this last observation that I find interesting, but I am not sure what to make of it. Why is the “post-exile Israel” described in much the same way it was in the Pentateuch? My expectations are that “God will write the law on their hearts” and so forth. Yet, this expectation doesn’t preclude a social order like unto the one laid out in the Pentateuch.
I’m not satisfied. I think I will have to return to Ezekiel when my forty days of lent are over. I am really baffled by this book.

Some thoughts while reading Lamentations:

1. The “speaker” in Lamentations is the city of Jerusalem. At first I thought that Jerusalem was just used figuratively to refer to the inhabitants of the city, but it becomes clear that it is the city’s lament we are reading. I haven’t determined whether this voice, that is - Jerusalem’s, is consistent throughout, or whether another, the prophet’s?, interjects. If it is the former, then the reading of 3:55ff could be really interesting.

2. Chapter 5:4-5, which reads, “We must pay for the water we drink; the wood we get must be bought. With a yoke on our neck we are hard driven…” calls to mind the Exodus. Specifically, the Israelite’s passage though Edom is evoked (Numbers 20:18f):

The Israelites said to him, ‘we will stay on the highway; and if we drink your water, we and our livestock, then we will pay for it. It is only a small matter; just let us pass through on foot.’ But he said, ‘You shall not pass through.’ And Edom came out against them with a large force, heavily armed.

(There is another, similar, scene in the Pentateuch, but I don’t remember where.)

The Book of Jeremiah certainly isn’t a “happy” book: the prophet Jeremiah, who is also attributed with writing Lamentations, certainly had a rough go of it. The mostly bleak outlook for Israel in Jeremiah makes it hard to read. Its like watching someone bent on self-destruction, and knowing that nothing you could do would prevent them from succeeding.
And yet. Even here, at the end of Jeremiah, we see that the unjust punishers of Israel (namely, Babylon), will also be punished. (Habakkuk covers similar territory). Also, as we finish the book we are left with words of hope:

Israel and Judah have not been forsaken by their God, the Lord of Hosts, though their land is full of guilt before the Holy One of Israel

Reminds me of Paul’s words in 2nd Timothy, “If we are faithless, he remains faithful, –for he cannot deny himself”

{I’m tired from driving all day, so this might be completely incoherent. Sorry about that, I’m going to bed now.}

I am struck by how Fidelity to God is the the central issue for much of the Old Testament. Israel’s faithlessness is constantly the subject of the prophets’ speech. It would be an interesting project to build a “theology” of sorts around the concept of Fidelity. For example, within such a project, “repentance” would be “disavowing faithlessness, and returning to God.” Or perhaps, make the metaphor of marriage the central metaphor for a theology. I think that the subsequent re-orientation of the rest of the theological framework (salvation, eschatology, etc) would yield some interesting insights.

Emmigrant Lake, from todays drive to Ashland.  Ashland is one of my favorite towns.

Okay, so here’s the story so far:

Yesterday evening, I sat basking in the prospects of a free weekend.  I wanted to get away, but I really didn’t want to spend the whole weekend cold.  Since I couldn’t think of anywhere I could go backpacking that would be even remotely warm, I ruled that out.

Then I had an idea:  Perhaps I could make use of my parents’ Worldmark connections.  I IM’ed my mom, to see if I could book a room, anywhere in the NW, for the next night, Friday.  I figured that wherever I could get a room, that’s where I’d go. I could be anywhere between Seattle and Kalamath Falls the next night; what sort of adventure I had would be shaped by where I got a room.

I am in Kalamath Falls.  Today I drove to Bend, had a burger and beer at the Bend brewing company, explored downtown Bend and Drake park while lunch settled, and then headed for the hills above LaPine. Tomorrow I will either spend the day in Ashland, or I will drive back up the coast on 101.  Depending on how I feel in the morning.

Some advenures work best when treated like “choose your own adventure” novels.

It is not without reason that commentaries on Isaiah generally divide it in half in between chapters 39 and 40: Isaiah 40-66 really feels like turning a corner. What struck me on this reading was the descriptions of the “Day of the Lord.” Well, actually everything that has to do with God bringing his people back from exile (from punishment) into the land. For me, reading the gospels through these passages completely overhauled my understanding of them.
When I began to see (the way was illumined by N.T. Wright’s work) that Jesus was pronouncing this “Day of the Lord’s Favor,” and saw how reading his word’s and actions in light of this proclamation made sense of Jesus’ ministry, my head spun. Now, I would go so far as to say that the more intimate one is with this chunk of Isaiah, the clearer Jesus’ message will be.

{I have never heard a sermon series on Isaiah, but I think one could be awesome for the life of a church. So, today’s comments take the form of an imaginary sermon.}

Introduction to a sermon series on Isaiah: an Expanded Outline
Or, How I would start a series on the book of Isaiah, if given the chance.

Tell me a little about the nature of prophesies…

If you grew up, as I did, in a small conservative “bible church,” then you probably have a deep seated expectation that prophesies have to do with the future. Some prophesies in the bible had already happened, like Daniel’s for-telling of the Greek empire, and some - more interesting - prophesies had not happened, like the John seeing helicopters and calling them locust in Revelation. The scariest prophesies had to do with Russia, naturally. These were my expectations, at least.
Imagine, then, my shock, upon first reading the Bible all the way through. I learned that not much of the content of the books in the “prophesy” section of the Bible (Isaiah-Malichi: I hadn’t heard of the Tanach yet) could even remotely be considered prophesy, as I understood it. At the time, I didn’t really respond to this discovery, preferring to hurry along to the “real scripture;” namely, the New Testament.
(more…)

I haven’t much to say about the Song of Solomon: it is one of the few books of the Bible where even scholars admit that they don’t really know what to do. Just this: There is very little (if any) conflict in this book. This fact makes me wonder whether the claim that Songs envisions a time when Israel is at peace in the Land is sustainable. I should be clear: by peace in the land, I mean that Israel is experiencing the Land as God promised.