Sagas

Sagas. Sounds dramatic, right? Like the girl you know who always has some saga with a guy going on in her life? Or the guy in the next cubicle who turns every work "hiccup" into a full-feature length saga. Well, here's the deal, this week, I'm taking my turn at writing a saga. As my first attempt at writing a saga, I'd urge you to keep your laughing and pointing to a minimum thankyouverymuch.

I've chosen to write my fictional saga about Juliette Gordon Low, the founder of Girl Scouts. As a Gold Award recipient, I owe a lot to Low (yep, I could have run a campaign for her if ever she had one #poetanddidntknowit) and the program she began for girls across our country.

In many sagas, there is/does:

• a single plot, single rising tension/conflict, resolution, and denouement (see former 9th grade English students... the word "denouement" WILL come up in the real world!)
• a small cast, with only one or two people in dialogue at a time
• no thick background
• describe "who we are"

Here we go...Scene 1, take 1 *cool movie scene-teller thingy snap sound*

Scene: Juliette Gordon Low, who is 51 years old, has been searching her whole life to find something meaningful to do. It is 1911 and she is meeting Sir Robert Baden-Powell, the founder of Boy Scouts, for the first time. For the purposes of this story, we'll assume Sir Robert is not very open to Juliet's ideas.  

"Well, hello, Robert, it is so nice to finally meet you. I am quite excited for this meeting," said Juliette, "as I think that what you're doing for the boys in the Boy Scouts could also be beneficial for the girls in our country. The girls deserve a chance to learn new skills, work on social endeavors, and further their opportunities." Sir Robert looks at her, interested, but amused. "Juliette, it is nice to meet you, I agree. But I don't think that the girls can do what the boys are doing. The boys are learning skills like camping, hiking, and sports. That's no place for a girl to be." 

Juliette thought long and hard about how she was going to win over Sir Robert so that he would help her to organize her newest idea. "Why reinvent the wheel?" she thought to herself.  "If Robert will help me, then I could be helping girls to learn and grow in no time." 

Just then, Juliette thought of an idea. "If I could just get a group of girls here to show Robert what a great idea this girls' group would be, maybe he'd be more willing to help me," she thought. So Juliette invited a group of 6 elementary-aged girls to a meeting at the school the next day. During the meeting, Juliette taught the girls how to make different types of knots. She explained that the knots could be used for lots of things -- from camping excursions to sewing projects to helping tie up horses. Sir Robert was skeptical of this meeting at first, but he began to lighten up as he saw how much fun the girls were having and how much they were learning. "For goodness' sake," he thought, "these are skills I taught the boys in Boy Scouts.  Now the girls are learning the same thing... and they're even good at what they're learning!" 

Next, Juliette took the girls outside and taught them the basics of starting a fire in a campfire ring. After several attempts, the girls along with their leader started a fire. "Well, Juliette, you've done it this time. The things you're teaching these girls are similar to what we teach the boys at Boy Scouts. I have to hand it to you, your persistence has paid off. You wanted this program to begin and grow, and even in the face of doubt you've made believers of your program... including me!" 

In the end, Sir Robert did help Juliette begin and organize her program, which is now the Girls Scouts. Because of her persistence, the Girl Scouts program has also shown persistence in its growth and leadership. We are a resilient group because of the resiliency Juliette Gordon Low showed in her establishment of the group. 

And...end scene. Herein ends (likely) the corniest saga you've ever read.

But.... I hope you get the point.  Throughout the Bible, we see sagas that tell ancestral stories, like that of Abraham in Genesis 12-25 or of Jacob's cycle from Genesis 25:19 - 35:29. In these stories, we see the cycles of families and people develop and evolve, while showing smaller, independent stories as well. In the story that was wonderfully crafted by yours truly, we see Juliette overcoming odds of adversity before her to do what she felt called and moved to do. The conflict came from an outside source (Sir Robert) and through her hard work, the conflict was resolved. In the story from Genesis 25:19 - 35:29, we watch the cycle of Jacob being born, growing up, "taking" the birthrights from his brother, receiving his father's blessing, being sent away, wrestling with Lord, causing him to become named "Israel," and receiving forgiveness from his brother. That's a saga if I ever heard one! 

What kind of ancestral cycles do you recognize and what do they say about the groups you belong to? 

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Can you spot the differences?

When I was a kid, I used to love when my new "Highlights" magazines would come and there'd be a page with two nearly identical pictures on it. The bottom picture would contain several (albeit hard to find for a four-year-old) changes from the top picture. Perhaps a person's shirt pattern differed slightly in the second, or the item sitting on the picture's counter would be missing. Sometimes it was easier to find the similarities than it was to see the differences; other times by looking for similarities, a difference would jump out and reveal itself as well.

Within the Hebrew Bible (that's the Old Testament (which is the OT in my world...er...writing) of course!), there are stories mentioned in the stories found in Genesis 1-11 that are not mentioned anywhere else. Maybe these stories were not very well-known or that they were created later than other biblical materials (for more information on sourcing, listen to this week's lecture on "Documentary Hypothesis" Part A and Part B). In other parts of the Pentateuch - the first five books of the Bible - we see that there are references to the creation story that differ from the Pentateuch's first book, Genesis.

Although it's not identical to the challenge of "Highlights" magazine's "Spot the Difference" page, let's look at some other passages from the OT and see how they say things went down during creation. Then, we'll look at the Genesis creation story and see how they differ. (Note: All biblical references are from the Common English Bible (CEB) unless otherwise noted.)

Isaiah 51:9 says wake up and get your armor on! Not literal armor (although with all the taking of different cities by force throughout biblical times, perhaps armor is a good choice!)

Job 9:4-14 says God shakes the earth from its place (9:6) and commands the sun (9:7).

Job 26:7-14 says "God stretched the North over chaos, hung earth over nothing" (26:7). In this passage, we also read that God hid the face of the moon (26:9) and stilled the Sea (26:12).

In Job 38:1-11, God reprimands Job and reminds him that he made the earth's foundations (38:4), set its measurements (38:5), and made the sea (38:8).

In Psalm 8:1-9, we read praises about God's making his glory higher than heaven (8:1), laying a strong foundation (8:2), and placing the moon and the stars (8:3). This is the first of the listed passages that mentions God's creating the sheep, cattle, wild animals, fish, birds, and everything that swims (8:7-8).  The language used here is very similar to that of the Genesis creation story.

Psalm 74:12-17 says God shattered the heads of the sea monsters (74:13), crushed Leviathan's heads 74:14), split streams and made rivers dry up (74:15). This passage says that God created the moon and the sun (74:16), established all the boundaries of the earth (74:17), and made the seasons (74:17).

Psalm 89:8-10 reminds us that God rules over the sea (89:9) and scatters enemies with a strong arm (89:10).

Psalm 104:1-9 seems different than the other passages in the ways it talks about God's creation. In it, God is praised for his majestic ways (which He is, amIright?!), but the descriptions of what God has done are light and uplifting. Some other are very powerful, rightfully so, but in a way that is more firm. In this passage, we read that God has opened the skies (104:2), builds His house on the waters (104:3), and established the earth's foundations (104:5)... foundations ---- are you sensing a theme yet?

In Psalm 136:1-9, we read about the One who makes: great wonders (136:4), the sky (136:5), shaped the earth (136:6), made the great lights (136:7), set the sun to rule over days (136:8) and the moon and stars to rule the night (136:9).

Finally, Proverbs 8:22-31 talks about God making the earth and fields (8:26), marking the horizon on the sea (8:27), and making the earth's foundations (8:29).

When we look back at the creation stories of Genesis. there are many pieces from these passages that are similar. We have seen throughout many of the above-mentioned passages that "God created the foundations of the earth" (Genesis 1:1). God created over a period of seven days to include water, sky, animals, and earth. In many of the passages, we see these parts especially repeated throughout.

I have a very difficult time imagining a story that could be created or written including the pieces of the stories that are included outside of the Genesis creation stories. I wonder if I'm too "stuck" in the creation story of God's creating everything out of nothing in seven days that I know and have read about so many times to be able to think of an alternative story. I think in an alternative story to those included in Genesis 1-2, the creation of earth could be more forceful (Um, hello! Everything out of nothing in like an "'I Dream of Jeannie' head bob/arm cross/doooooiiiiiinnnnnn sound" split-second... I get it... it's forceful that way too!), but by more forceful, I think about the passage from Psalm 74 specifically -- head crushing, shattering, splitting force.  This seems aggressive and negatively powerful rather than the creation story we know - one of what I'd call a forceful beauty. Yes, the earth was powerfully and forcefully created out of nothing. Yes, all living things - birds, swimmies, walkers (that's us... and the dogs, I suppose!), and even the creepy-crawlies - were created by God. All of these things seem to have been done forcefully, yet lovingly in the Genesis renditions.

I do want to end on a more serious note: I want to express my deep sorrow at the devastation and loss of life, homes, possessions that is being sifted through as a result of the earthquake in Nepal. We can analyze the biblical history of the creation, but it hurts to see when creation is mangled before our eyes. I pray that God is evident in the lives of those affected and that the peace and grace of God's love is felt by every one who is at a loss.

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

I Hear Voices...

This week's readings led us to 2 Samuel, a book that is part of the Deuteronomistic History (DtrH). In it, we read the story of Amnon, a son of David, who rapes his half-sister, Tamar. Absalom, Tamar's brother, seeks revenge and ends up killing their brother, Amnon.

In the first portion (2 Samuel 13:1-22) of this scripture passage, I felt like Tamar's voice is the one missing. Her perspective is unheard, yet is one that I feel is important. The second half of the passage (2 Samuel 13:22-33) is missing the voice of Absalom. Again, this is important. I have taken the liberty to re-write these halves from each of the above mentioned perspectives. Consider this a mid-quel (Read: my made up word for a re-write in the middle; not a prequel, nor a sequel. Thus a mid-quel. If you don't like my made-up words, move on, Folks - even Shakespeare did it!)

Tamar's Voice
My father, King David, asked me to go and serve my half-brother, Amnon, as he is very sick and has asked for me to come. I guess my serving him isn't completely out of the ordinary, after all, I am a Biblical woman.  Amnon asked for some very specific, heart-shaped cakes (yes, heart-shaped cakes!) to be made for him to eat and feel better.  So I "went to [my] brother Amnon's house where he was lying down" (2 Samuel 13:8 CEB) and I "took dough, kneaded it, made heart-shaped cakes in front of him, and then cooked them" (2 Samuel 13:8 CEB). When I went to feed my brother the cakes, he wouldn't eat them. Seriously?! I went through all that work and he won't eat them? He must really be sick... he had better be really sick!

I thought it was a bit strange that after Amnon refused to eat these specially-ordered cakes, he sent everyone out of his room. Even though I thought his dismissal strange, I thought maybe Amnon just wanted to rest. But then he told me to stay. Perhaps he wanted to tell me, his half-sister Tamar, something important? Perhaps he wanted the comfort of family surrounding him? Then Amnon told me to kneel in front of him and serve him the cakes from his own hand. What was he thinking? I did what he asked, because I wanted to show him loyalty and familial care, but then all of a sudden, he grabbed me and said, "Come have sex with me, my sister" (2 Samuel 13:11 CEB). What?! My own brother, my own flesh and blood? He can't mean what he says!

I cried out to Amnon "Please don't do this to me! Raping me will bring such shame to us both, to our family! I will have nowhere to hide from my shame and you will be made a fool! Ask the king to let me marry you instead!" (2 Samuel 13:12-13 CEB).

Then, he did the unthinkable. It was horrible, the worst thing I could imagine. But then, then his seeming love for me turned to anger. HE was mad at ME! How could this be? I did nothing to him but serve him and care for him like he asked.  And those STUPID heart-shaped cakes. How could I have been so DUMB to make him cakes. Heart-shaped cakes. Hearts. Those cakes should have been a foretaste for me of the things to come. The horror of this, my own brother. One whom I had loved and cared for. How could I have stopped this? What had I done wrong?

I was kicked out of his room and I fled. I tore my virgin-sleeves off and put ashes on my head. I am mourning the loss of what I have had torn away from me. My brother Absalom told me not to let it bother me and not to tell anyone (2 Samuel 13:20 CEB). My father, the king, was angry but refuses to punish Amnon (2 Samuel 13:21 CEB). After all... I am a woman.

*******************************************************************************
Absalom's Revenge
My poor sister, Tamar. How could our brother, Amnon, do this to her? To our family? Doesn't he know that a.) you don't do this to anyone, let alone family and b.) this will bring disgrace to all of our people. I will never, NEVER speak to him again (2 Samuel 13:22 CEB). Not a good word nor a bad word should pass my lips in the way of Amnon again. How dare he do this?!

I know I told Tamar to not let this bother her, but I am a hypocrite. It makes me so angry that I must do something. But what? How can I avenge a rape that has made me so angry that I do not even speak to my own brother any longer?

I have a plan: I will hold a fine banquet, will wait for Amnon to get drunk, and then will instruct my servants to kill him. Only once Amnon is dead will justice be served for our dear sister Tamar's rape (2 Samuel 13:27-28 CEB).

*******************************************************************************

If you've never taken the time to read this passage, I encourage you to do so. What perspective do you draw to? Is there another perspective to be had? Perhaps the other servants who were dismissed, but likely put two and two together?

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Don't Judge me...

This week, I have accepted the challenge of working with Judges. Nope, I'm not a paralegal; I'm not a lawyer either (although my husband would say my arguing skills may say otherwise!). I'm not talking about a judge in a court of law, but rather the book of Judges. Judges is part of the Deuteronomistic History (which I'll refer to as DtrH from here on out....because really, who can spell Deuteronomistic more than twice?!), which is believed by some scholars to be written by the hand of one person/one group of people.  The DtrH includes Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, and 2 Kings. In the book of Judges, we see many people -- often groups of people (a.k.a - "tribes") -- who defend the Israelites from "powerful, often superior, forces" (Bandstra 222). Rarely do these groups work together in the book of Judges; this is in contrast to the book of Joshua, where we see much success on the part of the tribes as they work together! Within the selected passage of Judges 19:1 - 21:25, we see a narrative unfold that shows the Israelites falling/failing, being thus punished, crying out to God for help, and then a judge being sent by God to deliver the people. The Deuteronomists' hand is seen strongly in the book of Judges.

The central theme of this story, I believe is a call by the editors of Judges (as it is part of the DtrH) for readers to realize that during this pre-monarchical period, the people Israel did whatever they wanted because they didn't have a king.  In the Judges period, there was no true settled area for the people. They didn't work together (often), and this caused them troubles. Had they worked together, we would probably see more success from them. As much as this narrative seems to be a call for us to work together, it would have been probably even more so for the people of ancient Israel.

One of the most offensive pieces of the plot of this passage is the Levite man giving his secondary wife (the term "secondary wife" is also a bit off to me as well) and the Gibeon giving his daughter to the naughties in the town of Gibeah to "abuse them and do whatever you want to them" (Judges 19:24). Um...what?! Who does that? There's not a social context in which I can imagine this is not offensive. When the Israelites inquired about his *secondary* wife's death (nope, doesn't get any better), the Levite doesn't offer up that he in fact pushed her out the door to the wolves, but rather puts the blame on the men who were outside waiting.  Now I'm not saying the men outside (the Gibeons) were not to blame, but the Levite didn't take any of the blame. He then (here's the next place modern readers may be should be offended) cuts his wife, limb-by-limb into twelve pieces and sends them to each of the tribes to call them to fight with Benjamin.

In Judges 20:1, we read that "Then all the Israelites from Dan to Beer-sheba, as well as from the area of Gilead, marched out, and the group assembled as one body in the Lord's presence at Mizpah." While this is the first time *all* the Israelites did something together, it wasn't a joining together or united front they presented; instead, they engaged in Civil War.

I think these elements that are offensive to the modern reader would have been perceived by an ancient audience as a warning of what not to do when there is not a leader. Bandstra writes

In the era of the judges, Israel is cowering in the forests, hiding in the hills, afraid of being wiped out by Canaanites and other assorted opponents (223).

So these elements of plot which show disorganization and disengagement of these agricultural people may seem reasonable when we understand that the Israelites are scared in the period that follows the leadership of Joshua.

The narrative story of Judges begins in Judges 19:1 by saying "In those days when there was no king in Israel" (CEB). For the people Israel, they are without a leader.  In the absence of leadership, it's as though the people don't know how to act or behave, and they certainly can't figure out how to work together and be successful. Much like this passage began ("no king in Israel"), the passage ends with "In this days there was no king in Israel; each person did what they thought to be right" (Judges 21:25 CEB). By beginning and ending with pointing out that the people Israel had no leader and acted willy-nilly, the modern reader sees that we can not each act however we want.  We have a Leader and King in the Lord -- by following the leadership of the Lord, we are innately working together, unlike the Israelites during the Judges era.

Where else in history have we seen the people act without leadership?

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Blessings and Curses.

This week's blogging has been a bit of a challenge for me. I have looked at the assignment several times. I've told myself I can do it tomorrow. I stewed over how to get started. Now, it's time to just bite the bullet and get this done! I always find it interesting the patterns of repeated information that occur throughout the Bible.  For example, parts of Deuteronomy, Joshua, 1 Samuel, 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles each describe the importance of obeying God. To take it even further, each of the above-mentioned books also talks about the blessings and curses that come forth from obeying and disobeying, respectively.

I'm a first born. I've always been a rule follower. This week, I read all about what it means to be a "Biblical Rule Follower" (BRF for short). We hear throughout these passages that when obeying God, blessings flow; when we disobey, curses flow.

Deuteronomy 28:1-68 --- In the first chunk of this Scripture passage (Deuteronomy 28:1-14), titled "Future Blessings," we are told that obeying God will benefit by being blessed. God shows mercy, and will defeat anyone who attacks us. We are to keep God with us at all times, and by doing so, we will be blessed beyond measure. The second portion, verses 15-68 called "Future Curses," we hear the opposite: if we do not follow God's commandments and continue to disobey, then we put ourselves under the curse -- a horrible, nasty curse.  As much happiness as can be found in obeying God? Flip the coin and that's how much unhappiness is found in disobeying!

Joshua 23:1-16 --- In this passage, which is the entire chapter, we read about Joshua (can I get a unison *DUH* for that last statement!?!). Joshua has grown old and is giving reminders about how faithful God has been in his lifetime. He urges us to remember to be faithful, as he has known God to always be faithful as well. Joshua 23:10 says "This is because the Lord your God fights for you, exactly as he promised you." In Joshua's eyes, we are to remember to be faithful, as turning from our faithfulness will bring the undesirable consequences we have been promised. He also warns about following false idols. If we trust in God's love, then we trust His faithfulness.

1 Samuel 12:1-25 --- This passage of 1 Samuel again urges the people to obey the Lord, but also includes that historically, when people have cried out to God for help, God has shown up. Because of this, Samuel says

So now, here is the king you chose, the one you asked for. Yes, the Lord has put a king over you! If you will fear the Lord, worship him, obey him, and not rebel against the Lord's command, and if both you and the king who rules over you follow the Lord your God -- all will be well. But if they don't obey the Lord and rebel against the Lord's command, then the Lord's power will go against you and your king to destroy you (1 Samuel 12:13-15 CEB).

Samuel's writing reminds us that while we have done evil things, we shouldn't turn our backs on God, but instead should fear and serve the Lord.

2 Kings 17:5-18 --- From the very beginning of this passage, things feel a little different than in the other passages. In it, we learn that this is written about the invasion of the Northern Kingdom by the Assyrians, leading to the fall of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. This passage feels like the "told you so" passage -- God told us the people to obey, they didn't, destruction ensues. End scene. "Disobeying God for Dummies" could be the book title of this situation. "But they wouldn't listen. They were stubborn like their ancestors who didn't trust the Lord their God" (2 Kings 17:14 CEB).

2 Chronicles 36:11-21 --- In the final chapter of the book of 2 Chronicles, we see the fall of Jerusalem. Under Zedekiah, the people, including the priests, became increasingly unfaithful to God. As a result, God sent the Babylonians over to play. "Red rover, red rover, send the Babylonians right over" - and that He did! Jerusalem and its temple were burned and destroyed... BUT as the last verse tells us -- the land finally enjoyed its Sabbath as a result.

The first three sets of passages (those from Deuteronomy, Joshua, and 1 Samuel) all seem a bit more personal, we might say. They seem to come from places of personal experience.  For example, in Joshua, he speaks from a perspective of the relationship between being faithful and God's blessings. He has witnessed and received first-hand the way this relationship works throughout his lifetime. While it may seem harsh to tell the Israelites that they should "obey or be doomed," I really did feel like the warnings/urgings by Deuteronomy, Joshua, and 1 Samuel were more relatable, or more personal perhaps.  On the other hand, in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles, we read this from the perspective of destruction of entire cities. These two books' descriptions of disobedience were much more harsh to me than the first three I mentioned. Why? Perhaps reading about the actual destruction that has come as a result of disobedience is more vivid than simple warnings of what may come.

How have you experienced God's blessings by being faithful?

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Nobody puts Israel in the corner.... well, except that one time.

Dear Curious One,

This week, I read about a cool new (to me!) topic, "Isaiah's Servant." This servant is also referred to as the "Suffering Servant" and "Servant of Yhwh." In Bandstra's chapter this week (Click to read), and in the OOTLE lectures (Responses to Exile Part A and Part B) this topic of "Suffering Servant" was explained well. Before I explain "Isaiah's Servant," I think you need a little background of another new-to-me topic from this week: Second Isaiah. Let me explain...

Before this assignment, I apparently was living under a rock hadn't read about this concept of Second Isaiah yet. Second Isaiah refers the chapters in the book of Isaiah (Chapters 40-55), which are written from the perspective of Babylonian exile. In these chapters, we read of strife caused by the exilic condition of those who were exiled to Babylon. The people there have already paid their debt, yet are continually being held in exile. The people - who came from Jerusalem - continue being held in Babylon, thus continuing to "overpay" on the debt owed. Second Isaiah's perspective claims that the people in exile at this time do not need repentance, forgiveness, or restoration (as they are being held for sins they are not guilty of), but rather are in need of vindication.

Enter: Isaiah's Servant. Bandstra highlights that Isaiah 52:13-52:12 is the last - and longest - of four "servant poems" in which we see "Yhwh's servant suffers for the people even though he did not deserve it" (Bandstra 340). The servant in these servant poems takes on the punishment for the sins of the group.

So who is this servant? According to the lecture (Part B) and to Bandstra's chapter, this servant is said to be representative of the people Israel, who are also sometimes called Jacob (remember Jacob was renamed "Israel" in Genesis when "God said to him, 'Your name is Jacob, but your name will be Jacob no longer. No, your name will be Israel.' And he named him Israel" (Genesis 35:10 CEB).) The servant,

Was this servant an actual, real-live person? While the servant is the most famous character in Second Isaiah, there is some disagreement about this question. While some feel that the servant is only representative of and a metaphor for the people Israel, there are some who argue that this servant was an actual person, perhaps Jeremiah (Bandstra 351).

So if the servant was a real person, what does that mean? Let's say the servant was Jeremiah. In what we read of Jeremiah in Kings and then again in the book of Jeremiah, we know that he was an outcast in society and was physically abused . If it's not Jeremiah, it could also be Jehoiachin (the king during the Babylonian exile), Zerubbabel (the first governor of Judea after the exile is done-zo), or perhaps even Second Isaiah himself (Bandstra 351).

Another interesting potential answer or possibility to this question is that the servant was Jesus. Before reading too deeply into who "Isaiah's Servant" was, I thought we'd be talking about Jesus (Hello, I know JC (as in the real-life man) was not in the Old Testament... I DO know that much), but I was thinking maybe it was a foreshadowing of Jesus' time to come. However, Christians have interpreted this fourth servant song with Jesus as the servant before as well. This is a theme that can be found in George Frideric Handel's Messiah. To me, without thinking about the fact that Isaiah is Old Testament and Jesus wasn't on the scene until the New Testament, it makes sense that the one who "received divine punishment" and "suffered for the people even thought he didn't deserve it" would be Jesus. It was my initial reaction, People. I mean tell me you don't have wrong initial reactions once in a while (ahem, fanny packs, anyone?!).

But what if the servant isn't an actual person, but is rather a metaphor for the people Israel? Then what happens? Well, if this is the case, we are reminded of the suffering and pain that those who were exiled endured. By their suffering and horrible treatment (I assume mani/pedi/spa days weren't offered to those in exile!) in Babylon, the nations and peoples around the people Israel were healed and taught about Yahweh's saving power.

So overall, "Isaiah's Servant" can be interpreted in a couple different ways. I think Bandstra's final thoughts on the topic make a lot of sense:

Perhaps the very indefiniteness of the allusion was Second Isaiah’s intention. He may have had somebody real in mind as a model; but he may have been suggesting, by keeping the identification vague, that the way of selflessness and suffering is the way salvation comes in God’s plan, not by military force. By keeping the figure indefinite, such a figure does not become merely an historical curiosity but a perpetual model for God’s chosen and redeemed people (Bandstra 351).

What a lovely thought -- perhaps Second Isaiah's intention was to give us some literary ambiguity! By leaving this identification up to the reader, we can't just turn "Isaiah's Servant" into an historical figure, but rather the "person" becomes a concept by which we live and love others. I think I like this idea best -- that we aren't meant to know exact meaning of this "person." By mystery of faith, we can relate it to different aspects and areas of our lives instead of being told "Read this, it means that."

What do you think of Second Isaiah and "Isaiah's Servant"?

With love and t-OOTLE-oos!

Melissa

P.S. -- Another author, Tovia Singer, wrote an article called "Who is God's Suffering Servant? The Rabbinic Interpretation of Isa 53" (Click to read). While the article was not necessarily my "cup of tea," there are some interesting points about how the "Suffering Servant" is identified and perceived.

"Hope and doom, hope and doom, Jeremiah's spouting hope and doom..."

Well, now that I have the tune of "Deep and Wide" in your head (you're welcome for that, by the way!), let's talk about the prophet formerly known as Jeremiah.

Within the book of Jeremiah, readers sense both hope and doom.  How can one writer, who wrote a book that spans about a fifty-year period (Bandstra 324) convey such elated feelings of hope next to such deep, dark feelings of doom? Jeremiah wrote during the reign of King Josiah of Judah (beginning in about 626 bce) and continues through the fall of Jerusalem (in 586 bce). The book of Jeremiah has probably undergone Deuteronomistic editing - which many other prophets' work also underwent - but this editing, paired with the time period in which Jeremiah prophesied leads to a canonized work that is fill with both optimism and pessimism. For more about the above information and more, listen to "Jerusalem and Jeremiah Part A and Part B" to get the low-down.

On a side note -- Jeremiah as a prophet is unique in that he often laid out his own personal feelings and spiritual life in his writings. Because of this, he is often called "the weeping prophet" (Bandstra 324).

While reading passages from Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:1-19; 2:1-13; 4:23-28; 5:1-5; 7:1-34, 8:18-9:3; 18:1-12; 20:7-13; 23:9-32; 31; 32:1-15 to be exact...you know, just a little light reading!), the feelings of both hope and doom are expressed almost instantly. Almost immediately, in Jeremiah 1:1-19, I had the feeling of a hopeful doom (oxymoron, anyone?).  Yep, I made that feeling up, but here's why: as I was reading, I read passages that said things like "Before I created you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I set you apart" (Jeremiah 1:5 CEB) and "Don't be afraid of them, because I'm with you to rescue you" (Jeremiah 1:6 CEB). I mean, who doesn't want to know that the Big Guy knew us intimately, even before Day 1? And really, knowing that God is there to rescue us from our fears? Awesome! Now, that all seems pretty hopeful so far, huh? But... then I read things like "Trouble will erupt from the north against the people of this land" (Jeremiah 1:14 CEB) and "That is why I will take you to court and charge even your descendants, declares the Lord (Jeremiah 2:9 CEB).

Okay, I know what you're thinking: "Hey, Crazy Lady Scholarly One! I thought you said it was hopeful doom... you even coined your own oxymoron for this and you haven't shown it yet!" What I'm getting at is that even when Jeremiah writes God saying, "Haven't you brought this on yourself by abandoning the Lord your God, who has directed your paths?" (Jeremiah 2:17 CEB), it still feels hopeful when He counters with something like "Yet it was I who planted you, a precious vine of fine quality; how could you turn into a wild vine and become good for nothing?" (Jeremiah 2:21 CEB). Even in the midst of our being the awfulness that we are, when we the abandon the One who created and loves us, God looks at us and cherishes the creation that we are. In Jeremiah especially, we are promised protection, rescue, and love, while yet being warned of destruction and doom to come. Even in the face of doom though, I still feel hopeful of the love God.

Jeremiah 18:1-12 (CEB) is a good example of God's love for us, which falls into the "hope" category. In this passage, God is compared to a potter and we are the clay. In it, God's words come to Jeremiah and he says "House of Israel, can't I deal with you like this potter, declares the Lord? Like clay in the potter's hand, so are you in mine, house of Israel! At any time I may announce that I will dig up, pull down, and destroy a nation or kingdom; but if that nation I warned turns from its evil, then I'll relent and not carry out the harm I intended for it. At the same time, I may announce that I will build and plant a nation or kingdom; but if that nation displeases and disobeys me, then I'll relent and not carry out the good I intended for it" (Jeremiah 18:6-10 CEB). God's love is what makes up people of hope, but it is also God's love and caring for us that should make us God-fearing people, those who are aware of the doom and devastation that God is capable of.

The final books and chapters of Jeremiah lead the reading down a further path of doom - one lined with despair and pain and ending with the fall of Jerusalem.

I find it completely legitimate that both hope and doom come from the same prophet. I believe that the life experiences, political situation, and current leadership of the time all encourage feelings of optimism and pessimism at different times. When preaching, I think it is important to cover hope (which is the easier of the two, of course!) as well as doom.  While doom is not the easiest or most fun topic (um...thus the name "doom"!), it is crucial to find a way and the time and place to share what the Bible says about doom.

Do you share messages of both hope and doom? How do you present each topic?

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Amos.

This week in OOTLE 15, we studied the latter prophets of the Bible, specifically Amos. Throughout selected passages (which I will discuss further on... keep reading!), Amos finds that the Israelite society has done things and behaved in ways that were not right and then proclaims what will happen to them if they don't change their ways.

Time Out: Before talking about that though, let's talk about Amos, the person (Note: this is not the cookie company's Famous Amos...sorry, Folks!). Amos was -- chronologically speaking -- the first of the prophets to have a book named after him (see Bandstra's Chapter 10 Page 288 to read more about this). In the introduction of the Book of Amos, readers learn a bit about Amos: he was a shepherd from Judea and he was called by God to be a prophet. Bandstra questions the authorship of the introduction, insinuating that the introduction may have been written by an editor (291).

Aside from his biographical information, the history from which the latter prophets associate is interesting as well (listen to Prophecy Part A and Prophecy Part B to get the 411 on that!). Amos comes to us from a period when, in his opinion,"Israel was just going through the motions of worshipping God and observing proper rituals, thinking that this was the sum total of their obligation to God" (Bandstra 291). The people were being chumps about their faithfulness to God. #yesisaidchumps 

Go with me for a moment: in my previous life (okay, okay... not life, but career) I was a high school English teacher for six years. In the time I spent student teaching and in my own classroom, I saw a handful of teachers who had "checked out." These were the folksies who had decided to hang up their rulers and chalk sticks (or gym shorts and tube socks for the PE variety) and call it a day. Now, don't get me wrong, most of the people I worked with who had reached the age of golden days retirement were sad to go, but recognized that they had worked long and hard and were ready for a little freedom. The few that I speak of though are those who put their retirement papers in the principal's box, skipped and cartwheeled back to their rooms, and then handed out worksheets and showed "educational" videos to their students for the rest of the school year. Because a contract had been signed, they showed up every day (for the most part... there do seem to be the people with 786.2 sick days banked up and are going to burn them!), but only fulfill the bare-minimum obligations they legally have to the school (thanks to those pesky contracts that cover an entire school year!). Long story short: They have a contract, but fulfill it half-heartedly. 

Enter: the Israelites of this time period. In Amos' opinion (and apparently in God's), the Israelite people are half-heartedly fulfilling their covenant with God. Not only are they half-hearted, Amos speaks for God with a laundry list of things the people are doing wrong, including selling the innocent for silver and those in need for a pair of sandals (Amos 2:6), crushing the heads of the poor and pushing the afflicted out of the way (Amos 2:7), and drinking wine that was purchased with gathered up fines (Amos 2:8), among other injustices. These are the people who "hate the one who judges at the city gate, and they reject the one who speaks the truth" (Amos 5:10). Overall, these people are greedy, act immorally, and corruption seems inevitable. 

So what now? What if the people of Israel don't change the way they are living? As seen throughout these passages of Amos, there are undesirable consequences coming to the people of Israel who have forgotten their loyalties and have become lax in their worship. The Lord say, "I know how many are your crimes, and how numerous are your sins -- afflicting the righteous, taking money on the side, turning away the poor who seek help. Therefore, the one who is wise will keep silent in that time; it is an evil time" (Amos 5:12-13). These people are not getting away with the way they've been living. God sees their greediness, their selfishness, and it will not go unpunished. Amos describes doom (to those who are living comfortably in their sins) that is certain (Amos 6:1-8) and days of hunger and thirst (Amos 8:11) and roaming aimlessly (Amos 8:12) that are set to come. No one can outrun or hide from this fate. 

Now we may wonder: is there anything the people can do to avoid this doomed fate? In reading Amos, the most clear answer I could find for this question was found in Amos 5:14-15 where it says "Seek good and not evil, that you may live; and so the Lord, the God of heavenly forces, will be with you just as you have said. Hate evil, love good, and establish justice at the center gate. Perhaps the Lord God of heavenly forces will be gracious to what is left of Joseph." Not only does Amos seek justice throughout his work, but encourages readers to seek to do do what is good and right. Evil has no place in our lives, for that is what brings the doom, greediness, selfishness, and a whole host of negative adjectives we probably don't want to be described with!

Overall, Amos is concerned with social justice -- that we take care of the poor, downtrodden, and everyone in between! How can you serve others with social justice in mind this week?

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

P.S. -- I used the Common English Bible (CEB) for all scripture references. 

It's the End of the World As We Know It...

Just kidding... it's apocalyptic literature. Until this unit, I truly thought apocalyptic meant the end of the world. Just that and nothing else. This week, in our OOTLE class, we studied the book of Daniel and I learned that apocalyptic is not strictly about the end of the world. Apocalyptic literature is written about when God will intervene and a new heaven and new earth will be created. Throughout apocalyptic literature, several common elements can be identified. In this post, I will be connecting passages from the book of Daniel to the common elements of apocalyptic literature.

Before making connections, I'd like to share what Christopher Stanley (in his book The Hebrew Bible, Chapter 36) identifies as some of the common elements of apocalyptic literature:

Apocalyptic literature shows visionary experiences in which God's plans for humanity's future are shown to an individual, sometimes through dreams, other times through the individual being lifted to heaven to learn of the future or secrets. Through these visionary experiences the interpretations are sometimes given, while at times, the reader is left to do the interpreting. Apocalyptic literature uses a narrative framework for recounting the circumstances through which the visions were received. These narrative works were often attributed to famous and/or revered leaders in the recent past (this is known as pseudepigrapha). A third common element of apocalyptic literature is cosmic dualism, which describes the period in which people started questioning the "goodness" of God in comparison to the evil in the world.

Elements of eschatological orientation are found in apocalyptic literature as well. This element is not necessarily preoccupied with end times, but rather includes ideas of what will come when God intervenes.  In God's intervention, it is believed that evil will be defeated and a new heaven and earth will be ushered in. Stanley identifies moral strictness as another element to apocalyptic literature. This moral strictness encourages readers to associate only with those within their groups and provides motivation for people to remain faithful, even in the face of temptation. Moral strictness in apocalyptic literature may lead to suffering and death, but Stanley wrote "those who suffer and die for their faith will be richly rewarded by Yahweh after death" (Stanley 484). The final element common to apocalyptic literature is the use of symbolic language. Through the use of imagery and symbols, literature with aspects of fantasy is recalled and/or created.


Let's connect! (Please note: the elements do not happen in any particular order!) The first passage from Daniel that I will connect to apocalyptic elements is Daniel 7:1-28.

In this passage, the very first verse reads "In the first year of Babylon's King Belshazzar, Daniel had a dream - a vision in his head as he lay on his bed. He wrote the dream down" (Daniel 7:1 CEB). This correlates with the element of visionary experiences. Daniel's dream fits nicely into the apocalyptic element of a person receiving visions through dreams and/or being taken to heaven to hear the future.

A reader may also notice early in this passage the use of symbolic language when Daniel 7:4-8 describes beasts of the sea. One is described as a "lion with eagle's wings" that is set "on two feet, like a human being, and given a human mind" (Daniel 7:4 CEB). Other beasts in these verses are described in details that are fantastic in nature, fitting quite nicely into this element of apocalyptic literature.

The second passage from Daniel to which I will make connections with elements of apocalyptic literature is Daniel 10:1-4.

In this passage, the element of symbolic language is seen very strongly. Daniel, in first-person, describes a vision he had while on the banks of the Tigris River. In this vision, Daniel suddenly sees a "man clothed in linen" who had "a gold belt around his waist" and a "body like a topaz" (Daniel 10:5-6 CEB). While this language presents different (and less scary!) imagery than the previous passage's, it still paints a very vivid picture of a fantastic event. Even though the people with Daniel did not see the vision that Daniel saw, he says they ran away and hid (Daniel 10:7 CEB).

The last thing the "man" presenting the vision shares is that he has "come to help you [Daniel] understand what will happen to your people in the future, because there is another vision concerning that time" (Daniel 10:14 CEB). While we don't actually learn what that vision is, readers are able to see hints of eschatological orientation through the speech of the man. This orientation is not necessarily about end times, but again is a telling of what will happen after God intervenes.

Finally, let's work with Daniel 11:1-12:13.

One of the first elements that I noticed in this passage was that of dualism. In the opening verses, Daniel describes a fourth king of Persia who will disturb everyone and a warrior-king who will step forward and do whatever he pleases (Daniel 11:2-4 CEB).

In this passage, this is where the eschatological orientation is most strongly viewed. This entire passage is apart from the first two discussed, as this set of verses is not describing visions or dreams that Daniel has had or is having, but is rather used to shows Daniel's prophecies for life that is to come.

Overall, the passages from Daniel are written in a narrative framework, which is another element common to apocalyptic literature. These passages read as though they are fantastically wild and, at times, dark children's stories, much like legends that have been passed down over time.

I have enjoyed studying Daniel this week, as I had only ever studied the "nicey nice" stories about "Daniel and the Lion's Den" and Daniel, the three youths, and the fiery furnace.  Okay... not so nicey-nice as in threw-my-fave-into-the-lion's-den-to-see-if-he-can-swing-it or let's-throw-'em-in-the-furnace-Gang, but nicey-nice in that they have good messages about being faithful even in the face of obstacles.

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Testing, Testing....1, 2, 3

This week has been trying. This is to say the least. Many extenuating circumstances have made this week less than stellar for me.  I have kind of felt like Job.  No, not because I've lost all my stuff (quite the opposite, actually... the only thing I've lost is my mind, Folks!), but because I feel like I've been tested... and tested... and tested this week. I've had my patience tested, my ability to sleep like a college student again tested, my organizational skills tested, and the list goes on an on.  Unlike Job, however, I haven't been so great at the praising God part. I've tried so hard to keep it together for my job, my husband, my kids, my sanity, that I think I have been forgetting to praise God and be thankful for the things given to me and the blessings I do have. I am working on that part still.

This week, I listened to a portion of a podcast at professionalleft.blogspot.com by Driftglass and Blue Gal.  The podcast is "270: Prayer Breakfasts, Blasphemy, and Aaron Schock." (Please note there is explicit language throughout the podcast). The portion I listened to was from about 22:00 - 32:00. In this podcast, which seems a bit incomplete (by this, I mean I feel like I was missing the point of the podcast or the fullness in which the conversation was being done with), but apparently Stephen Fry was charged with blasphemy because he claimed he would ask God at judgement day "Why let children suffer?"  The podcast hosts then turned their attention to Job and how Fry's comment could be related to the story of Job.

In their discussion of Job, which seems half-hearted (or maybe half-informed is a better word) at best, the pair discusses the book of Job.  Some claims they made were fairly accurate, but some were not.
Others just felt incomplete.

** Note: I took notes while listening, so I'm using words directly from their podcast to categorize what I felt was right, wrong, or incomplete.

Correct:

• “God’s a jerk in Job.” While I have to admit I'm not to keen on calling God a jerk (as in, I would make my middle and high school youth pick a new word in this instance had they called God that...), it seems a bit true. He definitely comes across as a bully, especially when he has tested Job so much and has taken so much away from him.  In the end, God puts Job into his place (read Job 38-41) and suggests he not question God again! 
•  “One of the most honest books in the Bible.  It’s about the best man being tested and having everything taken away.” I can agree with the statement that Job is one of the most honest books in the Bible, if not the most honest book! I think we all want to strive to be obedient like Job, but in reality, Job's devotion has me in shock. I can't imagine losing all that Job does (I will speak more about "having everything taken away" in another point...that part of the statement from the podcast was a little off to me) and still remaining faithful.  I think I'd cave on the niceties and brood against God if I was put in the same situation!
• "Job followed every rule to a T; he made good with the contract he had made with God." True. Job was like the best Christian ever -- he followed all the rules, made a conscious effort to be faithful to what he was told, and held firm to his beliefs.

Incorrect: 

• Job's wife died. This is one of the most blinding inaccuracies I came away from the podcast wondering about. "Driftglass" claims as an aside at the beginning of this portion of the podcast that "Job is his favorite book." After making the claim though that Job's wife died, I began wondering if the pair has actually read all of Job.  I do not recall anywhere in the book that Job's wife died.
• "Bet with the Devil that if you take away this guy's good stuff, he'll turn against God." Another inaccuracy I felt was portrayed in this podcast was their ideas that God and the satan bet each other about what would happen to Job.  I don't think that God actually bet with the satan.  By saying this, it means that both parties involved in the "bet" were hoping to gain something from the outcome. I don't think God ever bets on any of us, because he knows our human faults and that we will ultimately fail. The only thing God got out of the deal with Job (or with any of us for that matter), was heartbreak.  Much like the love of a parent to a child, God knows the heartbreak of parenthood and he knew by testing and stripping Job of the things and people he loved, God would "lose" Job, albeit temporarily. 

Incomplete:

• "God took everything away from Job." I think that this piece is somewhat incomplete, because it implies that Job has everything that is able to be taken away. While Job has a full life, he doesn't have everything. I don't think it's really about Job's stuff being taken away anyhow. Job did lose all of his earthly possession and those he loved, but I think "everything" needs to direct us away from thinking about the material possessions and thinking more about losing everything Job had in God. Job went through a period and starting questioning whether God was there for him or not. The fact that Job felt alone and lost, without the One to whom he had been so faithful, that shows that Job lost everything. 

Overall, I question what the purpose for the podcast was.  Was it to make funnies and create controversies? The podcast personalities definitely had some good points that seem mostly accurate, but also had some incomplete and inaccurate points as well. 

On a side note, I want to briefly mention the reading from Bandstra's chapter called "Proverbs and Wisdom: The Wisdom of Israel" (Click here to read). In this chapter, Bandstra discusses wisdom literature. He says "Every culture finds ways to transmit its accumulated knowledge, sometimes through storytelling or through institutions of learning" (Bandstra 397-398). We see this in our own country throughout different cultures, peoples (I think of Native American literature, for example), and traditions. Of the Biblical wisdom literature (which includes Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes, by the way!), Bandstra shares that

Whatever the original context of instruction, the content of instruction eventually came to be written down.  The wisdom books provide direction to those who sought to conduct their lives in a moral and productive way. They may have functioned as textbooks for those who were teaching and learning how to manage life: how to think, how to cope, how to succeed (Bandstra 398).

I think the most striking part of this quote from Bandstra is that these wisdom writings were used to teach and learn life management skills including thinking, coping, and succeeding. While the Bible sometimes seems like we are incapable of fully understanding, we can relate to the fact that the sharing of stories among generations is done to help nurture and grow the generations to come.  This is a lovely sentiment!

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa 

It's Already Week Two... Psalm down...

So... this week in OOTLE (I don't know if I ever clarified what that means.... Open Old Testament Learning Environment... now you know why I use #ootle15 in my Tweets and the label "ootle" in my blog posts) we went a'discoverin' in the Psalms. I'll break down a bit of what I learned from each portion of this week's work, and then will talk about a specific Psalm.

Lecture: From this week's lecture episodes (Psalms Part A, Psalms Part B), a couple of points that stood out to me include:

• Five Basic Types of Psalms (the Psalms themselves do not actually contain labels... rather, we simply see how Psalms can fit into these types); we see 
• Individual Complaint/Lament: these are from individual people asking for God's intercession
• Communal Complaint/Lament: like individual complaints or laments, but from a group rather than any one person
• Individual Thanksgiving: from an individual, thanking God for already intervening
• Communal Thanksgiving: again, like an individual Psalm of Thanksgiving, but from a group thanking God for prior intervention
• Hymn of Praise: these Psalms praise the nature of God as one who intervenes regularly
• The Psalms are written as Poetry
• Pseudepigrapha: the Psalms were written and then attributed to a revered figure in the past in order to be considered authoritative; the book of Daniel is an example of this
• Superscripts: these are the little "blurbs" at the start of a Psalm that set up the verses (On a cool side note: we were talking about Ash Wednesday in middle and high school youth group this week where I am the Director of Youth Ministries, and in reading a couple Psalms, I was able to share this new vocabulary word with my youth!)

Bandstra Reading: In this week's reading of Bandstra's Part 3: Writings, Prologue to the Writings (Part 3), I wrote down a few notes about the Writings that were interesting points to me:

• "Together the books of the Writings represent an important stage in the history of Israel and the development of its religion and society" (Bandstra 369).
• I am more and more realizing that the Tanak, specifically the writings, can be seen as a crucial part of the way that the nation of Israel was formed and functioned
• The individual books that are considered Writings drew upon the Torah (aka: 5 books of Moses, Pentateuch, Law) and the Prophets. Within the Writings, we often see quotes from earlier books, which is a way of remembering traditions or prophecies in order to either affirm God's faithfulness and/or call people to return to being faithful (Bandstra 370)

Edward Hirsch's "How to Read a Poem" Reading: In this reading ("How to Read a Poem"), I was reminded of my days of teaching high school English (which was my career for 6 years before becoming the Director of Youth Ministries) and trying to teach kids how to read poetry. I am wishing I had discovered this article sooner and could have used it to teach about poetry! Anyhow, there are several tips Hirsch gives regarding taking a stab at poetry; these tips work well with reading the Psalms, as the Psalms are poetry!

• Embrace Prior Assumptions: One of the most important things I urged my students to remember when reading literature and especially poetry is the fact that each reader of poetry or literature comes to the piece with a differing set of experiences, backgrounds, and lifestyles. 
• Read a Poem Aloud: This may take several tries!
• Decipher the Line: Working through the grammatical structure of a piece can be challenging, but is important to understanding the content of the poem
• Start a Conversation: Although the contents may be personal, answering questions raised, reshaping, and clarifying the meaning is important. 
• Talk Back to the Poem: Ask questions or authorship, situations, audience, tone, etc. to help better understanding
• Conquer the Context: Realizing and embracing the contexts of a poem will help the reader to relate to the poem 
• Embrace Ambiguity: Being okay with not understanding all parts of the poem's meaning on the first try will be helpful to the reader.  It may take several attempts at reading, or even an amount of time passing to gather experience and knowledge to finally make sense of a poem.

And now.... for the Main Event!  Let's talk about a Psalm! After all, it is Psalm Week (Disclaimer: this is nothing like Shark Week). In this section, I will take a look at Psalm 44 (CEB), and will answer the questions raised by Hirsch in his section called "Talking Back to the Poem":

• Who is the speaker? The speaker of this poem is a group of Korahites.
• What circumstances gave rise to the poem? The Korahites, a group of worshippers in the community of Israel, are lamenting, wondering where God is. They have recently been/felt defeated, as can be seen starting in verse 9.  
• What situation is presented? The situation, as I understand it, is that the Korahites have previously been successful in battle (with God's help), but now have been recently defeated and feel rejected and abandoned by God. 
• Who or what is the audience? The audience of this Psalm is God. The Korahites were disappointed with God. 
• What is the tone? The tone starts off in a way of praise. The Korahites praise God for their past victories, but then change to a tone of lament and disappointment in their recent defeat. 
• What form, if any, does the poem take? This Psalm does not take any specific grammatical form, but can be viewed as Praise - Lament. 
• How is form related to content? I do not believe that the form is related to content. 
• Is sound an important, active element of the poem? When reading this Psalm aloud, the letter sounds are not as important as the sound of anger (the tone) that is portrayed when hearing the words. 
• Does the poem spring from an identifiable historical moment? This poem does not spring from an identifiable historical moment, specifically, but rather is a response to a recent defeat of the people speaking. This historical moment can be transferred to any defeat -- personal, economic, in the workplace, etc. - of the people to read it at any time. 
• Does the poem speak from a specific culture? This Psalm speaks from the point of view of the Korahites, but is easily translatable to people of any culture. 
• Does the poem have its own vernacular? I do not believe this Psalm uses its own vernacular.  Instead, I feel that the language used is that which people of all stations of life can relate to. 
• Does the poem use imagery to achieve a particular effect? This Psalm uses imagery that creates real pictures for the reader. The images are that of real-life, relational situations: ie - sheep ready for slaughter, sheep to be butchered.  These images are some that people of the time the Psalm was written would understand and relate to. 
• What kind of figurative language, if any, does the poem use? One of the most apparent uses of figurative language in this Psalm is that of God sleeping or hiding from the people.  In verses 23 - 26, the people cry out "Wake up! Why are you sleeping, Lord? Get up! Don't reject us forever! Why are you hiding your face, forgetting our suffering and oppression? Look: we're going down to the dust; our stomachs are flat on the ground! Stand up! Help us! Save us for the sake of your faithful love." In these verses, we see the people lamenting, crying out for help and guidance through the use of figurative language about what God is doing (or not doing). 
• If the poem is a question, what is the answer? I don't believe this poem is a question, but rather asks the question "where the heck are you, God!?
• Does the poem use unusual words or use words in an unusual way? This poem does not use any especially unusual words, but rather uses words that are common to the people of the time it was written. 

Psalm 44 can be considered a Psalm of Lament, as the people are wondering why God has rejected and abandoned them. Despite this lament, the people praise God, giving thanks for all that God has already seen them through. The use of language is not done in a way that excludes readers from relating to and using this plea.  Rather, the language allows readers of all experiences and backgrounds to relate to the desperation in the plea of the people. 

Can you apply Hirsch's tips to other Psalms? 

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Week One (in a Nutshell).

This week, I read the introductory chapter of Barry Bandstra's online textbook called, Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. (FYI: From this point forward, I will refer to this book as RtOT). In this introduction, Bandstra wrote about the Bible and how it is perceived, especially in America. "Each year," Bandstra writes, "the Bible is the best-selling book, with Americans buying 25 million a year, and the market is worth more than a half billion dollars" (Bandstra 6).  As Americans, we are spending a great deal of money every year to purchase the Bible, but we don't necessarily know what to do with the Bible or what the Bible is. For example, Bandstra uses statistics from a Polling Report in 2007 showing that nearly 75% of Americans in the past 30 years believe that Bible is the literal Word of God and that we should take the Bible's text with absolute accuracy and follow it word-for-word (Bandstra 6).  These facts were surprising and not at the same time for me. I have wishful thinking that we - as a whole - would understand and know what to do with and how to utilize the Bible more accurately. On the other hand, maybe we in the church are missing the boat when it comes to teaching our members how to use the Bible. Maybe we need more congregational education about how to use the Bible?

After reading, I watched/listened to two podcasts from my professor regarding the Tanak. The Tanak is a relatively new subject to me, as I first heard about it in the Confirmation class I co-lead (and by co-lead, I mean I sit and soak in as much knowledge as I can in the hour we are together!) a couple of months ago.

The word Tanak is an acronym of sorts for the Old Testament. It stands for:

Torah (Law)

• The Torah includes the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy 
• The five books listed above are also called "The Five Books of Moses"
• The five books are also known as the "Pentateuch" 
• The Torah is written as instruction
• These books were the first to be translated into Greek

Nevi'im (The Prophets)

• The Nevi'im were later translated into Greek
• The Prophets can be divided into two sub-sections, Former and Latter Prophets
• Former Prophets: Includes historical books like Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings
• Latter Prophets: Includes books of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Habakkuk, Nahum
• The Latter prophets can be divided into two sub-sections, Major and Minor Prophets
• Major Prophets: these are long books (which is what makes them "major," not the fact that they are more important than the others), such as Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah; major prophets take up an entire scroll with their writings
• Minor Prophets: these are 12 shorter books (again this is what classifies them as "minor"), including Amos, Hosea, Jonah, Nahum, and Habakkuk; minor prophets' work could be added up and all 12 could fit onto one scroll

Ketuvim (The Writings)

• The Ketuvim includes the books of Psalms, Proverbs, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ruth, and Esther, to name a few
• Ketuvim writings are unique from prophets and law because they are written in genres that help us to understand what the author was trying to say.
• In these writings, usually there is not just one way to interpret what is being said 

Understanding the parts of the Tanak is important to beginning to understand the Old Testament. While we view the Old Testament (which I will refer to as OT from this point forward) as harder to understand than the New Testament (I will refer to this as NT from now on), the disciples and NT writers felt the opposite - that the OT made sense and the NT was harder to grasp. We must understand this as we read the Bible and try to make sense of the way it is written. 

As I close, I leave you with a couple questions this week: Have you heard of Tanak before? If so, how has the knowledge shaped the way you read each part (law, prophets, writings)? If not, what do you think now?

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa

Can you hear me now?...

Welcome!

I am in a MOOC (Massive Online Open Course) this semester to study the OT (Old Testament). Let's be real here. I just had to Google "MOOC" again, because I couldn't remember what the letters stood for.  Hey, at least I remember what OT stands for! 

This course is open to anyone in the world who wants to learn more about the OT. 

Join me for the next 13 weeks of learning about the OT!  This is also an experience for me learn more about Twitter, MOOC-ing (um... can I make a verb out of that? I do have a Masters of English Education degree, which I have previously touted to former students as my "golden ticket" to coining whatever I want to!), and being more adamant about blogging.  I have had a couple blogs for several years and am really good at changing the backgrounds and themes not so good about actually writing on them. 

Here's to 13 weeks of learning fun... please don't point and laugh at my attempts to Tweet and blog (to my face anyhow... turn your computer camera off, please, before doing so!)

T-OOTLE-oo!

Melissa