Introducing the Bible

 

to the

 

21st Century Reader

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dieter Tieman

 

 

Introducing the Bible

to the 21st Century Reader

 

 

by Dieter Tieman, 49 Pueblo Street

COPACABANA   NSW    2251  Australia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright  © Dieter Tieman, 2005

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is an edited version of a series of lectures

given at Kincumber Uniting Church

during the first half of 2004.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ISBN 0-9579940-1-X

 

Tieman Publishing 2005


 

CONTENTS

 

 

                                                                                             Page

Foreword                                                                                                               7

Preface                                                                                                                   9

Part One  Introducing the Old Testament                                                      11

 

1.     Who is this Hebrew God?                                                                          13

2.     The Bible                                                                                                       17

                Interpretation

                Authority of the Bible

3.     Introduction to the Oral Period                                                                  21

                Dating and Authorship of the Old Testament

                The Four Sources theory for the whole Pentateuch

                Genesis after its final edition

4.    Historical Books or “The Lesser Prophets”                                           30

                History in the Biblical sense

                Joshua

                Judges

                Samuel,  and the rise of the Prophetic Movement

                Kings

5.     Prophets from the Pre-Exile period                                                            36

                Introduction to Prophetic Movement

                Nathan

                Elijah

                Elisha

                Amos

                Hosea

                Isaiah 1

                Micah

                Zephaniah

                Nahum

                Habakkuk

                Summary on Pre-Exile Prophets

6.     Prophets from the Exile period and after                                  44

                Jeremiah (627-586? bce.)

          Lamentations

          Habakkuk (contemporary of Jeremiah)

          Ezekiel

          Obadiah, (servant of YHWH)

          Isaiah 2 or Deutero Isaiah (chapters 40-55) - still in Exile

          Isaiah 3  (chapters 56-66) - After Exile, back in Jerusalem

          Haggai  (probably born in exile)

          Zechariah, (a contemporary of Haggai),

          Malachi  (name means: "My Messenger")

          Chronicles

          Ezra, Nehemiah,

          Joel  (The name means "Yahweh is God")

          Daniel  (The latest book of the O.T.)

          Summary of the Prophetic movement:

 7.    Poetry and Wisdom Literature                                                                   52

          Psalms,

          Proverbs,

          Ecclesiastes,

          Song of Songs,

          Esther,

          Summary of Wisdom Literature.

          The Protesters  (so called by Spong p.64)                                    54

            Job,

            Ruth,

            Jonah

            Canon of Scripture

            Summary of the O.T. course

 

Part Two     Introducing the New Testament                                  58

 

8.      Introduction to the New Testament                                                        59

          A new approach to Interpreting the N.T.

          Three Stages in the Formation of the N.T.

          The Foundation of the Christian Faith

          Christology

          Introduction to the Gospels

9.      Paul’s Writings                                                                                           69

          Introduction

          Interpreting Paul’s Writings

          1 and 2 Thessalonians

          1 and 2 Corinthians

          Galatians

          Romans

          Philippians

          Philemon and Colossians

10.    Mark’s Gospel                                                                                             76

           Spong’s Lectionary Theory

11.    Matthew’s Gospel                                                                                      82

          Introduction to Matthew

          Comparing Matthew with Mark

          Theological Development in Matthew

          Writing the Gospel as Lectionary Material

12.    Luke-Acts                                                                                                    90

          Luke-Acts - About the Author

          The story of Jesus told against the Order of Torah

Genesis

Exodus

Leviticus and Deuteronomy

13.    The Book of Acts                                                                                       99

          The Book of Acts

          Jesus and Peter paralleled

          Jesus and Paul Paralleled

14.   John’s Gospel                                                                                               104

15.  Other Letters and Writings in the New Testament                                  110

        Ephesians

        1 + 2 Timothy; Titus

        Hebrews

        James; 1 + 2 Peter;  Jude;  1, 2 + 3 John

        Revelation

        History of The New Testament Canon

        Summary   

 

Bibliography                                                                                                         118

 

Appendix                                                                                                               120

                Mark’s Easter Vigil

                Jewish Pentecost Vigil

                Mathew’s Pentecost Vigil

                Comments of Jewish Feasts

 

Chart: The Jewish Calendar and the Liturgical Year                                       123

 


 


Foreword

 

What are we to make of the many and diverse stories and writings contained in that library of thought called the Bible?

 

Many church folk have grown up with the belief that this is God’s book, and the events noted therein, really happened.  Others are not that sure, but still feel it is an important book with equally important messages about God in the world, but need interpretation.  Still others claim it is not God’s word but a valuable collection of stories and recollections by various people who share a common search for meaning and spirituality.

 

With these and other opinions, Dieter Tieman has put together a series of group studies, expanded them, and now offers them as a resource to others who are ‘on a journey of discovery’.

 

He weaves some of the suggestions of the leading progressive theological thinkers of our day with his own, to present a thorough and honest book.  To use the current in-phrase - he has done his deconstruction well!  But he doesn¹t just leave it there.  He invites his readers to also share in the process of reconstruction.  And that is a very important invitation.

 

There is much in the biblical accounts with which we can no longer relate.  Our world views are very different in important ways.  But there is also much wisdom and re-imagining.

 

So I hope this book will be a helpful guide to all those who wish to continue their journey from a pre-critical belief to a 21st century ‘thinking’ and ‘living’ faith.  Because thinking theologically means more than just interpreting our given ‘orthodox’ biblical tradition and creedal statements.  It also means being willing to think differently now, than we have in the past.

 

 

Rex A E Hunt

Director

The Centre for Progressive Religious Thought

Canberra

 

 

Easter 2005. 

 

 


 

 

Preface

 

 

I wish to express my gratitude to all participants of the course at Kincumber Uniting Church, for their wonderful contribution to our discussions.  It has been a great learning experience for me, to walk together with you along a new path of knowing God, of making sense of our Christian faith, and to explore a way forward into the twenty first century.  Whilst John Shelby Spong was the inspirator for this course, I drew on many other theologians and commentators for my presentations.

I am not an expert on the Bible, in particular with reference to the Old Testament.  I did not study Hebrew.

                A Chinese pastor once said: 'Reading the Old Testament is like eating a large crab; it turns out to be mostly shell with very little meat in it'.  (Davidson p.11).  Is this how you see it?  I like crabs, even if it is mostly shell!  I hope that you too will like and value the Old Testament as much as the New, for we must remember, if we didn't have the Old Testament, there would be no New.  In fact, if we don’t understand the Old Testament, we won’t be able to fully understand the New, let alone be able to follow Spong and other modern theologians who are trying to make sense of the Bible for us in the 21st century.

                Spong said, after he had published his book Living in Sin:  "Sex drove me to the Bible." (p.1)  In a strange way this applies also to us, particularly in the Uniting Church, with the present debate about homosexuality and leadership.  When I saw some of the arguments for and against gay ordination in Insights, (our NSW Synod paper) it really gave me the creeps. It was then that I realized that before we can enter this debate in any meaningful way, we need to know more about the Bible, how it came to be written, who the writers were, and what kind of life the first hearers/readers lived.  So I became motivated enough to run this introductory course, no matter how basic or rudimentary.

                Meanwhile, our Uniting Church was prompted to establish a Task Group on the understanding and use of the Bible.  It issued a most helpful Report, from which I would like to quote one paragraph:

 

"It is time for the church to move on beyond the present impasse towards fresh ways of valuing, using and interpreting the Bible. While scholars have a role to play in this process, such a breakthrough must grow organically over many years from within the life of a church reclaiming and befriending the Scriptures as a life-giving, transformative and faith building gift of God to the Church" (Task Group  4.2.7).

 

Let us keep the last sentence as our motto for this booklet:

 

"To reclaim and befriend the Bible as a life-giving, transformative and faith building gift of God to us."

 

 

 

 

 

Copacabana, April 2005

D.T.

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Part One

 

 

 

Introducing the Old Testament


 


 

 

 

Chapter One

 

Who is this Hebrew God?

 

Quoting from the Task Group Report we said the Bible is "God's gift to us."  Before we look at the gift, let us look at the giver.  The name theology really means ‘God Talk’.  If we look at all the different types of theologies, we may discover that people have talked about God in so many different ways, that some people are confused.  “Which is the right way to talk about God”? they may ask.  Let me say from the outset, there is no right way, not one person has all the answers, but many people had a profound spiritual insight, or experience of God, which they shared with others.  In the course of human history, we may be able to observe, what we might call an evolution of thought about God over the centuries or millennia.  Each theologian built on the foundation of others, and new theologies evolved, almost like the evolution of the species.  This evolution is never finished.  It must also be said that God should never be taken for granted, neither by the church, nor by individuals.  Only if and when we’ve become aware of the spiritual side of life, which may have given us a new direction or a new purpose in life, can we really speak about God.  Such speaking comes from those who are not impartial observers, but convinced participants.  This prompted Schofield to write: "The whole Bible is propaganda", (p.9) and the purpose of this 'propaganda' in the Old Testament is, to tell us something about this Hebrew "God".

                Who is this Hebrew God?  We may need to let our imagination help us first to answer the question, how did the idea of "God" start in the first place?  When homo sapiens still lived in caves, we could imagine that the ‘awareness of the divine' may have dawned on them, like the following story illustrates:

 

A group of homo sapiens have found shelter in a cave, when a fierce storm approached.  They were terrified by the lightening and thunder outside.  Although they didn’t know what it was, they thought that there was someone who wanted to kill them with fire, and that terrible noise was caused by that someone’s footsteps.  Who could that someone be?  They all huddle together and the most experienced among them said: “It can’t be someone like us.  It must be someone much, much bigger, with a terrible power.  It could be his voice and his fire.  And they may have called that power Thor (the Scandinavian god of thunder).  When they experienced earthquakes, they found another name for it.  Eventually they had a name for many terrifying experiences in their life.  When they started to till the land, they gave names for the one who sent the rain, who gave them good harvests, for the sun and moon.  So not only the powers they feared were so named, but also those that were beneficial to them.

       All these were life experiences they could not understand.  To early humans these were caused by powers from beyond.  They called these powers gods.  When things went wrong for them, like the harvest washed away, or there was no crop because of a drought, they would say: "the gods are angry".   They might then try to ‘bribe’ them to make them change their mind.  So they gave them something they themselves valued, and called it sacrifice.

          Eventually, a cult grew around these gods.  They developed elaborate worship.  The worthy among them were appointed priests to officiate at these sacrifices and functions.  (Here ends our imagined story).

 

                Turning now to the question: “who is this Hebrew God”? we might get some answers from ancient History:

                One of the earliest cults developed in Egypt. (see Egyptian Mythology)  Egypt was ruled by kings (pharaohs), who had absolute authority.  They claimed to be a god among other gods, and so had power over life and death.  They had priests and an elaborate ritual for worship, festivals and other celebrations.  After many years and many kings, a king called Amenhotep IV ruled Egypt (from 1375 to 1358 bce.)  He considered Aten (the sun god) to be the supreme power of life.  He claimed that Aten was not just the supreme deity and fount of all the others, but was in fact the only god worthy of worship.  He was to be worshipped as an abstract, yet ever-present being by all the people of the whole universe. (Egyptian Mythology p.99)  This is a truly remarkable new theology! 

                The king later changed his name to Akhenaten as it was believed that one’s name described the person's being.  Amenhotep meant ‘Amon is content’, i.e. his allegiance was to Amon, whereas Akhenaten meant ‘It pleases Aten’ i.e. a subject of Aten.  His wife was Nefertete.   He built the city of Akhetaten – ‘Horizon of the Aten’ - now Tell el-Amarna, with temples and palaces in the name of Aten. 

                After only 17 years on the throne, the king died, with no male to succeed him.  One of his daughters married Tut-ankh-Amon, who became king.  As his name tells us, he returned to the worship of Amon, and there is evidence that the priests of Aten were persecuted.  Is it possible that a remnant of the followers of Aten survived and under the leadership of Moses fled during these persecutions?  We don’t know, but we do know that Moses promoted a monotheistic God (there is only one god).  He could have been influenced by Akhenaten.  Mose means 'child' in Egyptian, and we believe that he was brought up in the royal household, as described in chapter two of Exodus, and later became the leader of the refugees. 

                In the Cairo Museum there is a stone (stele) from around 1230 bce. when Pharao Merneptah reigned.  This shows an inscription about his conquests of Libya, the Hittites, Canaan, Askelon, Gezer, Yenoam and: “Israel is ravaged and has no offspring.  Palestine is widowed.”  (Bible As History p.130)  The name for the Israelis is Habiru, or nomads, dependants, foreigners. (New Bible Dictionary p.511).  This seems to be the earliest written record containing the name of the Hebrew people.

                For the next two to three hundred years, these stories about Moses, the time in Egypt, the Exodus etc. would have been passed on around camp-fires at night or at religious ceremonies/cults, long before they were written down.  As the Bible contains some conflicting passages about this period, Spong is asking whether there may have been two traditions of Moses preserved in our Bible.(Resc. p.41) 

 

"Most of his religious ideas can be linked with the dawning universalism of a most unusual Pharaoh ... Akhenaten.  Yet some of the ideas attributed to Moses are anything but universal, caught as they are in tribal patterns.  Were there really two persons who have been subsumed under the name of Moses in the memory of Israel?  .... Could this explanation account for the tension between the lofty idea that "God is the creator of all, and all are in God's image", and the barbaric orders to "kill every man, woman and child of the Amalekites," both of which are said to come from the God of Moses?"

.....Was the original Moses killed in the wilderness in one of the many rebellions against this leader that the biblical narrative speaks of?  And was he replaced with a Hebrew whose warlike tribal experience reflected a God who was conceived of as a warlike tribal deity?  In time, were these two figures merged into a single person with a continuous, although not always compatible, narrative in the folklore around the camp fires?"

 

                Whatever it was, the story of the Exodus has become the history of the formation of Israel.  The people, and particularly the priests, saw in those events God's hand, the one and only God, Yahweh.

 

“O God, when you led your people, when you marched across the desert, the earth shook, and the sky poured down rain, because of the coming of the God of Sinai”  (Ps.68:7-8).

 

                This story had become for the people, God's guidance for any event in the future.  And so it was passed on from mouth to mouth, from one generation to the next, in the form that God had initiated the Exodus, and that God had acted decisively.  This story became the cult of Israel.  But other interpretations of God were put alongside:  (1) A mighty and powerful tribal leader;  (2) a conqueror of nations;  (3) a creator God of all the universe, and all are made in God's image;  (4)  a life-giver;  a protector in times of trouble;  (5)  a guide for moral living;  (6)  a loving shepherd, father, husband, offering forgiveness for waywardness;  (7)  a universal power of love.  A very rich concept indeed!

                To put this against a modern theologian, let me quote a couple of paragraphs from Spong's book: "Beyond Moralism".  They are important for us to consider:

 

"God can be experienced but not explained.  Words can point to God, but they cannot contain God.  Creeds tell true stories of faith, but creeds can never exhaust the ongoing stories.  God is beyond and more than any human system of thought.  Countless times we have fallen into heresy by forging our small and partial truths into religious clubs to beat into submission anyone who did not agree - and always in the name of God.

       There are those who seem to be convinced that God is a member of their worship tradition.  God is not a Baptist, Anglican, Roman Catholic, [or Uniting] ....  God does not prefer the King James Bible or the Book of Common Prayer, but we trust, all participate in and point to who God is, but God cannot be adequately described by those human constructions.

       No nation or race captures the whole truth of God.  God is not American (etc) ...  God is not white, black or oriental.  God is not a he.  Yet each of these ways of describing God does share in the divine truth.  We are simply limited by language, imagination, and finitude.

       No faith system can claim identity with God.  God is not a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Buddhist.  Until we accept the partiality of all religious systems, our religious arrogance will violate God's word against bearing false witness"- (e.g. the Ninth Commandment, Ex.20:16)

Christians are not settlers, but pilgrims.  Settlers circle their wagons and prepare to guard their turf against the enemy.  But as pilgrims, Christians are always moving, always widening their circle of experience to gather new acquaintances who tell God-bearing tales of lives lived differently from their own.  Unchanging conviction stops pilgrims in their tracks and puts an end to story-telling and therefore an end to living faith."  (Beyond Moralism, p.128)

 

These are challenging words indeed!

                How would we describe “God” at this point?  What is your own concept of God, or what does "God" mean to you?  Each person has, of course, a valid answer for him- or her-self at a given time.  My own version is at this moment:

 

"God is a universal energy that enables each person to respond with awe and admiration to the universe, and so reach out to others to share all that which is good, loving and life affirming".

 

                In this chapter we looked at the Giver.  Our next one will be dealing with God’s gift, the Bible.


 

 

Chapter Two

 

The Bible

 

 

Referring again to the Task Group Report, this section will deal with God’s gift, the Bible, or often referred to as ‘The Word of God’.

                As far as the Old Testament is concerned, there are actually two versions of it:

 

1.       The Protestant Old Testament canon, or rule, of Jamnia (now Jabneh, south of Tel Aviv), written in Hebrew and agreed to at the end of the first century ce. 

2.       The Catholic Old Testament, which includes the Apocrypha, meaning that which is hidden, written in Greek, dating from about 300 bce. This is known as the Septuagint. It was used in Jesus' days in Greek speaking Synagogues.

 

The Old Testament contains a collection of many books.  The earliest written material comes probably from Jerusalem and dates shortly after the death of King David ca.960 bce.). (Resc.p.40).  The latest book was written about 150 bce., during the Maccabean Revolt.

                As mentioned earlier, many stories go back to oral tradition, especially the Torah, as the first five books of the Bible are also called.  As in the evolution of the species, where many species became extinct, so in the evolution of the Bible too, many stories were forgotten, but those that sustained the people as a community, which were necessary for life, those were remembered and eventually written down.

                How the Old Testament came about to be written is, of course, obscure.  No one knows for certain.  But most scholars would agree today, that the theory originally proposed by the 19th century German theologians Graf and Wellhausen, is by and large still valid today. Their theory is called ‘the four-document theory’, which will be dealt with in chapter three.

                Since there is such a long gap between the events and the written record, and since the Bible is ‘propaganda’ (see p.13), and the aim has always been to tell us something about this Hebrew God, we need to interpret the text: not only from the original text to modern English (translation), but also from an ancient world view (a three-decker universe) to our days of space travel, from ancient concepts like demon possession and exorcism to present day insights of psychiatry etc.  Jews and Christians have always looked for a deeper meaning than the literal one.  Therefore, both consider most of these stories as being inspired.  The Jews call this interpretation midrash.  Our next task then is, to look at what is involved when we interpret the Bible.

 

Interpretation

 

As the originals were written in Hebrew or Greek, (only few in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke), they had to be made accessible by scholars through translations.  There are many versions, like the King James translation, RSV, Good News and many others.  The stories are told in a thought form which is far removed from ours.  We need to consult, therefore, history, archaeology, anthropology and other disciplines.  We need to know something about the cult, religion and customs of ancient times, and about the development of science, and to be informed about our present world view.

                It was mentioned earlier, that God in the Bible is described in many different ways:  on the one hand the writers thought that there were many gods (Poly-theism), then that God was like an absolute king or despot, but also God was seen like a shepherd.  Some saw him as a powerful universal creator, whereas Spong sees God as Love, Life, and Being.

                A debate on Compass (a religious programme on the ABC) not long ago showed two atheists or rationalists, (Philip Adams was one of them), and two people who claimed to be spiritual (‘they claimed to have faith’).  Geraldine Dougue did her very best to keep both sides in opposition for the sake of the debate, I guess.  On the one side you had ‘reason’, on the other ‘faith’.  This seemed absurd to me, as I have always understood that faith goes together with reason or understanding.  For me it is not rationalism versus spiritualism, as it was presented!

                Firstly, as God has given us all a mind with which to think, a blind faith would not be satisfying for most of us.  Spong has a famous saying:  He doesn't want to leave his brains at the church door!  Secondly, we need to nurture our faith with understanding.  In other words, our faith needs to make sense.  St.Anselm of Canterbury, who lived from 1033 to 1109 ce, already realized that.  He said:  "For I do not seek to understand, in order to believe; but I believe in order to understand.  For this too I believe, that unless I believe, I shall not understand."  (Anselm:Proslogion, 158:227 p.73).  In other words: Faith nurtures our understanding, and understanding will enhance our faith.

                Because we are all made differently, not only in looks, but understanding, education, back-ground etc., there are many different approaches to the Bible.  You will find representatives from the whole spectrum of theology; from those who believe that the Bible was dictated by God and that every word of the Bible is literally true, to those who think the Old Testament has been superseded by the New and is therefore no longer needed. (see: "Diverse Approaches to the Bible" in Task Group, 4:3)  Most of us would find themselves somewhere in the middle between these two extremes.

 

The Task Group urged all: [3.3] "There exists a wide range of approaches to the Bible" and asked that we "emphasise the importance of respecting differences of approach both to the Bible and to theological issues generally". We (Task Force) have had the privilege of journeying together and learning from each other. We ask the Uniting Church to do the same. This Report suggests some ways and means in what can only be a continuing process:

                "Discussion about how we might interpret the Scriptures faithfully will only be fruitful in an atmosphere of trust, a quality easily lost in times of conflict. There has never been uniformity in the Church regarding the right interpretation of the Bible. Dr. Ian Breward reminded the task group in a paper on ‘The Use of the Bible from 500 – 1600’ that “Differences in biblical interpretation are as old as Christianity. There has never been a period when everything was really settled. Schism, excommunications and anathemas partly solved the problems in different regions, but that set of 'solution' is not desirable or practicable in our world where contested ideas cannot be excluded. We are challenged to find unity within diversity." (Task Group 4.2.3)

 

This reminds us that we have started to "reclaim and befriend the Scriptures as a life-giving, transformative and faith building gift from God to us."

 

Authority of the Bible

 

In which sense can we speak about the Old Testament as ‘The Word of God’? or, what is the authority of the Old Testament?

                There are several kinds of authority:  Absolute authority (authoritarian) - the law is laid down and people must follow; delegated authority (like in the church or government); collective authority (by vote, either consensus or majority); internal authority (where we respond to our conscience, or where we respond in gratitude, completely voluntarily).  The latter is known in the Bible as covenant.

                Who gave such authority to the Old Testament?  Were they Priests, Scribes, or the Church?  The Canon had actually been voted on, either by consensus or by a majority.  Since then it has been fixed.  The Task Group writes in 4.2.5:

 

(a)  The Bible grew out of the life of the early church and the church remains the proper home of the Bible, the “community of interpretation” within which the Scriptures find their proper context. But the church does not “possess” the Scriptures. The church lives under the authority of Scripture and of the risen Christ to whom the Scriptures bear witness.

 

(b)  The Old Testament tells of God’s call to a people and of their attempts to live in covenant partnership with God, embodying his liberating love in their social life and expressing their devotion in prayer, in moral living and in hope. The Hebrew Scriptures are those documents which helped the early church understand Jesus and what God was doing through him.

 

(c)  As we enter the biblical story, allowing it to become our story, as we open our lives to wisdom and guidance beyond what is in our own minds and experience, over and over we find ourselves addressed, summoned, graced by the same divine presence as is witnessed to in Scripture. .....  It is this continuously experienced capacity within the Scriptures, Old and New Testaments alike, to mediate to the community of faith a fresh grasp of the saving work of God in Christ, which marks them as authoritative. The Scriptures point us to God in Christ who alone has true authority in the church. The Bible is thus, an indispensable means rather than an end.

 

Spong thinks that once we have escaped the strictures of a literal approach to the Bible, we see so much more of its truth and beauty:

 

"We hear that Word in creation, where this God proclaimed that everything divinely created was good and that male and female had both been created in God's image.  That "Word of God" fuelled every human movement for justice from the fight to end slavery and segregation to the feminist movement to the peace movement to the gay and lesbian rights movement.  That Word of God challenges the prejudice that grows out of our limited knowledge, our tribal identities, our economic systems, and our sexual fears." (Resc. p.75).

 

But not all parts of the Bible do that, neither is the Bible read in its totality at worship services.  Large parts are totally ignored.  This is evidence of a natural selection of the evolution of theology.

                In our next chapter we shall be looking at the different authors of the

 Pentateuch, and the dates these were written.


 

Chapter Three

 

The Oral Period

 

 

The first five books of the Old Testament are called the Pentateuch, Torah, Law, or sometimes: The Five Books of Moses.  Some of the events described happened a long time before they were written down.  The Hebrews looked on these as the supreme rule to govern themselves and for personal guidance and devotion.  For us in the 21st century, however, we can no longer read these books as they have been passed on to us.  Even the Jews in the time of Jesus had to face the question how to bring scripture up to date.  They called this process midrash, an interpretation to bring out the meaning of a passage.

                To help us sift through “the shells to get at the meat of the crab”, as mentioned in chapter one, we need to do what commentators do, namely to find out in what period certain passages were written, their historic background, who wrote them, and what certain words meant then and what they mean today.  This is often forgotten by most ‘literalists’.  Also, some of the writers, especially the Prophets, were convinced that God prompted them to write a particular message.  So they wrote: “God said”.  In some churches even today the words are said: “hear the Word of God” before a scripture reading.  This is to indicate that many passages are ‘inspired', that they have still a message for us all today.

                For this reason, our question must always be: 'what does a passage or a story mean' to us, and not ‘is this true’?  Why did the writer tell us the story in this particular way?  What spiritual experience lies behind it?  In other words, we try to capture the mood, the conviction of the writers, and so look behind their stories and sayings.  Above all, the Old Testament is, of course, the whole Bible of the Jews.  They call it 'the Law', 'the Prophets' and 'the Writings'.  For them, like for us, it is a divinely revealed and sacred literature, where Law means guidance, direction, or instruction, rather than what we mean in our legal sense.  Right from the beginning, this Law was presented through interpreters, like Priests, scribes etc.  These priests said that the Prophets and the Writings explained the Law.  It was the practice of Jewish priests and scribes, to use 'proof-texts' , or quotes from the Torah, to bring home their point. 

                When this practice was taken up by the priests in the Christian church, in time it gave more and more power to the hierarchy and they eventually preserved the right to be the sole interpreters of sacred Scripture.  This is when some thinkers clashed with the authority of the church.

                Spong illustrates this point by telling the story of Galileo, (1564-1642) who was a mathematician/scientist.  In 1610, through his own observations, Galileo confirmed the theory of Copernicus, the father of modern astronomy and a contemporary of Luther, who stated that the sun is the centre of our solar system, not the earth, contradicting the teaching of the church, which had based its theology on Joshua 10:12-13 and others.

                Galileo taught in Pisa, Italy in the 16th century.  The Roman Catholic Church, which then had complete authority over all people, forced Galileo to recant on pain of death from his 'non-scriptural' assertion.  Not till 1991 did the Pope admit that the church had been wrong.  By then nobody really cared.  (New Christ.p.9)  So to let the church decide what the 'norm of interpretation' should be, is not always helpful.

                It has been established that science and faith need to be held together in tension.  Faith cannot tell us anything, for instance, about the origins of this world, whereas science does.  But science cannot tell us anything about the spiritual longings of us humans, whereas the Bible does.

                The Pentateuch is considered to be Israel’s history, but from our point of view today it is more a ‘confession of faith’. (Westermann p.4)

                With an extreme literalist point of view, the world would have begun about 4004 bce, yet we know from science that homo sapiens appeared about 500,000 years ago, or much earlier, and that the Planet Earth is something like 4-5 billion years old.  Therefore, when we talk about Creation, we need to distinguish between the ‘origin’ of this world and the ‘development of our faith’.  One is science, the other theology.

                So what does the story of creation say to us today?  If we look at both accounts in Genesis, (on this later) we see a three-decker universe, but they both tell us about a world created by God.  To me this means that we do not look at this world as a scientist, but as a feeling human being, who sees the beauty of this world.  It has such an affect on me that I often stand in awe and wonder before it, that I am reminded of that spiritual dimension of my life, which I want to call God.  Like a sun-set; a view; or perhaps a spectacular lightening at night.  I have a feeling about nature which lifts me beyond my known world into the sphere of the Spirit.  This gives me a feeling of gratitude deep within that gives my life meaning.  It is a religious response which cannot be scientifically analysed or explained.

 

Dating and Authorship of the Old Testament

 

Schofield said in his Introducing Old Testament Theology, that "a wall should always be dated by its mortar (i.e. when it was built), not by the date when the stones were formed."(p.23).  If we apply this to the Pentateuch, we see the stones as the stories that go way back into the distant past, and the wall as the book that was written down.  The past is irretrievable, so we can only look at the date when these books were written down.  A wonderful tool to determine the dates is called the four documents theory of Graf and Wellhausen, which we had mentioned earlier.

 

Yahwist or “J” Document

 

The first and oldest is the Yahwist writer, or commonly known as “J” (Germans spell it Jahweh).  The name indicates that the writer’s name for God is Yahweh (Ex.3:14).  It was written around 960 - 920 bce. during the early reign of King Solomon.  The story begins with the second creation story in Gen.2:4-4:26.  It is an epic story about the nation of Israel as viewed from Jerusalem.  God is portrayed in very human terms: he planted the garden, walked in the cool of the evening, and clothed the first humans.  All of humanity and the whole created order were completely bound up together.

                Although some may consider the writer’s view of God to be primitive or too human or earthy, there is evidence of a remarkable depth and insight not paralleled elsewhere.  For instance, the story of Moses’ call at the burning bush, where God’s name is revealed as: I am who I am, we have here a concept of pure being, taken up by none other than Spong.  Another gem remarked upon by Spong is found in Ex.33:18-23, where Moses asked to see the face of God.  But he is given only to see the back of God, which can be interpreted as we can only see God where God has been, a truth that we still experience today. 

                “J” is "fresh, colourful, and full of power; clearly the work of a single great mind.  He does not whitewash his heroes..." This writer "recorded the genius of Israel and made that genius normative for the future of the Hebrews." (Resc. p.44)  When the writer claimed that Yahweh is the only divine power at work in the universe, he affirmed a true mono-theism.  Yahweh is creator of all there is; the God of all nations through Adam - a truly remarkable view for the 10th century bce.

                His main purpose is to tell the story of the Exodus, and his hero was Moses.  A people who came from slavery in Egypt were formed into a great nation.  He argues powerfully that the slave heritage of Israel was an accident of history.  Behind their slavery the Hebrews were free, noble, and rich.  They are a people of promise in whose life Yahweh is constantly intervening to make good the divine word. (Resc.p.44)

                King and priests were God's anointed and ruled by divine right. "Thus the first strand of Israel's written history was royalist, hierarchical and strongly supportive of the institutions of monarchy and priesthood, as they were being lived out in Jerusalem." (Resc.p.46)

                The third Covenant, the Ten Commandments or Decalogue, is given:

 

 "I now make a covenant with the people of Israel.  In their presence I will do great things such as have never been done anywhere on earth among any of the nations.  All the people will see what great things, I, the Lord, can do, because I am going to do an awesome thing for you.  Obey the laws that I am giving you today." (Ex.34:10-11)

 

There are three different versions of the Decalogue, Ex.34:14-26, Ex.20:1-17, and Deut.5:1-22.  The Ex.34 version seems to be in its original form, where no editing took place.  Spong comments:

 

"In this version of the Ten Commandments (Ex.34) there is no reference to God having rested on the seventh day as the justification for the observance of Sabbath.  The reason for this omission is because the seven-day creation story of Gen.1:1-2:4 had not yet been written.  It was a much later work of art." (Resc.p.46)

 

The situation in Israel became chaotic after the death of King Solomon, around 920 bce. The northern tribes could never really accept the monarchy and Solomon's oppressive policy widened the gap between north and south.

 

"Following the death of Solomon, there was a rebellion and a civil war in the Hebrew nation, and the land was split into a northern kingdom, called Israel, and a southern kingdom, called Judah.  In the south, the Jerusalem temple and the royal house of David continued to be dominant.  But in the north, rebellion against both institutions had to be justified, and a new form of "church and state" relationship had to be designed.  These realities found expression in a new version of Jewish history that was to be the product of the northern kingdom." (Resc.p.46)

 

The Elohist or “E” Document

 

It’s author lived around 850 bce. in Samaria, the Northern Kingdom.  God is named Elohim.  El is the name for any god, Elohim, though plural, stands for the most supreme God.  "E" gives the northern kingdom's version of many stories in the Yahwist document.  Reflecting the sentiment of the people, “E” was anti-royalist, who suggested that the covenant was not made with the leaders, or Moses or the royal family, but with the people, who then chose their leaders and empowered them.  This meant that no priest, leader or king could claim permanent status over God's people.  The power given to the leaders/kings could be taken away if they failed to be sensitive to the people's needs.  Spong asks whether this may have been a pre-cursor of democracy. (Resc.p.47)

                "E" is less universal than “Y” and more nationalistic.  He begins with Abraham, who according to Spong (Resc.p.47) is not coming from Ur but who is a Bedouin, a wandering Aramean (Deut.26:5).  The story of the near sacrifice of Isaac (the name which means laughter) is another masterpiece of his (Gen.22:1-19).  It is told in parabolic fashion as a challenge to faith.  But his hero is Jacob, whose life story comes across most vividly and real.  Jacob is 'elected' over his elder brother, flees to his uncle Laban, loved Rachel, and eventually the trickster got tricked with Leah (Gen.29:15-30).  Rachel's grandson Joseph, who was the son of Ephraim, became subsequently the reason for the whole tribe of Hebrews to come to Egypt.  Then follows the most moving story of Joseph in Egypt (Gen.:39-47).

                It is not accurate history, but "an attempt to explain history of the present moment by shaping the folklore of the past that could have been at least one thousand years old". (Resc.p.48)

                "E" linked the patriarchs Abraham with the shrine of Hebron, Isaac with Beersheba, and Jacob with Bethel, all places of worship in competition with Jerusalem, which was the Southern Kingdom’s place of worship.  He probably knew the "J"-document, so he blunted its Judean emphasis.  Miracles and magic of the Egyptian plagues are his material.  He has God establish the covenant with the people first.  They then appointed Moses their leader.

                When the capital Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 721 bce., most of the leaders were exiled, but some escaped to Jerusalem, probably taking the "E"-document with them, where eventually it was amalgamated with "J".

 

The Deuteronomist or “D” Document

 

The word Deuteronomy means: ‘second giving or repetition of the Law’.  The dating is somewhat problematic, but it is generally assumed that Josiah’s reform in 621 bce. in Jerusalem (see 2 Kings 22:3f) is based on this document.  If this is correct, it must have been written during the century before that.  Cluniffe-Jones thinks it was written during the reign of Manasseh (692-638 bce.) and was then forgotten. (p.25)

                It contains great material, together with that of limited value.  It affirms the love of God, which calls us to respond with love and obedience.  Israel is a holy people.  It appeals to a social conscience.  On the negative side:  it is ruthless, harsh, rigid, and narrow.  Suffering is due to disobedience and prosperity is due to goodness. (Deut.p.18-23)

                In time Deuteronomy was added to the Jahwist/Elohist combination and the merged text was edited again, in the light of new insights.  When in 596 bce. Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, and the people were exiled, they took with them the growing sacred Scripture (J, E, + D) and the priests kept alive the tradition. 

                Spong comments that Deuteronomy:

 

"was a book that summarizes Jewish history.  If the Jews could be said to have a catechism (teaching their faith) it would be Deuteronomy.  This book rehearsed the law and the history of the Jews and commended it to the next generation.  So the custom developed, of using Deuteronomy to prepare converts." (Lib. p.74)

 

In the Jewish liturgy this was done before the celebration of the Passover.  We will return to this book and this custom when we deal with the New Testament.  During the exile, this sacred Scripture would get its final editing and revision.

 

The Priests or “P” Document

 

This document was probably compiled by the priests in Exile, after 596 bce.  The Babylonians had hoped that the Jews would lose their national identity in exile, but together with their sacred Scriptures, they did not succumb to that.  Priests like Ezekiel and much later Nehemiah and Ezra, met this national crisis:

 

"in a way no captive people had ever done.  They did it primarily by asserting the power of the religious tradition of the Jews over the total life of the people.  In the process they also edited and re-wrote massive parts of their sacred story." (Resc. p.53)

 

Jews had to be different.  Their distinguishing marks were circumcision, the Sabbath law, and kosher diet.  Many of the Psalms were written in that period.  The seven-day Creation story was written (Gen.1:1ff); and Synagogues were built for worship, as the temple in Jerusalem was no longer available to them.

                The main part of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers were re-written, and the Combination J, E, + D were thoroughly edited by "P".  For instance, the story of Noah was altered (seven pairs of clean animals, and one pair of unclean in Gen.7:1-10).  The collection of manna in the wilderness was twice the daily ration on the sixth day, (Ex.16:4).  The rational for the Sabbath was added to Ex.20 9 in the Ten Commandments.  Furthermore, circumcision was added to Abraham's story, and kosher food was incorporated.  "A history of every ritual observed in Jewish worship entered the sacred story," (Resc.p.54) Moses was said to command the Sabbath day, Abraham the practice of circumcision etc.

                Many textual contradictions in our Bible today come from the amalgamation of the four documents into its final form as we have it today in the Pentateuch.

                The book of Genesis has a special place in the Old Testament.  It describes the beginning of time, and the founding of the Hebrew clan.  Exodus describes the formation of the Hebrew faith.  These books, as they appear in their final form, will be discussed briefly in the next section.

 

 

 

Genesis 

 

The first Book in the Old Testament has been given the name Genesis, which means origin.  During the Oral Period, the message was passed on by filtering it through "subject after subject, until it was either forgotten or took its place in tribal folklore to be repeated generation after generation". (Resc.p.37).  The first 11 chapters of Genesis form one section of it.  The writer or writers try to explain what in those days was un-known, like the origin of the planet, first humans, sin and the variety of different languages, just to name a few.

The second creation story (Gen.2:4ff) is the older one, also called “The Garden of Eden”, which comes from the “J” source.  Man was created first, then the plants, the animals, and finally Woman.  The problem of sin is explained in terms of Man’s disobedience to God’s command.  This seems arbitrary to the 21st century reader.  Spong thinks we all started with a survival instinct as a baby, which becomes selfishness as we grow up.  The 'fall' is not due to anything in particular our ancestor (Adam) could have done, but simply that we have advanced from clan, to tribe, to nation, and now to a global community, where the extreme selfishness of individuals and nations can lead to the destruction of us all.

 

 "Do not those very qualities that once served our need to survive now threaten to annihilate us as we struggle to be the keeper of our brothers and sisters in a shrinking, overpopulated world that can no longer absorb the garbage we selfish Homo sapiens create in our quest for individual pleasure?" (Resc.p.35)

 

Already in 1967 Bishop J.A.T. Robinson, taking Sydney Carter’s quote for the title of his book: But that I can’t believe.  Carter’s verse goes like this (Robinson p.11):

 

You can blame it on to Adam,

you can blame it on to Eve,

you can blame it on the apple,

but that I can’t believe.

 

Apart from sin, the problem of guilt (tree of knowledge of good and evil), and death (tree of life) is dealt with in a most imaginative way, but to take these stories literally, would be nonsense for us in the 21st century.  The overall purpose of "J" seems to be, to re-assure the readers that God was and is in charge of the whole world and of each individual.

                Then “J” deals with the perception of God’s anger over the ever-present transgression of people, as described in the story of the Flood.  But the seed of God's love is also evident, as described in the first contract (or Covenant) made with Noah (Gen.9:1-17):   "never again will all living beings be destroyed by a flood" (9:11)  So that people would not forget, the symbol of the Rainbow was given.

                The final issue in the first section is trying to explain the great variety of languages in the world with the story of the Tower of Babylon.  It is said that language separates people from one another and from God. The New Testament story of Pentecost is a reversal of this dispersal, which a literalist interpretation would not understand.

                From Genesis chapter 12 we enter a new section, which deals with the Patriarchs.  This is still pre-history, and belongs to the oral period.  We meet first with Abraham, the Father of the Jews, Christians and Muslims, the three great monotheistic religions.

                We learn about the Second Covenant with Abraham (Gen.15:18-21): - God's pledge of a son to Abraham: Isaac (15:4), that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars (15:5), "I promise to give your descendants all this land from the border of Egypt to the Euphrates River" (18-21).  Had Abraham been a historic person, he would have lived around the 19th century bce, a time when Polygamy was still practiced, child sacrifices took place, and when Polytheism was the norm.

                The story of Isaac’s son Jacob is a brilliant one of deception and counter deception, a story of real life and one of the favourites around camp-fires.  They are so vivid.  We hear of Jacob's twelve children, representing the twelve tribes of Israel, and about the change of his name to Israel (32:28), simply indicating that this is not literal history but deeply steeped in symbolism.

                With Joseph coming on the scene, the story of Israel's stay in Egypt is explained. Genesis ends with the death of Joseph.

 

Exodus

 

Several generations of Josephs Hebrew tribes have lived and died in Egypt.  We hear of a gradual enslavement of them until it became so bad that an escape was planned.  The person responsible for leading them out of Egypt (the Exodus), was Moses who lived around 1250 bce., still long before any written records were kept.  He was probably an Egyptian.  Rather reluctantly, he became the leader of the refugees.  We may find the story of God killing all first-born sons of Egypt rather strange, but what stands out is Moses’ concept of the one and only God.  We find here a monotheism similar to Egypt's King Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten) who might have influenced Moses. (see p.14)

 

With regard to the Levites, Spong wants to know: "were they also connected to the original Moses as a priestly group whose roots were likewise Egyptian?  Are they the ones who kept the original Egyptian Moses and his ideas alive in Israel so that they could challenge year after year and generation after generation the narrow, angry tribal deity that dominates the pages of Hebrew Scriptures?  Did the prophetic movement rise out of the Levitic heritage?" (Resc.p.42)

 

The other books of the Pentateuch are Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.  Leviticus describes how the priests were left in charge of worship and with upholding the law, Numbers describing the experience of the Hebrews in the wilderness, and Deuteronomy, summarising the other four books, as was mentioned before.  But what link there is between Moses, and how the Israelites were forged into a nation during the time in the wilderness is a question scholars will still have to answer. 

                In summarising the Pentateuch I would like to quote from a statement by Chris Budden, the General Secretary of the Uniting Church.  He said in a commentary on 2 Cor.3:17 in With Love to the World (February 2004):  "Where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom".   "When our obedience to God is shaped by books and codes of law we are unwilling followers, but when the Spirit enters our lives our deepest desire is to serve God and it is love alone that binds us and we are free."  I think when we have separated the shells from the crab-meat, we find the seeds of this freedom already present in the Law or the Torah of the Old Testament.

 


 

Chapter Four

 

Historical Books

 

 

The books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are called by the Jews “The Lesser Prophets”.

                I have always loved history when I went to school. I learnt dates by heart, names of kings, their battles fought, and I was fascinated by the heroes and great men of history.  Little did I realise then that this type of history was only partial.  It left out much about the ordinary people, those who had to make a living in times of war, who were often persecuted and oppressed.  I did not learn much about their religion, what they thought, what they felt.

                When we turn to the Old Testament's so-called historical books, we have in a way a more complete history, which also deals with these issues.  However, one thing we won't find in the Bible is a western concept of accurate history, with facts and dates etc.  Schofield puts it this way, (p.16) what we have in the Old Testament is "not history lectures, but prophetic sermons."  History is being used to tell what God had done.  As the Law is concerned with God's guidance and is not a textbook for general science, we must remember that the Historical Books are religious works, always pointing to God, the Lord of history.  This is the Jewish way of writing sacred history.  They had a fairly unique sense of history.  Other nations, like Egypt, recorded the successes of their kings.  The Bible is a continuous story, telling us about the fate of a whole people, beginning with Abraham through to the Fall of Jerusalem in this chapter, (586 bce.) and how this history is linked with God.

                This could only take place because there was the conviction that things happened with a purpose.  That purpose was to learn about this Hebrew God, who had led them out of Egypt, and what they could learn for the future. (Davidson p.23)

                When editors at a later period dovetailed the material before them, they altered it, not to present a more accurate history of what had happened, but rather to re-interpret the tradition so that it spoke to a given present situation.   (Bowden p.46)

                So to ask: 'is it true' in a literal sense, is the wrong question.  We need to ask, how did the writer see God in all this?  Has there been a new insight, a growth or a further step in the evolution of their understanding of God?  As the Old Testament editors were concerned that the message of previous writers should remain alive for their age, they sometimes left the text and added their new understanding, or they altered the text, not because they thought the previous authors were wrong, but so that the message would be remembered in the new situation.  That was good old Hebrew tradition.

                They used what is known as 'midrash Haggadah', a method of explaining a theological truth by telling a story.  They could thus add tales, parables and the like, or use a story of the past, to explain current experiences.  "This style is not concerned with historic accuracy. It is concerned with meaning and understanding." (Lib.p.36)

                The writers were speaking with an internal authority or conviction, so that they could proclaim: "God said", or "Thus says the Lord".  It was not a voice from somewhere, audible to others, but their insight into a current situation enabled them to criticise kings, priests, institutions or certain customs.  Their message was in line with God's teachings, with God's law, and that gave their message a divine authority.

                Our theologians today don't proclaim ‘Thus says the Lord', but through their studies they often share new insights, which may bring them to different conclusions than their predecessors or colleagues.  And there is no reason to get upset, if one doesn't agree with the one or the other.  As Gamaliel said in the Sanhedrin in Acts 5:38, when the apostles were accused before the Council, that they had spread a wrong teaching: "If it is of human origin, it will disappear, if it comes from God" it will survive.  In this sense our Theologians are Prophets of the present age.

 

Joshua

 

The first book in the historical section is the Book of Joshua. The Bible describes Joshua as Moses' successor.  After the death of Moses we read in Deut.34:9: "Joshua, son of Nun, was filled with wisdom, because Moses had appointed him to be his successor".  To re-enforce his conviction, that God was present in Joshua as God was with Moses, the writer uses a prophetic device.  As Moses parted the sea in Ex.14, so Joshua causes the water of the Jordan to be parted (ch.3).  Spong calls this: midrashic teaching.

                God had appointed Joshua the leader over all the people of Israel, to take possession of the land he had promised them long ago.  The Hebrew name Joshua means 'YHWH is salvation', the same as Jesus, the Latin name for Joshua.  Joshua is described as a successful military commander, a 'man of God' and loyal to him.  And so the story of the conquest of the 'promised land' is told.

 

There are two versions of this event:  The first is in chapters 1-12, which tells of a united people accepting Joshua's leadership, and recounts the swift conquest completed within a short period of time.  The conquest described was ruthless, bloody, and no mercy shown to women and children.  It is most likely that this version is from the “P”-document.

                Alongside this, the Old Testament presents another picture of the occupation (Judg. chapter 1, also Josh.13:1-6, 15:13-19, 63, 23:7-13).  Scholars think that this version is probably from the “D”-document.  It describes a long process accomplished by the efforts of individual clans, and was only partially completed.  The whole occupation caused only little conflict, but a constant warning was issued, to maintain 'racial and religious purity'.  Some clans may have joined together with another to drive out the original inhabitants.  Much to Joshua's anger (he described it as being against God's will), some Hebrews were absorbed by the indigenous population, as described in chapter 9 with the people from Gibeon.

                These two versions were eventually blended together.  It is a comment on the interpretation of Israel's life in the light of the Torah.  After the conquest, a great assembly held at Shechem is described in chapter 24.  Various tribes established a religious bond between themselves, and the covenant with God is renewed.  Although the time described here is straight after the Exodus, it was most likely written as a comment on the destruction of the Northern Kingdom in 721 bce. 

 

Judges  

 

The Judges were apparently tribal leaders, 'raised up by YHWH', to proclaim and adjudicate God's Torah.  Could these have been the fore-runners of the 'prophets' we meet later?  The development of this 'office' may go back to their early experience in the occupied land.  Once in Palestine, the tribes experience fierce fighting with the indigenous people.  From time to time they were oppressed by foreign invaders.  The Tribes were not a cohesive nation and their tribal disunity made them extremely vulnerable.

                These leaders (Judges) realised that their only way out was to emphasise their common faith in YHWH.  They encouraged the Tribes to come together on a regular basis to worship YHWH, first at Shechem, then Bethel, Gilgal and finally at Shiloh.  The shrines established there contained the ark of the covenant, a wooden box containing tablets of the Torah, and each centre would house them as appropriate.  They came together at these places to celebrate the covenant, their alliance with YHWH and worshipped him.

 

Samuel  -  and the Rise of the Prophetic Movement.

 

The first book ascribed to a prophet in the Old Testament is Samuel, a sign of the great esteem he was held in.  It is most likely a composite work of several authors.  Beginning with this book we have before us a more continuous story, narratives with far more detailed descriptions.  However, it is not History in our sense.  It is likely that some written records existed from this period, before they were collected and written up in the “J”- document, at the beginning of King Solomon's reign.

                Samuel trained under Eli (the last Judge/Priest).  He brought a spiritual revival and political unity among the tribes, and probably saved them from certain disintegration.  Samuel could be said to have started the prophetic movement, which had such a profound influence on the life of Israel - and of course later on the life of the Christian church to this day.  According to most prophets, God was seen as Israel's king, and so most of them opposed the monarchy.  Israel wanted to remain a theocracy in a most unique way.

                God was seen to rule directly.  The Prophets were considered to be a go-between, an intermediary.  The Philistines, who had entered Palestine (the name is a derivative of Philistines) a little later than the Hebrew clans, caused much trouble to the loosely confederated Hebrews.  After more than 100 years of continual fighting with the Philistines, Israel's loose organisation was so weakened, that when the Philistines made plans to conquer Israel, they were in serious trouble.

                Some time after 1050 bce, when Israel tried to stem the advance of the Philistines by bringing the Ark (YHWH's presence) into battle, they were defeated and the Ark was captured (1 Sam.4-1:11).  A large territory of Israel was conquered by the Philistines.  Israel was in turmoil. 

                Israel's guiding spirit through these dark days was Samuel. Many Israelites realised that their case was hopeless unless a strong leader could be found.  It must have been quite a desperate situation for them to agree to elect a king, though there is evidence of two different strands reporting this event:  one is tacitly favouring the monarchy, (1 Sam.9:1-10:6) (probably a "J"- document), the other bitterly hostile (ch.8; 10:17-27) (probably an "E"-document).

                When Samuel eventually agreed to take part in the election of Saul as King, it was in response to popular demand, voiced by the tribal elders (1 Sam.8:4-22).  "It is quite certain that Samuel, whatever his initial feelings, soon broke with Saul and became his bitter foe." (Bright, p.167)

                The theological issue here is a perceived rivalry between God and King.  Other nations around Israel had kings.  From history we know they ruled absolute.  This would have been quite unacceptable to the Israelis, as YHWH was their king, and God did not tolerate rivals.  Thanks to the respect the people had for Samuel, and owing to the emerging prophetic movement, a compromise seems to have been agreed upon.  The kings may rule over the people, but God would rule over the kings, and the prophets became spokes-persons for God.  Their task was to criticise the king when he went wrong.  In the next chapter we shall see the profound influence the prophetic movement had on the life of Israel.

                The second king dealt with in Samuel is David (1000 - 961 bce).  The war of succession was fierce.  David was seen as a rival of Saul.  In the end David won, Saul was killed in battle with the Philistines (together with three of his sons).  David, a military hero, was elected king, like Saul before him, but his rise to power involved certain novel features.

                He owed his success to his loyal troops, like a feudal leader, and he became the king over Judah without the consent of the other tribes of Israel (2 Sam.2:1-4).  The rest of Israel remained loyal to Saul, where his surviving son Eshbaal (Ishbosheth) was made king (2 Sam.2:8-11). 

                This is where the seeds for rivalry between Israel and Judah were sown.  David ruled over Judah only, for 7 years.  After Eshbaal's death and no further claimants on the throne, David was made, by popular acclaim, king over Israel as well.  How David achieved the final victory over the Philistines is unclear, but 2 Sam.8:1 simply states the fact.  But the Hebrews did not just look at ‘the facts’.  The significance of this is the theological implication.  What decided the issue in David's favour was, the people saw in him the man upon whom YHWH's spirit rested.  The principle of dynastic succession was not recognised. (1 Sam.16:13).  David's charismatic leadership was evidence that YHWH had designated him as king.  He was described as "obedient" to God, though the writer is not blind to his faults.

                For example 2 Sam.11-12 tells the story of Nathan, the prophet, criticising David's behaviour with his affair with Bathsheba.

                A new covenant is described in 2 Sam.7.  This bound YHWH to David and Zion (Jerusalem) for ever, "You will always have descendants, and I will make your kingdom last for ever.  Your dynasty will never end." (v.16)  This is an important concept to remember when we deal with the New Testament.

                But had the fear of a monarchy disappeared, because David was so successful?  Whatever it was, as we shall see later, the northern kingdom never accepted this point of view.  Out of this ideal king grew later the hope for a coming king, a coming Messiah, a son of David, who would make the Jews once again a strong nation.  An interesting section in 2 Sam.24f tells us of David ordering a census of all men capable of military service.  The result: 800,000 in Israel; 500,000 in Judah.  We shall meet with another census in the New Testament later.

 

Kings

 

This book continues with the history of the united Kingdom: death of David, reign of Solomon, (961-922 bce) and the divided kingdoms after him.  From here on actual written records exist.  We may assume therefore, that some of the historical events are more reliably reported, with the one proviso, that the writers were only interested in Israel's and Judah's relationship with God, not history as we know it.

                The story unfolds:  Solomon prays for wisdom, not for riches or a long life. (1 Kings 3:1-15)  Solomon builds the temple. (1 Kg.6:1-14)  By skilful diplomacy and vigorous commercial enterprise he enriched his kingdom (Davidson p.22).  Thus he was a successful king, and mostly popular with those who benefited from his reign.

                On the other hand, though, his extravagant tastes, heavy taxation and a policy of forced labour, alienated him from most other people.  Not surprisingly, on his death, the kingdom split into two, the northern kingdom of Israel (or Ephraim) and the southern kingdom of Judah.  The dynasty of David continued in Judah until the Babylonian exile in 586 bce, whereas Israel's dynasty changed immediately with Jeroboam (1 Kings 12:1-20) and a total of three different kings within the first 50 years. 

                It is thought that the reason for this lay in the constant opposition of prophets and priests against monarchical or dynastic succession.  This was evident until 721 bce, the Assyrian conquest.  Whilst dealing with the kings of Judah (from David to Jehoiachin), Kings is mainly interested in the spiritual side of their reigns, whether they observed The Law, and what the Prophets thought of them.  Each king is judged by his loyalty to God, but the writer passes negative judgment on many.

                In the next chapter we meet the Prophets Elijah, Elisha, and Isaiah, as we further discuss the Prophetic Movement

 


Chapter Five

 

Prophets from the Pre-Exile period

 

 

Introduction to the Prophetic Movement

 

The prophetic movement, beginning with Amos and Hosea, continued for some three centuries.  The classical prophets represent a new phenomenon for Israel.  These were the ones that wrote their own books, or had a book named after them.  It had a profound influence on the whole course of Israel's history and religion and indeed on the whole world.

                They were not so much innovators with new theological insight, with some exceptions, but more 'reformers', who reminded the people and the leaders of what they already knew. They adapted the tradition to new situations. Quite early material shows that Israel had a profound idea of God (the covenant) and a clear ethical consciousness.  "The prophets attempted to bring back the depth of the old insights, adding to them a new dimension which had been introduced by the best of insights of the wise men". (Bowden p.89/90)

 

"The prophetic movement was a Jewish gift to the world.  It was in touch with the Elohist mentality that placed all things, including the temple and royal family, under the judgment of the living God" (Resc. p.58)

 

The traditional view represented in the Old Testament is that prophets predicted the Future.  In the sense that they warned their people that unless they changed their way, the future would look bleak for them, this is correct, (or as someone said, they brought bad news in good times).  But Spong takes issue with those who think that the Old Testament is there to point to and be fulfilled by the New Testament.  He says:  "The prophets were thought to be something like fortune-tellers, who served as the divine predictors of future events". (Lib. p.31)

                This is not how the Hebrews saw it.  According to them, they were interpreters of present situations.  They used a story or borrowed a concept of the past and applied it to their new situation.  We will meet this when we come to the New Testament, where the writers were looking to the Old Testament, to interpret the death of Jesus, for instance.  Spong asks:

 

"Did the writer predict the events of the cross, or did the Gospel writers pattern their story of the cross after the very familiar Psalm"? (Resc.p.58)

 

Another view of the Prophetic Movement is expressed by Bright:

 

"They (the prophets) were men from every walk of life who had felt the compulsion of Yahweh's word and who often came to their vocation through some experience of call.  They took issue with the state and continually tried to influence its policies, but they never took part in any revolutionary activity." (Bright p.246)

 

They were telling people that YHWH demanded righteous living and that he alone should be worshipped.  As YHWH had once come to the people through his spirit-chosen leaders, so he came now to them through his prophets.

                In the 8th century bce. the state of Israel, though "externally strong, prosperous and confident of the future, was inwardly rotten and sick past curing". (Bright p.248)

 

Nathan

 

The first prophet to appear in the Old Testament was Nathan (see 2Sam.11:1-12:15).  He was famous for criticising David's affair with Bathsheba, and the subsequent 'murder' of her husband Uriah.  The extraordinary thing is that David repented, and after this event Nathan became David's closest adviser.  There is not much more to say on Nathan.

 

Elijah

 

He appears first in 1 Kings 17 - 19.  (v.1) "A prophet named Elijah, from Tishbe in Gilead, said to King Ahab..."  Ahab was the king of the Northern Kingdom, Israel.  Elijah is not reported to have written anything.  The principal author of this period is most likely "J" (Yahwist), although it describes the situation in Israel, not Judah, where he lived.  He followed in the tradition of Israel, being an anti-royalist.  He was fiercely opposed to any totalitarian monarch, though the neighbouring kings around Israel were this.

                Elijah belonged to the strictest tradition of Yahwism in Israel.  The hair mantle he was wearing was a symbol of their office.   1 Kings 18:1-40 describes him confronting the prophets of Ba'al.  These were the prophets that had compromised their Yahwist religion with foreign gods (Jezebel, the king's wife, came from Sidon in Phoenicia).  She had encouraged them in the worship of Ba’al.  Elijah, and a few others loyal to YHWH, opposed them all and Elijah told his followers to kill all the prophets of Ba’al.  Queen Jezebel, the daughter of King Ittoba'al of Tyre, was Elijah's principal antagonist.  Although always in fear of her, and fleeing many times, Elijah maintained his opposition, and suffered for it. 

                One day he had to flee from Jezebel's supporters across the border to Judah (Mt.Horeb - Sinai), where he spent forty days in a cave.  Forty signifies a new spiritual insight into God’s way.  There in the wilderness he had a profound experience of God - God was not in the wind, not in the earthquake, not in the fire, but in a soft "whisper of a voice" (or still small voice). (1 Kings 19:11-12)

                Elijah, of course, also opposed King Ahab, e.g. in the familiar story of Naboth’s vineyard, described in Chapter 21:  Elijah was also told to anoint Hazael as king of Syria, and Jehu king of Israel, in opposition to Ahab, to show Israel that God did not approve of him.  This was seen as treason, a very dangerous act.  Elijah also anointed Elisha as his successor, as the chief prophet of Israel. (1 Kg.19:15-16)  As Spong points out, Elijah (2 Kg.2:8) and Elisha (2 Kg.2:14) "were said to have parted the waters of the Jordan River to walk across on dry land," (Lib.p.36) in the same way as Moses and Joshua had done before them.  This was added to the records, not because it was history, but to show that God was with both of them in the same way as he had with Moses and Joshua.

                There is no book named after Elijah, but he was regarded in highest esteem.  In Jesus' days the Jews thought of Elijah as the prophet of all prophets.  This is reflected in the story of the transfiguration in Mark 9:2-13, where Moses represents The Law and Elijah The Prophets.

 

Elisha

 

He is Elijah's successor, who carried forward the aims of his master.  Opposition to the king continued to mount.  Elisha resisted the policy of the state with the help of other prophets loyal to the Yahwists.  The Yahwist writer reports more miracles and does his best for Elisha not to be overshadowed by Elijah.

                All the above three prophets are considered most important to the Jewish faith, but none of them had a book that was named after them.  The prophets with a name to their writing first appeared in the 8th Century bce.

 

Amos  (about 750 bce)

 

He is the first prophet whose message was recorded at length.  Although he came from Judah (Tekoa, on the fringe of the Judean wilderness) (1:1), he preached mainly to the people of Israel.  He was not a member of the official prophets paid for by king Jeroboam, and was eventually forbidden to speak at Bethel. (7:10-17)  He lived at a time of great prosperity for some, for others great poverty.  He is known for his great sense of social justice!

 

2:6-7: 'The Lord says: "The people of Israel have sinned again and again, and for this I will certainly punish them.  They sell into slavery honest men who cannot pay their debts, poor men who cannot repay even the price of a pair of sandals.  They trample down the weak and helpless and push the weak out of the way." 

 

Famine brought those who struggled to ruin.  Their property was foreclosed and they were evicted, because of the greed of the wealthy. (4:6-9)  He spoke against the tampering with the weights and measures (2:6-8).  Judges did not deal fairly with the people. (5:10-12)  Yahwism had become "lip service". (Bright p.242)  The priests of the state did not criticise the king as they were in his pay. (7:12-17)  The people had forgotten to keep their part of the covenant with YHWH, and a perverted theology developed:  "You ordered the Nazirites to drink wine and ordered the prophets not to speak my message".(2:9-12) (Bright p.243)

 

Hosea - followed Amos. 

 

He also prophesied in Israel, but because he came from there he was more vulnerable.  He seems to have come to be a prophet due to a tragic domestic experience. (chs.1-3)  This gave Hosea's message its characteristic shape.

                The covenant bond is like a marriage - YHWH is like Israel's husband, expecting from her faithfulness which a husband expects from his wife.  In worshipping other gods, Israel had committed "adultery" and so deserved to be "divorced". (2:2-13)

                The practice of overt pagan fertility cults with debasing rites were evident everywhere and sternly condemned by Hosea.  But in spite of all that unfaithfulness, God still loved his people (2:14-23); and so Hosea resolved to buy back Gomer, his unfaithful wife.  Hosea saw "God as the infinite and patient lover" (Spong p.59), who forgave Israel time and time again (throughout her long unfaithfulness).  We have here a most profound and new insight into the nature of God.

 

Isaiah 1  (chapters 1-39) (around 742 bce to 690 bce)

 

These chapters are considered by most scholars as having a different author than the rest of the book.  Chapter 39 seems to be an editor’s note to combine Isaiah 1 with Isaiah 2.  One can notice a different style and a different time all-together.  (see also the next chapter).

                Isaiah 1 began his ministry in Judah towards the end of the reign of Uzziah (about 742bce), then Jotham (742-735bce), Ahaz (735-715bce) and Hezekiah (715 to about 690 bce).  He was probably a relative of King Ahaz.  He certainly was his adviser.  During this time the shadow of Assyria had fallen over the land.  Isaiah saw Assyria as YHWH's tool (8:7) to punish the corruption not only in Israel, but also in Judah, and for rejecting YHWH.  By then Israel had decayed to such an extent, that its total disintegration was inevitable.  Yahwism was so diluted that the priests at the local shrines, pagans or half-pagans themselves, did not speak out against 'idolatry', when they broke the covenant law.  The clergy of the state cult had become officials and spokespersons of the government, and would therefore not criticise it. (Amos 7:10-13)  "They had placed their patriotic fervour at the service of the state and given it the blessing of YHWH." (Bright p.243)

                It was no surprise then, that Israel (Samaria) was occupied, and almost totally obliterated by the Assyrians in 721bce.  But Isaiah was not blind to the corruption that had set in also in Judah.  As he had denounced the state prophets in Israel, he also exposed their exploitation of the poor in Judah. (3:13-15)  Isaiah, though, sensed a return to YHWH in Judah.  When occupied Israel threatened king Ahaz, Isaiah encouraged him not to be terrified by this threat and not to make an alliance with them.  He told the king, "if your faith is not enduring, then you will not endure". (7:9)

                In reply to Ahaz's doubting, Isaiah told him that God himself would give him a sign that all will be well: "A young woman who is pregnant will have a son and will name him 'Immanuel', i.e. God will again be with Judah.  By the time he is old enough to make his own decisions, people will be drinking milk and eating honey". (7:14-15)  So King Ahaz felt strengthened by Isaiah, and thought that God would be with him and keep Judah from the same fate as the northern Kingdom.

                Hezekiah, Ahaz's son (715-687bce), seemed a stronger man than Ahaz.  He followed the prophets' call for reform, and the more conservative Judah seems to have repented and turned back to YHWH.  The people remembered the promise of God that the Davidic kingdom would last for ever.  Isaiah warns them:

 

"The sinful people of Zion are trembling with fright. They say, ‘God's judgment is like a fire that burns for ever.  Can any of us survive a fire like that?’ You can survive if you say and do what is right.  Don't use your power to cheat the poor and don't accept bribes.  Don't join with those who plan to commit murder or to do other evil things.  Then you will be safe; you will be as secure as if in a strong fortress.  You will have food to eat and water to drink." (33:14-16)

 

The longing grew for a better king, an ideal David, who would establish justice and peace in Judah, and so would make the promise come true:

 

“His royal power will continue to grow; his kingdom will always be at peace.  He will rule as King David’s successor, basing his power on right and justice, from now until the end of time.” (9:7)

 

Chapters 36-39 are almost identical copies of 2 Kings 18-20:19.  It is not known who copied whom, or whether Isaiah 1 wrote the passage in Kings, or even, if an editor of Isaiah added this passage to link it up with Isaiah 2, beginning with chapter 40.

 

Micah is a contemporary of Isaiah.  He lived around 750 to 687 bce. (straddling the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah). 

                He was probably of humble origin, denouncing the rich landlords, who were exploiting the poor farmers.(2:1-10)  Micah could not see any redemption of Judah and so proclaimed total doom for the nation and also the destruction of Jerusalem, and its temple raised. (3:12)  He indicated that the "security in the temple" preached by the state, was false.  In spite of this, Judah would be marvellously delivered and have a Davidic king, who would rule from Bethlehem. (5:2) He would usher in an age of peace.  Micah rejected the identification that linked the "Promise" with Jerusalem and it’s Temple.

                His primary message was, like Amos, against abuse of power by the wealthy over the poor.  How much Micah influenced King Hezekiah's reform described in 2 Kings 18:3-6 is not clear, but it can be assumed that such preaching encouraged the king, not only to reform religious practices, but also social and economic ones.  Taking David as his hero/example, Hezekiah's ultimate aim was to re-unite the northern and southern kingdoms like in David's time, but external politics, like the conquest by Assyria, and the people of Samaria themselves, were not ready for it.

                Micah also preached against religious exploitation by the priests, who were asking for ever higher offerings of sacrifice:

 

"Will the Lord be pleased if I bring him thousands of sheep or endless streams of olive oil?  Shall I offer him my first-born child to pay for my sins?  No, the Lord has told us what is good.  What he requires of us is this: to do what is just, to show constant love, and to live in humble fellowship with our God." (6:7-8)

 

Micah shows an extraordinary insight into true spirituality.  For him the whole practice of Temple Sacrifice was obsolete, also a new insight. 

 

Zephaniah  lived in Jerusalem during the reign of Josiah, between 640-609 bce, about 50 - 80 years after Micah.  In 1:1 he is identified as prophesying during the reign of King Josiah and as a great-grand-son of King Hezekiah himself.  With Jeremiah he may have laid the ground for, or further influenced, the Reform of Josiah in 621.  He carried forward the tradition of Isaiah 1.

                He denounced the religious and ethical sins of Manasseh's policy, which he interpreted as prideful rebellion against YHWH. (1:4-6)  Zephaniah believed that "a great day of the Lord" (1:7, 14) would come and destroy all of Judah, unless they repented. (2:1-3)  Like Isaiah 1, Zephaniah believed that YHWH would bring, out of judgement, a chastened and purified remnant. (3:9-13).

 

Nahum  lived around the middle of the 7th century bce.  He witnessed or anticipated the fall of Nineveh (Capital of Assyria) in 612  bce. either from the Northern Kingdom, or as a resident of Judah watching events in distant Assyria.  It is a literary masterpiece, but theologically only significant for one thing:

                God's justice will reign against all odds, including the power of the Assyrians.  Not even Nineveh can escape his judgement.

 

Deuteronomy 

 

The lawbook found in the Temple, which so profoundly influenced Josiah was, as is generally agreed today, some form of the book of Deuteronomy.  According to 2 Kings 22:8, repairs to the temple were carried out, when a scroll of law was discovered.  This prompted Josiah to restore the cult of YHWH to its old roots of the covenant at Sinai.

                During his reign a religious revival and a revision of sacred scripture took place.  Spong comments on the found scroll:

 

"This text was, not surprisingly, completely responsive to the prophetic tradition of Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, Micah and especially Jeremiah, who was alive and at work when this new book was ‘discovered’.  This book called for the kind of religious reform the prophets had been calling for and it rekindled a kind of national pride that helped to keep this soon-to-be-conquered nation intact through the period of exile." (Resc. p.50)

 

Worship was purified, all foreign rites were purged, and Jerusalem and the temple became the focus. There was no other place allowed for worship as expressed in 2 Kings 23:8.  God was seen as sublime and awesome, no image could be used in worship. (Deut.4:12)  Idolaters were to be put to death. (13:5-11)  God was seen as a nationalistic deity.  This concept was attacked by Lamentations, as this was to become destructive later on.

 

"By the time the deuteronomists had finished their work, they had coloured the books of Joshua, Judges, 1 + 2 Samuel, and 1 + 2 Kings.  They had supplied their nation with a philosophy of history, and they had touched up the books of the prophets.  They had taught the Jewish people to see the past through their eyes." (Resc. p.51)

 

 

Summary

 

The Prophetic Movement had greatly influenced the fate of the Jewish people.  It had laid the foundation of their 'Jewishness', which during Exile developed into an exclusive religion that would distinguish them from any other religions and indeed from any other peoples.  Their theology fostered a strongly critical stance against the monarchy, but also evoked nationalistic feelings among its people.  In Micah we have seen a move away from the formal religion, as practiced in the temple with its elaborate sacrifices, towards a more internal spirituality.  This will be developed further in the next chapter.

 

 


Chapter Six

 

Prophets from the period of Exile

and after

 

 

On a global scale, the period we are dealing with here, has seen enormous change taking place.  Lloyd Geering, in his book “Is Christianity going anywhere?” writes: 

 

“Looking at the totality of human cultures, we find that the year 500 bce. marks the approximate centre of a time of radical cultural change, now labelled the Axial Period.  The term “axial” was chosen because it seemed as if the evolution of human cultures was taking a giant turn on its axis and moving in another direction….   It was in this period that the Judeo-Christian tradition came to birth.” (p.12)

 

Whatever it was that brought about change, the influence of the Exile on Judaism was profound.  Their return portrayed another 'Exodus' which would eventually form the people and their religion into what we find in Palestine in Jesus' days.

                In this chapter we are going to look at the prophets who lived and operated roughly from the period in Exile until approximately 150 bce.

 

Jeremiah (627-586? bce.)

 

Jeremiah stood in the tradition of Hosea, who went back to the Mosaic covenant itself.  He used a scribe to write down his oracles, whose name was Baruch.  He lived in a time of far reaching change, pre-Exile and Exile.  He savagely attacked the idolatry of the land.  Borrowing from Hosea, he called Judah an "adulterous wife who will surely be divorced" if she does not repent. (3:12-14 etc.)  This message must have been received with sympathy and also influenced Josiah’s reform.  Into this ferment of resurgent nationalism and religious reform came the discovery of the Book of the Law in the Temple – a version of the Book of Deuteronomy "like a thunderclap of conscience." (Bright p.299)  But it was too late.

                The old Assyrian empire had become weak, Egypt aspired to dominate, but was defeated by the new power of Babylon, whom Jeremiah called the Chaldeans.  Eventually Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians in 586 bce.

                Jeremiah remained at first in Jerusalem, criticising both kings, Jehoiakim and Zedekiah.  His political judgment was far superior to both kings.  His message was that the fall of Jerusalem was due to Judah's sin, and we would add, due to political stupidity.  The result was that the people had to suffer.  His message for the people was: 'Turn away from your sin, then God will bring you back home'.  'Trust in God in the face of adversity, your exile is to purify you, then you will be saved.'  He saw the 'old covenant', centring in the temple and its ceremonial worship, as outdated - it needed reforming: 

 

"The Lord says 'the time is coming when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah.  It will not be like the old covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and led them out of Egypt.  Although I was like a husband to them, they did not keep that covenant.  The new covenant that I will make with the people of Israel will be this:  I will put my law within them and write it on their hearts.  I will be their God and they will be my people.  None of them will have to teach his fellow countryman to know the Lord, because all will know me, from the least to the greatest.  I will forgive their sins and I will no longer remember their wrongs.  I the Lord have spoken". (31.31-34)

 

This new covenant, replacing the Law with the Holy Spirit, had to wait till New Testament times, but it is significant that the seeds for this development have been planted here by Jeremiah.  It was not readily accepted, of course, and so he was taken eventually against his will to Egypt, as written in chapter 43.  After this he disappears from history.

 

Lamentations

 

Traditionally it was thought that Jeremiah wrote this book, but there is no evidence of this.  Cunliffe-Jones thinks it is a “product of many hands, differs markedly in style and content from Jeremiah’s own thinking, and because it comes from a later time, was originally not included among the prophets.  It only became part of the third section of the Hebrew Canon, the Writings”. (p.37)  "The five poems which make up Lamentations, all describe the response of faith in the catastrophic event of 586 bce." (Davidson p.32) 

                The writers state time and again, that it is Yahweh who had determined the fate of Jerusalem, widening their concept of God from a tribal, individual God to a universal Lord, who is present also in tragedy and disaster.  He is the Lord of all history. 

 

Habakkuk  was a contemporary of Jeremiah

 

Most likely his evil men in 1:4 are either the rich who exploit the poor or the threat of the up and coming power of Babylon in 1:6.  So the dating could be during Jehoiakin's rule between 609 and 597 bce.  However, 2:6-19 could also be interpreted as coming from the latter period of exile.

                The question Habakkuk is trying to answer is stated in 1:13 "How can you stand these treacherous, evil men? ... why are you silent while they destroy people who are more righteous than they are?"  He answers it in the light of past history when he says in 3:16 "I will quietly wait for the time to come when God will punish those who attack us."

 

Ezekiel  was a younger contemporary of Jeremiah, a priest, called to the prophetic office in 593, and preached for twenty years, to 573 bce.

                He played a key part in keeping the nation of Judah together while in exile.  He has a style of his own, very imaginative: "He had wonderful dreams and visions that enliven his works". (Resc.p.60)  He preached pitiless, remorseless doom before the fall of Jerusalem. (2:1-3:15)   But as the vision of the valley of dry bones emphasises (Ez.37), Judah will come back to life again.

                Both Jeremiah and Ezekiel forged a new interpretation of the old covenant.  "It enabled the formation of a new community, based on individual decision, which could survive the wreckage of the old." (Bright p.317)

 

Obadiah  The name means ‘servant of YHWH’.  This is the shortest book in the Old Testament, probably written after the return of the Jews from Exile in 539 bce.    He resented the infiltration of foreign peoples on Judah's soil. (1-14)  He looked for the Day of the Lord, when Israel would return to it's former glory, namely David's, and her foes, especially Edom, would be destroyed. (15-21)

 

Isaiah 2 or Deutero Isaiah (chapters 40-55), was written about 150 years after Isaiah 1, around 540 bce.  Jerusalem is in ruins, the people are still in exile in Babylon.  Its main message is comfort and hope for his beaten people.

                Cyrus became King of Persia, present-day Iran, in 555 bce. An inscription on the monument to Cyrus located at the western end of the Bicentennial Park, Homebush, Sydney reads:

 

“Creator of the first and largest multicultural society in the history of humankind; ruled with respect for human dignity and justice based on the universal righteous order; issued the first declaration of human rights in 538 bce.; liberated Jews and others from captivity in Babylon; granted religious, linguistic and cultural freedom to all peoples, and established the first Federal System based on the autonomy of all States.”

 

With such an enlightened king it is not surprising that Isaiah 2 saw God using Cyrus for his purposes.  He calls him saviour who would deliver the Israelites from Babylon, and the captives would be released shortly.  A truly universal concept of God had developed, "I am the only God there is". (45:22) 

                Cyrus defeated all of Babylon in 538 bce.  The days of judgement had passed.  Judah had gone through the fire, her iniquity is pardoned. (40:2)  His message is that "The Sovereign Lord is coming to rule with power, bringing with him the people he has rescued," (40:10) to set his captive people free and lead them back to their former homes.  God will "take care of his flock like a shepherd". (40:11)  The all-powerful God comes as saviour of the weak, the lost, the depressed.  God uses his power not with might, but with love, with grace, to reach out to those who have no saviour.  "God's agent in his plan of universal salvation is a special people".  (Wright p.89)

                Is.41:8-9 are the key verses to understand the Servant songs of Isaiah2:  "But you, Israel my servant, you are the people that I have chosen ... I called you from the ends of the earth and said to you, 'You are my servant'”.  Israel, the servant people, is given power to see that justice is done on earth.  “Through you I will make a covenant (here ‘promise or instrument of salvation’) with all peoples; through you I will bring light to the nations.  You will open the eyes of the blind and set free those who sit in dark prisons." (42:6-7 and 49:8-9)

                The unexpected happened.  "The people reply: (i.e. it is their own response to the sufferings they had endured)  "Who would have believed what we now report?" (53:1)  Whilst people thought that the sufferings endured by Judah were God's punishment, Isaiah 2 saw it as a suffering for others, whereby others would be healed.  "We thought that his (Judah's) suffering was punishment sent by God.  But because of our sins he was wounded, beaten because of the evil we did.  We are healed by the punishment he suffered." (53:5)  This is a truly remarkable development of theology, which enabled the New Testament writers to use when they interpreted the death of Jesus.

                Isaiah 2 sees that Israel's whole past prepared them for her great mission in the new age about to be born. (Wright p.91)  Spong said about this prophet that he:

 

"saw Judah as a people called by the experience of suffering into a vicarious ... life of sacrifice, healing and doing for others.  It produced a new dimension in the evolving portrait of what the Jewish messiah was destined to be." (Resc.p.61)

 

Isaiah 3  (chapters 56-66) is believed to be from the same writer, or the same school, but many scholars think it is different in style, and therefore give it the name Isaiah 3.  It is written after the return of the people to Jerusalem, around 520-500 bce.  The Temple in Jerusalem has been rebuilt.  Its main message is Eschatological i.e. looking to the future – the end-time.  "The restoration of Jerusalem, its Temple, and a small province of Judah in the years between 539 and 515 bce. have not brought the complete fulfilment predicted in chapters 40-55.  The hope for the future, however, still burns brightly as a vital part of faith in the Lord". (Wright p.137)

                The people are not observing the Law and this disobedience is condemned by Isaiah.  Yet he sees a glorious future for Jerusalem and Judah:

 

"The Sovereign Lord has filled me with his spirit.  He has chosen me and sent me to bring good news to the poor, to heal the broken-hearted, to announce release to captives and freedom to those in prison.  He has sent me to proclaim that the time has come when the Lord will save his people." (61:1-2) (see also Lk 4:18-19)

 

What follows is a vision of a new era, one in which God's will would be done.  This will be a "new creation". (65:17)  The new Jerusalem will be "full of joy and her people will be happy". (65:18)   "Wolves and lambs will eat together, lions will eat straw as cattle do, and snakes will no longer be dangerous.  On Zion, my sacred hill, there will be nothing harmful or evil". (65:25)  God will judge all nations, and his messengers will go to all the world to proclaim his greatness. (66:19)

 

Haggai  was probably born in exile.  He wrote during the early period after the exile back in Judah ("second year of Darius as emperor of Persia" (1:1), about 521 bce.

                It was a difficult time of poor harvests, real hardships and frustrations for the returnees.  The Jews had started to rebuild their Temple earlier but failed to get on with the work. (1:2) "This is not the right time to build the Temple", they said.  They needed desperately to have a focal point for their stability and spiritual well-being.  Haggai saw the political uncertainty of Persia as a sign that the times for God's reign were imminent.  He urged his people to resume work on the Temple.  Then the Lord would send another king, like David, and usher in the messianic era.  This was to be Zerubbabel, the governor.  (2:20-23)

 

Zechariah,  a contemporary of Haggai, also encouraged the Jews to finish the temple.  It was eventually dedicated in 515 bce.  He came from a priestly family.  He expressed his prophetic words in forms of visions, 8 in all.

                Zechariah explained the meaning of these visions.  He said that God is concerned for the welfare of everyone.  God is concerned for the future greatness of the Jewish community.  God will soon remove all evil in the land.  God's messengers (angels) gave him the words of prophecy.  Not only people can oppose God, but also heavenly beings (satan).  Ultimately God would rule the nation, and gradually this came to pass in the person of the high priest.

                Chapters 9-14 are thought to belong to a different author, because of a different style and language. For instance the word "oracle" is used in 9:1 and other places.  A different time/period is evident, like contact with Greek military forces in 9:13;  God is expected to intervene with destructive fury to establish his people as victors over the other nations of the world.  Emphasis is put on the "coming day of the Lord" in apocalyptic language, i.e.hidden or disguised.

 

Malachi  The name means My Messenger, who was to prepare the way of the Lord.  He was a Jew living in Jerusalem, prophesying around 475 to 450 bce.  He attempts to find an answer to the question: "Where is the God who is supposed to be just?" (2:17)   He was a God-fearing, patriotic man "who was concerned with the abuses of his time: the carelessness of priest and people with respect to offerings, the faithfulness of the people in marriage, and their lack of concern for widow, orphan and sojourner." (Gailey p.130)

                This prophet saw the exile as punishment for the people's laxity in their observance of the law.  Priests offered sick and injured animals to Yahweh, (1:6-14) Sabbath was neglected, and tithes were abandoned. (3:7-10)  The attitude prevailed that there was no profit in being loyal to the faith. (2:17; 3:13-15)  Divorce was a public scandal. (2:13-16)  The weak were exploited. (3:4)

                He tried to purge Judah of all foreign influences, and make the Law of God the law of the land.  This may have helped the people of Judah (who by then were known as "Jews"), to maintain their identity, and to take God seriously.  This is the last book of the Old Testament in our Bible.

 

Chronicles  was written between 400 and 340 bce.  In its original form it was joint with Ezra/Nehemiah, and in the Hebrew Bible this is the last book of the Old Testament.  It is assumed that it was written so that the post-exilic community could understand how it had come into existence, and that it represented a continuation of its history.  God's gift, the temple, had been entrusted to them.  The Jews were great in re-telling their history, but the author's main concern was to portray Israel as a religious community.

 

Ezra  was written around the fourth century bce. as a sequel of Chronicles.  As it stands now, its beginning is a repetition of the end of Chronicles.  Ezra is a priest and received his commission from Artaxerxes I (465-424) around 450 bce. to go to Jerusalem to see to the spiritual well-being of the Jews.  This book begins with the proclamation of the edict by Cyrus of Persia, ordering the rebuilding of the Temple and permitting the Jews who wish to do so, to return to their homeland. (1:1-4 and 6:3-5)  The writer, like Isaiah 2, admired Cyrus: 'the Lord prompted Cyrus'.  He also admires the surprising moderation and tolerance of Cyrus, a truly enlightened ruler of ancient times.  It then goes on to describe the difficulties and problems of the resettlement of Judah, regarding the building of the Temple, the walls, their neighbours.

 

Nehemiah  a contemporary of Ezra, sent by Artaxerxes 1 as governor of Judah.  It is written as a personal account.  The rebuilding of the wall is described in chapter 3, opposition by the neighbours is overcome by cunning and good and selfless leadership in chapter 4.

                Nehemiah re-introduced the festivals, such as Shelters/Sukkot.  He kept or even expanded the exclusive nature of the Jewish faith, which had been essential to preserve their minority in Babylon.  This feature is one of the main reasons why the Jews have survived until today as a distinct people.  Ancient laws, like not to intermarry with foreigners, temple worship etc. were re-introduced with all the prescribed sacrifices, dedication of the first-born in the temple, and many other laws. (see ch.8 and 10). Nehemiah's reform is described in chapter 13. 

 

Joel  The name means "Yahweh is God"   There is very little known about him.  Also there are no clear indications as to when he wrote.  It is thought that he could be among the last of the Prophets.  The picture of a future conflict between God and his foes is looming. (3:9-15)  This would be The Day of the Lord where he will judge all the world.  His message:  "The day of the Lord is coming soon. (2:1)  Repent - then God will restore Jerusalem and Judah". (3:1)  On that Day "I will pour out my spirit on everyone". (2:28)  On that day God will live in Jerusalem, and the city as well as Judah will last for ever. (3:21)

 

Daniel  is the latest of the Old Testament books, written after the desecration of the Temple by the Greek king Antiochus Epiphanes in about 166/5 bce.  The purpose is to address this emergency.  It stresses loyalty to the old covenant.  Owing to the political situation, it was dangerous to write anything against the ruler.  It is therefore written in apocalyptic style (implying to belong to a different era, but addressing a current issue).  Apocalyptic style of writing is used when times are bad, when people are being persecuted under totalitarian regimes.  It is a message of "good news in bad times" - as against the prophets, who brought a message of "bad news in good times".

                Daniel serves as an example of loyalty to Yahweh's law.  Antiochus was called Nebuchadnezzar.  Jews who read it would have got the message.  Daniel faced the lion's den rather than pray to the king (ch.6), and the three youths preferred a fiery furnace rather than worship the king's idol, which was the golden statue of Zeus placed in the temple, as described in chapter 3.  It is encouraging the Jews to political resistance.  It was to support the oppressed and persecuted Jews, to stand firm, God would triumph in the end.  Daniel's vision described in chapters 7-12 are also written in apocalyptic style.  The "beast" is slain.  God's intervention is at hand.  God would give the eternal kingdom to one who looked like a man "like a son of man", who came from the clouds and "his kingdom would never end".(7:14)  This concept of Son of Man who would come again on the clouds, became a useful tool to describe later who Jesus was to the eye of faith.  The concept of life after death became gradually accepted during that time, a rather late development in the evolution of theology:

 

"That some would pay for their loyalty with their lives Daniel did not doubt.  But these and their loved ones could comfort themselves with the assurance that God would raise them to everlasting life (12:1-4)". (Bright p.409)

 

It seems that crisis situations bring forth new insights.  It is therefore not surprising, that reflecting on the fate of heroic martyrs, the belief in life beyond the grave became firmly established in Judaism only in that period, relatively late, considering that it became the foundation stone for the Christian faith.

 

Summary of the Prophetic movement:

 

The prophetic movement had become formative for the Jewish faith and its future.  It always held the love and justice of God before the people, especially at times of political prosperity, but spiritual decline.  Prophets called people back to repentance, keeping the good of the whole community in mind.  It held on to the belief that God wants justice done by everyone, not through force, but through a changed heart, which responds to God’s love.

 

Unfortunately, though, this noble inspiration became swamped by a theological trend from about the 4th century bce. to the 19th century ce.  The building of a just society had moved into the background and made place for a more individualistic faith with a 'pie in the sky when I die' attitude.  If we wish to reclaim the Bible for the 21st century we need to re-emphasise the ancient prophets' concerns for social justice and ethical living, and if we divorce social concern from its religious roots we are not faithful to the teachings of the Bible.

 


Chapter Seven

 

Poetry and Wisdom Literature

 

 

Psalms

 

Perhaps the best known part of the Old Testament, known as Wisdom Literature, are the Psalms.  They were written for worship services, either to be sung or read during the liturgy.

                Some psalms are based on material that goes back to the third millennium bce., to Egypt and Canaan; some may have been composed by David (2; 16; 18; 20, 21, 29; 45, 68; 72, 82; 108, 110); the vast majority, however, were written during the exile or soon after the exile, composed for worship in the new temple.  They served the same purpose as our modern hymns today.  Other psalms also used at worship services, which were not so popular, have long since been forgotten.

                It is mainly in the royal psalms that we find YHWH promising David a dynasty that would reign for ever, and would triumph over all its foes. (2:4-11; 72:8-11, etc.)

                For the pious Jew, religion was a deeply internal experience.  The latter psalms are filled with humble confessions of sin, with a longing for God's mercy and pardon, a desire for cleanness of heart in his sight.  They express patience in trouble, an unshakeable confidence in God's deliverance, and gratitude for God's mercies.  In this respect, the Psalms are still meaningful to us today, and can be used during worship services.

                However, as Bright points out, (p.425-428) a gradual shift is noticeable in the later Psalms, and other writings of that period, away from seeing the Law in the light of the Covenant, where grace always comes before works.  In the later Psalms a more externalising righteousness is evident, where the Law is made absolute.  Slowly, Judaism had become so rigid and extreme, that a reform did not seem to be possible. 

 

Proverbs

 

Another book belonging to this genre is the Book of Proverbs. They are well-constructed maxims, that probably go back to Israel and Judah long ago, collected from different sayings of people from all over the known world.  Proverbs sees wisdom as: "the fear of the Lord which is the beginning of wisdom". (Prov.9:10)  Those who are loyal to God and seek his wisdom, and follow it in their lives, will be rewarded by God, those who are not are responsible for their own downfall.

 

The king best known for his wisdom was of course King Solomon (4:30).  Some proverbs may go back to him, but most of this literature flourished in the post-exilic period, in the second century bce.  The good and happy life involved:

 

"hard work, high morals, moderation, kindness to the less fortunate, loving ones family and home, sincerity, modesty, self-control, chastity, a willingness to live and learn, an attitude of forgiveness and even being kind to animals." (Resc.p.66)

 

Rewards for a good life were meted out before a person died.  During the flowering of wisdom literature, a concept of life after death had not yet evolved in Jewish theology.  Wisdom was open to all, and those who did not possess it were blamed for refusing to 'learn'.  So, "if they were poor and afflicted, they deserved it." (Resc.p.67)  It was thought that everyone began life from an equal starting point, which we, of course, know is not so.  To the Jew the sum of all righteousness was to keep the law.  In the wisdom literature, wisdom ultimately came to mean the same as the law.

 

Ecclesiastes or Qoheleth (the preacher).

 

This dates in its final form in the third century bce.  The writer is undoubtedly influenced by the inquiring Greek mind.  At that time an ever growing philosophical inquiry into the meaning of this life was pursued, however, there is no evidence for a belief in a life after death yet. (2:15-18).

                This writer states that the ways of God are beyond understanding (3:11), which is an important insight!  During the discussion in the first century ce., as to which books were to be included into the Jewish canon, Ecclesiastes had some opposition:

 

"the questioning, godless quality of Ecclesiastes led to much dispute among Jewish scholars as to whether it should have been included in the canon." (Resc.p.63)

 

Esther  

 

Esther was written to provide some material for the festival of Purim.  It describes the situation at the Persian court, but its date and authorship is unknown, probably third century bce.  It shows a fervent patriotism but God is never mentioned.

 

Song of Songs

 

This book in its present form, written around the second century bce., is a “poem which celebrates human love in all its physical dimensions”. (Charp.p.87)  Some commentators believe that it takes up several beautiful love poems of ancient times, used for weddings.  When it was read at worship services, it was mostly interpreted to describe God’s love for his people.  Charpentier observes:

 

“At a time when women were men’s slaves, these songs in which a couple love each other equally, in the freshness of a tenderness which does not ignore difficulties, are quite extraordinary compositions.” (p.87)

 

Summary of Wisdom Literature.

 

During the Exile, Synagogue worship had developed, because the Jews had no Temple.  This style of worship was continued after the return, even though the Temple had been re-built.

                Ezra's reform, begun in Exile, helped to form and to define a new nation.  Israel was able to keep its distinctiveness even after the nation was no more even when its people were scattered all over the world.

                After the Exile the priests saw to it that a Jewish Bible was formed.  They had to decide, which books to include in the Canon, and which not.  After 300 bce. the Torah and most other books had been translated for the Greek-speaking Jews into their own language, and probably also for the Ptolemy King Philadelphus, (285-246 bce.) who wanted a copy for his famous Alexandrian library. This version of the Old Testament is known today as the Septuagint.

                Bright (p.418f) writes in his History regarding the growth of a Canon of Scripture: "Of the greatest importance is the fact that the Jewish community was constituted on the basis of a written law."

                In this canon, the Torah or Pentateuch held a special status.  It was accepted also by the Northern states (Samaria), but the other books of the Jewish Bible were rejected there.  This was one of the reasons why the 'Samaritans' were held in such contempt by the Jews in Israel in Jesus' days. (Bright p.419)

 

The Protesters

 

The old tradition to explain Scripture with another text from Scripture was continued in a more deliberate way by the authors of the books Spong calls the Protesters.  The books of Job, Ruth, and Jonah come under this heading.   (Resc.p.64)  He argues that they provide a counterpoint to prevailing attitudes, hence ‘protesters’.  None of the people after whom the books are named are considered to be historical figures.

 

Job  was written fairly late in Hebrew history, however its roots go back perhaps to 1100 to 500 bce.  It is a literary master-piece from which Goethe borrowed the ‘Prologue’ for his greatest literary work: ‘Faust’.

                The issue is the suffering of a righteous man.  It is assumed that he must have done something evil, for God is always just.  It is a protest against this view, which had been developed in Proverbs, namely that suffering is due to sin of the individual.  Our society today, with its extreme individualism, would do well to learn from Job.  Before this individualism captured the minds of the people, the tribe was seen as the basic unit of life.

 

"A tribe was a corporate singularity, not a collection of individuals.  One stood before God as a people, not as individuals.  The people of the tribe were interrelated, interdependent, and mutually responsible.  It was their destiny to thrive or to perish together.  When evil was in their midst, the whole of the people suffered.  When faithfulness marked their common life, the whole of the people were blessed." (Resc.p.65)

 

An example of this can be found in Ex.20:4-6 which says that the sins of the fathers will be punished to the third and fourth generation.

                Job wrestled with the old concept of 'tribal sin' as against Wisdom’s emphasis on individual sin, and its consequences.  Even the first Jewish messianic thought was corporate rather than individual: "through the descendants of Abraham all the nations of the earth would be blessed" (Gen.12:3).  Particularly in Isaiah, we see the whole people of Israel as the suffering servant.

                From the time Ezekiel wrote "the soul that sins shall die", (Ez.18:46) individualism gradually evolved.  It grew in prominence and became fully expressed in the Wisdom literature.  For the writer of Job this became a problem.  He recognised that life was not always fair.  Is this why the concept of heaven and hell was thought of transferring reward and punishment to the here-after?  Was this to make sense of evil?

                Job's answer is:  Although God is always just and deals with sin decisively, God is not forced to do so.  This leaves room for God’s grace and love which we will meet more fully developed in the New Testament.

 

Ruth and Jonah  is a protest against narrow-minded religious bigotry of that time. We would call it today racism.  Jews themselves believed to be God's 'elect' or 'chosen'.  (To which Spong somewhat facetiously responds, whether the others were to be seen as the specially 'unchosen' ones)  They believed, that a narrow keeping of the 'Law' was the only way to improve life here and now - developing into an extreme legalism, as we meet them in the ‘scribes’ of the New Testament.  Some saw this to be impossible to achieve, so they saw the good life returning through ethnic purity.  A scapegoat had been found for their calamity - the foreigners! This, as we have seen in our days, is a very dangerous theology indeed!

                Under Ezra and Nehemiah racist laws were created to exclude any non-Jew, even half-casts or quarter casts.  The writers of Jonah and Ruth created the stories in protest to this view.  Jonah represented the racists view, not wanting to follow God's order to preach forgiveness to Nineveh, as they were pagans.  Ruth represents the non-racist view.  Even Ruth, who is a foreigner and pagan (Moabite), can benefit from God's love and grace, winning a husband and security for herself and Naomi, her mother-in-law.

                The seer madness of racism is exposed by Spong when he writes: "Ruth and Boaz had a son named Obed.  He had a son named Jesse, and his son was the greatest king in the history of Israel - a man named David". (Resc.p.74)  Would David himself have been purged by the laws under which the Jewish state was operating under Ezra? or did they not realise that King David’s great-grandmother was not a full-blooded Jew?

 

Summarising the Protest Literature, Spong writes: "Literalism would be a serious block to meeting, confronting, and understanding the Word of God in these wonderful books of protest." (p.74)  Although we may assume that Jesus took these books literally, the lesson learnt from them was deeply ingrained in his own life and teaching, a life of tolerance and love towards foreigners.

 

Summary of Part One

 

                At the beginning of this part we said that the Old Testament contains 'the living word of God'.  It has timeless and universal values.  It deals with issues the world had to face time and again, until today.

                Over the millennium it took to be written, many ideas evolved.  By theological evolution, those with universal values were kept and developed, others, which may have just appeared as a theological fad, were discarded. 

                When new ideas or new teachings emerged, the old was not always discarded as worthless, but often it was put side by side with the new.  This could have been a device to guide the readers from one stage of spiritual development to the next, to help people grow in their faith until they had reached the level to which current thinking had developed.  No one stage can therefore claim any form of absolutism.

                When communalism faded very much into the background in the 21st Century, for example, it seems to have totally replaced it with an extreme form of individualism.  Modern psychologists tell us now that many of our mental illnesses grow out of such an extreme individualism, even the high crime rate and anti-social behaviour is due in some parts to this.

                We started this introduction by asking: "Who is this Hebrew God?"  We hope that these notes for the Old Testament will have given the reader some answers to this question.

                We also asked the reader for a definition of God on p.15.  If you wrote another one now, what would it be?  How does that compare with your first definition?

                I would like to leave Spong to have the last word for this first part:

 

"There is so much more biblical truth and biblical beauty once we escape the strictures of a literalistic approach to the Bible.  If we could be assured of this possibility, we might be able to surrender our concept of biblical inerrancy.  But to surrender biblical inerrancy is not to surrender the Word of God!  For if we mean by "the Word of God" that we can discern the hand of a transcendent deity underneath these literal words, we have taken a major step forward.  Then we can lift that transcendent presence out of its ancient context and place it with integrity inside our own spiritual journeys as a resource.  Surely then we can proclaim with great joy that in this sacred book we can meet and know the Word of God and that this living Word can be for us a source of life even 2000 years removed.

                                “We hear that Word in creation, where this God proclaimed that everything divinely created was good and that male and female had both been created in God's image.  That "Word of God" fuelled every human movement for justice from the fight to end slavery and segregation to the feminist movement to the peace movement to the gay and lesbian rights movement.  That Word of God challenges the prejudice that grows out of our limited knowledge, our tribal identities, our economic systems, and our sexual fears." (Resc.p.74/5)