Here is the next Bible Study. Hoping to get the last three in this series posted soon - Linda.
Sacred Space #8 11/26/10
Relationships in the Gospel of John.
Jn1:35-39 gives the account of the calling of the first disciples. These were followers of John the Baptist who hear him announce, “Here is the Lamb of God.” They follow Jesus who asks them, “What are you looking for?” They ask, “Rabbi where are you staying?” Jesus replies “Come and see” - and they stayed with him.
Jn 20:15-17 describes the morning of the resurrection. Mary Magdalene sees Jesus, but doesn’t recognize him. Jesus speaks to her, asking, “Whom are you looking for?” Mary recognizes him and calls out, “Rabbouni”. Jesus tells her not to hold on to him, but instead to “go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, my God and your God’”.
These two passages are bookends or literary inclusions. There is a progression between the first to the second. Both have questions, but these transition from what to whom, from the impersonal to the personal. The disciples call him Rabbi (translated as teacher); Mary calls him Rabbouni. In both accounts the evangelist uses parenthesis to give the same translation - teacher. The difference is that the word’s ending changes to give the meaning “beloved teacher” in the resurrection narrative. They are structurally parallel accounts with a common drama. Mirror stories placed at the beginning and the end of the Gospel. The first story announces the thematic –Jesus is a teacher. As the Gospel unfolds the reader enters into a deeper, more meaningful, relationship with Jesus. The Gospel is an invitation to learn from Jesus and enter into this relationship.
There is a lot of turning in this story. In v. 14, “When she had said this she turned around and saw Jesus standing there…” In v. 16, “Jesus said to her ‘Mary!’ She turned and said to him in Hebrew, Rabbouni”. The Hebrew word for repent is “to turn around”. Turning here has a spiritual and relational sense. The first time she turns she sees who she is expecting to see, what she is looking for – the gardener. The second time she hears his voice and is open to a different understanding. You can’t see this new risen Lord unless you turn, change your perspective. When you move from your fixed way of being you can begin to see him. It signifies a shift in relationship – from Rabbi to Rabbouni. In the first story the disciples follow Jesus to his home in Capernaum; here Mary is called to a new relationship.
Mary tries to hold on to Jesus, to keep things the way they were in the past. Jesus replies that “I have not yet ascended to my Father and your Father…” He then tells her to go to the brethren and tell them, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God”– the present tense. He is in process of ascending. Ascension in John is not a physical thing, a movement to another place, but rather a progressive growth in relationship. Otherwise why link himself and his disciples in this way? He “ascends” in the measure that his disciples enter into the same relationship as he has with the Father.
At the same time being “raised up”, going upward, in John is all about the cross. Jesus will not complete his ascension, he will continue to ascend, until people understand that Jesus’ God, his Father, is also their God and Father, and that he is the one who willed the nonviolence of the cross. When you see Jesus you see the Father - a nonviolent God. Because of this all the barriers between us and the divine are no more. The intermediary mechanisms of sacrifice and temple are redundant once you have been brought into this relationship. Priests and Pastors may serve a useful pastoral role but cannot substitute for the new relationship with God. We see that Mary needs to let go of Jesus and this is so in order that she may enter into this privileged relationship with the Father and help lead others into it. Although we understand the Father through Jesus, Jesus in a way has to become less so that the Father becomes more.
In Jn 14:1 Jesus says to his disciples, “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in me.” Here he is talking of the same thing. That the Father is nonviolent and loving, so there is no need to worry. Jesus shows us who God is - the Father. Jesus mirrors the Father – and so creates an endless reflective relationship with us in the middle!
The accounts of the Samaritan woman at the well and the anointing of Jesus by the woman at Bethany are also parallel stories. Jn 4:6-15 describes the meeting at Jacob’s well –a holy site. Jesus gently deconstructs that sacred space. He asks the woman to give him water, breaking the cultural barriers associated with Samaritans and Women. Jesus as the source of living water will become the source welling up within you. There is no more need to return to the well. True worship is in spirit and in truth. Neither Jacob’s well nor Jerusalem will be necessary as sacred space. They are replaced by this new relationship between the believer and Jesus. The woman who anoints Jesus in Jn 12:1-8 is a mirror of the Samaritan woman in terms of relationship. She pours costly nard on Jesus’ feet in an extravagant gesture of limitless love. She has moved beyond argument to an act that shows the depth of this relationship.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Short Days, Love and Nothing
This time of year, the sun is close to its lowest point. Even after the solstice it seems to linger low on the horizon (actually I think this is technically correct for reasons I can’t remember).
The New Testament also tells us the days are short, but from a different perspective
Paul says “The present form of the world is passing away” (1 Cor. 7.31). Why? Because its “form”, its collective human construction, or “imagined reality”, is undermined by the gospel of Christ. Paul didn’t have an anthropology of the victim or a science of mirror neurons to show how this might actually be happening. But he did have a direct awareness of the impact of Christ on humanity—as did all the primitive church, and that’s why he and they called Jesus “Lord”. They knew that something really was up with the Risen Jesus!
If there was a condemned and executed man declared innocent in living fact (empty tomb/appearances to individuals) —a man who had always enacted forgiveness while saying that the kind of God we got depended on the kind of God we gave out—then it meant all previous bets about both divinity and humanity were off. And if you believed this you also knew it. There was a totally new game in town.
That was back then. To think how that might affect us now we have to hit the scene-select much later, a much more contemporary understanding that takes into account the deep course and purpose of the gospel message over the space of 2000 years. For today, after those two millennia, there is a third sense to shortened days. Our time seems to be narrowing before our eyes because of the enormous pressure on the human earth…from increased population, but also increased desires, from the relentless media stream of images and the wants they prompt.
The effect of the pressure is both physical and mental. Slowly, we are herded closer and closer together, and there is less and less room to maneuver, to step aside and find an empty space. We’re like a pot of water on the stove. The heat is the human world itself and we are the molecules, more and more agitated, bouncing off each other, with no place to go but the next bounce…
Then suddenly, in precisely this situation we see the whole point of the shortened days, the increasing pressure of so many humans and their wants…it brings us to an entirely new human possibility, an entirely new way of being human, or in other terms a totally “new year”.
For a bounce doesn’t have to be a bounce. Being brought in close proximity to the other does not have to mean conflict. It could equally well mean forgiveness and peace and community. And this is so because with the gospel there really is a new human physics, one that has as little to do with violence as time travel would have to do with road travel. There is now finally at the eleventh hour a new science of human particles to learn, a new anthropology, a new humanity. It has always been there, of course, but now with the pressure of the pot it appears more and more as the one remaining human possibility. As W.H. Auden said on the eve of WW2, "We must love one another or die".
But at once the objection comes: love seems so tenuous, so helpless, how can it possibly stand against human violence? And it is that objection which brings me to the real point of the blog. I first started thinking not about short days as such but about love, and its real existence. And it was its existence that struck me forcibly, so then I worked back to how urgent love has become in the moment of violent pressure.
For yes, love exists! But love is relational and so essentially invisible. It cannot be seen or observed. I have a friend who’s always talking about vortices and energy lines and powers in the earth. He believes what’s good and holy is located somehow physically in the world, in rocks, and rivers. I am not adverse to the thrill of certain special places and their feeling and associations, but the thing about love is that it is a new physics. You’ll never see an energy line for love, a blip on a screen or the flicker of a meter. No doubt we can see its effects in the physical world, but in its own moment, its actual existence as love, it is absolutely new and different. The closest it could be recognized would be as a vanishing trace, the signal of something that passed this way but we missed it as it passed.
And the reason for that is because love gives itself as a nothing, into the nothing. If it were to give itself as a some-thing then it would not be love, but an exchange, a something demanding something in return. (Even Christmas gifts for all their attraction have some of this, we give and expect gifts. Love expects nothing in return.)
But then—and this is the enormously cool thing—the moment that love passes by in the world, in the actions of people, it sets up a secret attraction, because at a level too deep for words, too deep for anything, we find life exactly in this. There is a level in us moved precisely by no-thing, by love. And it is this level that more than any-thing proves we are meant for more than the present order of things, the present world and its imagined reality. We are meant rather for an endless world of endless loving, of giving the self away as if it were no-thing.
So may the days be short and ever shorter, so the new day of love can begin!
The New Testament also tells us the days are short, but from a different perspective
Paul says “The present form of the world is passing away” (1 Cor. 7.31). Why? Because its “form”, its collective human construction, or “imagined reality”, is undermined by the gospel of Christ. Paul didn’t have an anthropology of the victim or a science of mirror neurons to show how this might actually be happening. But he did have a direct awareness of the impact of Christ on humanity—as did all the primitive church, and that’s why he and they called Jesus “Lord”. They knew that something really was up with the Risen Jesus!
If there was a condemned and executed man declared innocent in living fact (empty tomb/appearances to individuals) —a man who had always enacted forgiveness while saying that the kind of God we got depended on the kind of God we gave out—then it meant all previous bets about both divinity and humanity were off. And if you believed this you also knew it. There was a totally new game in town.
That was back then. To think how that might affect us now we have to hit the scene-select much later, a much more contemporary understanding that takes into account the deep course and purpose of the gospel message over the space of 2000 years. For today, after those two millennia, there is a third sense to shortened days. Our time seems to be narrowing before our eyes because of the enormous pressure on the human earth…from increased population, but also increased desires, from the relentless media stream of images and the wants they prompt.
The effect of the pressure is both physical and mental. Slowly, we are herded closer and closer together, and there is less and less room to maneuver, to step aside and find an empty space. We’re like a pot of water on the stove. The heat is the human world itself and we are the molecules, more and more agitated, bouncing off each other, with no place to go but the next bounce…
Then suddenly, in precisely this situation we see the whole point of the shortened days, the increasing pressure of so many humans and their wants…it brings us to an entirely new human possibility, an entirely new way of being human, or in other terms a totally “new year”.
For a bounce doesn’t have to be a bounce. Being brought in close proximity to the other does not have to mean conflict. It could equally well mean forgiveness and peace and community. And this is so because with the gospel there really is a new human physics, one that has as little to do with violence as time travel would have to do with road travel. There is now finally at the eleventh hour a new science of human particles to learn, a new anthropology, a new humanity. It has always been there, of course, but now with the pressure of the pot it appears more and more as the one remaining human possibility. As W.H. Auden said on the eve of WW2, "We must love one another or die".
But at once the objection comes: love seems so tenuous, so helpless, how can it possibly stand against human violence? And it is that objection which brings me to the real point of the blog. I first started thinking not about short days as such but about love, and its real existence. And it was its existence that struck me forcibly, so then I worked back to how urgent love has become in the moment of violent pressure.
For yes, love exists! But love is relational and so essentially invisible. It cannot be seen or observed. I have a friend who’s always talking about vortices and energy lines and powers in the earth. He believes what’s good and holy is located somehow physically in the world, in rocks, and rivers. I am not adverse to the thrill of certain special places and their feeling and associations, but the thing about love is that it is a new physics. You’ll never see an energy line for love, a blip on a screen or the flicker of a meter. No doubt we can see its effects in the physical world, but in its own moment, its actual existence as love, it is absolutely new and different. The closest it could be recognized would be as a vanishing trace, the signal of something that passed this way but we missed it as it passed.
And the reason for that is because love gives itself as a nothing, into the nothing. If it were to give itself as a some-thing then it would not be love, but an exchange, a something demanding something in return. (Even Christmas gifts for all their attraction have some of this, we give and expect gifts. Love expects nothing in return.)
But then—and this is the enormously cool thing—the moment that love passes by in the world, in the actions of people, it sets up a secret attraction, because at a level too deep for words, too deep for anything, we find life exactly in this. There is a level in us moved precisely by no-thing, by love. And it is this level that more than any-thing proves we are meant for more than the present order of things, the present world and its imagined reality. We are meant rather for an endless world of endless loving, of giving the self away as if it were no-thing.
So may the days be short and ever shorter, so the new day of love can begin!
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Sacred Space #7
Here is the next Bible Study summary in our series on Sacred Space. Still to come are Sacred Space in the Gospel of John; Jesus and the Temple; Sacred Space and the Book of Revelations; and the final study in the series will be on the Trinity. Keep watching this space! -Linda
Sacred Space #7 11/19/10
The early Christian community
The earliest writings of the New Testament are those written by Paul. Thessalonians is one of the first – from about 49AD – roughly 20 years after Jesus death. It is a direct communication between Paul and one of the early Christian communities. It provides us with a sociological study of the early church.
The Greek word for church is ecclesia- which was a secular term meaning “called together” or “gathering”. It did not have the modern association with a sacred place of worship. Christians were called together at each others’ houses. The concept of “church” as a separate building came with Constantine. The Roman emperor gave a Basilica (a royal palace) to the church. The king’s private quarters became the area behind the altar from where Jesus/the king would emerge to be seen. The church was adopted by the imperial power and became identified with power and prestige and all of its trappings. For the first three centuries, however, Christian gatherings took place in peoples’ homes. Ecclesia was a small assembly of people. The Pauline letters usually use the phrase “church at the house of”. For example 1Cor 16:19 “Aquila and Prisca, together with the church in their house, greet you warmly in the Lord”. (See also Romans 16:5). Prisca and Aquila were tent makers who moved around – living in Corinth, Ephesus and Rome. At that time it was relatively safe to travel – during the relatively stable Pax Romana. Other examples of house churches are found in the letters to Philemon (1:1-2) and to the Colossians (4:15).
When the head of the household became a Christian, it was usual for his household (his wife, children, servants and slaves) to follow suit. Romans 16:10 alludes to this “ Greet those in the Lord who belong to the house of Aristobulus.” In 1 Cor 1:16 we see the same thing “I did baptize the household of Stephanas.” It has been estimated that 25-33% of the population of the Roman Empire, were slaves. Paul does not argue against slavery as an institution. He did not set out to abolish slavery – rather teaches a subversive love that will ultimately undermine it. For Paul, the Christian message is not about bringing down the empire – rather it introduces a new understanding about who we are in relationship to others, something that overturns the deep structure on which the empire rested. In Philemon Paul says to receive a slave as a brother.
The Pauline message is a message of transformation. God invites us to change our hearts by the power of love. Social order is subverted from within. In 1 Cor 7: 17-24 Paul describes the freedom that comes through belonging to the Lord. The Jewish community had clear demarcating lines with its practice of circumcision, and through its dietary laws. Christianity in contrast has no preconditions. This being the case there is always the tendency to chaos. Paul’s letters struggle with the tension between anarchy and freedom in the Spirit. Paul tries to keep the freedom but at the same time seeks to introduce some order. He recognizes that freedom requires a tremendous surrender to the Spirit to make it work. Christians can experience freedom in any situation – whether slave or master, woman or man, rich or poor.
The early church also has a number of women in leadership roles. Romans 16:1-2 describes Phoebe, a deacon and benefactor. She is a woman of independent means, who traveled to Rome. Her name is not linked to any man. In Romans 16:7 another woman, Junia, is called an apostle. In the Middle Ages an “s” was often added to the end of her name to make it sound like a man’s. In Acts 16:14, Lydia, a business woman dealing in purple (a luxury dyed cloth) is described as the head of her household – another woman of influence.
The New Testament gives us a picture of the people who made up the early church. It also gives us a picture of how they worshipped as a community. 1Cor 11:17 describes problems emerging in relation to the communion meal in Corinth. Corinth was a small Christian community – perhaps just four or five households. Divisions had emerged because people had not learned to share with the poor. Paul says it is better that they eat at home if they cannot be in community.
1 Corinthians also offers teaching on the issue of whether it acceptable to eat food sacrificed to idols. There are three chapters devoted to this subject (8-10). 1 Cor 10:23 -32 sums up this teaching. There is no need to observe dietary laws if you are ruled by love. Food should not become a barrier to entering into a relationship with another. The Christian is free to eat any food, even if it has been dedicated to a god. If another believes that the dedication is meaningful, however, then don’t eat it because it might cause them offense. This concept of no rules only works if you have respect for the other and for yourself. The new Christian movement has no sacred order – instead it is trying to work out a new way of how to be free with each other. “ For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more of them….I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings.” (1 Cor 9:19-23)
Sacred Space #7 11/19/10
The early Christian community
The earliest writings of the New Testament are those written by Paul. Thessalonians is one of the first – from about 49AD – roughly 20 years after Jesus death. It is a direct communication between Paul and one of the early Christian communities. It provides us with a sociological study of the early church.
The Greek word for church is ecclesia- which was a secular term meaning “called together” or “gathering”. It did not have the modern association with a sacred place of worship. Christians were called together at each others’ houses. The concept of “church” as a separate building came with Constantine. The Roman emperor gave a Basilica (a royal palace) to the church. The king’s private quarters became the area behind the altar from where Jesus/the king would emerge to be seen. The church was adopted by the imperial power and became identified with power and prestige and all of its trappings. For the first three centuries, however, Christian gatherings took place in peoples’ homes. Ecclesia was a small assembly of people. The Pauline letters usually use the phrase “church at the house of”. For example 1Cor 16:19 “Aquila and Prisca, together with the church in their house, greet you warmly in the Lord”. (See also Romans 16:5). Prisca and Aquila were tent makers who moved around – living in Corinth, Ephesus and Rome. At that time it was relatively safe to travel – during the relatively stable Pax Romana. Other examples of house churches are found in the letters to Philemon (1:1-2) and to the Colossians (4:15).
When the head of the household became a Christian, it was usual for his household (his wife, children, servants and slaves) to follow suit. Romans 16:10 alludes to this “ Greet those in the Lord who belong to the house of Aristobulus.” In 1 Cor 1:16 we see the same thing “I did baptize the household of Stephanas.” It has been estimated that 25-33% of the population of the Roman Empire, were slaves. Paul does not argue against slavery as an institution. He did not set out to abolish slavery – rather teaches a subversive love that will ultimately undermine it. For Paul, the Christian message is not about bringing down the empire – rather it introduces a new understanding about who we are in relationship to others, something that overturns the deep structure on which the empire rested. In Philemon Paul says to receive a slave as a brother.
The Pauline message is a message of transformation. God invites us to change our hearts by the power of love. Social order is subverted from within. In 1 Cor 7: 17-24 Paul describes the freedom that comes through belonging to the Lord. The Jewish community had clear demarcating lines with its practice of circumcision, and through its dietary laws. Christianity in contrast has no preconditions. This being the case there is always the tendency to chaos. Paul’s letters struggle with the tension between anarchy and freedom in the Spirit. Paul tries to keep the freedom but at the same time seeks to introduce some order. He recognizes that freedom requires a tremendous surrender to the Spirit to make it work. Christians can experience freedom in any situation – whether slave or master, woman or man, rich or poor.
The early church also has a number of women in leadership roles. Romans 16:1-2 describes Phoebe, a deacon and benefactor. She is a woman of independent means, who traveled to Rome. Her name is not linked to any man. In Romans 16:7 another woman, Junia, is called an apostle. In the Middle Ages an “s” was often added to the end of her name to make it sound like a man’s. In Acts 16:14, Lydia, a business woman dealing in purple (a luxury dyed cloth) is described as the head of her household – another woman of influence.
The New Testament gives us a picture of the people who made up the early church. It also gives us a picture of how they worshipped as a community. 1Cor 11:17 describes problems emerging in relation to the communion meal in Corinth. Corinth was a small Christian community – perhaps just four or five households. Divisions had emerged because people had not learned to share with the poor. Paul says it is better that they eat at home if they cannot be in community.
1 Corinthians also offers teaching on the issue of whether it acceptable to eat food sacrificed to idols. There are three chapters devoted to this subject (8-10). 1 Cor 10:23 -32 sums up this teaching. There is no need to observe dietary laws if you are ruled by love. Food should not become a barrier to entering into a relationship with another. The Christian is free to eat any food, even if it has been dedicated to a god. If another believes that the dedication is meaningful, however, then don’t eat it because it might cause them offense. This concept of no rules only works if you have respect for the other and for yourself. The new Christian movement has no sacred order – instead it is trying to work out a new way of how to be free with each other. “ For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more of them….I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings.” (1 Cor 9:19-23)
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Sacred Space #6
And another Bible Study Summary...
Sacred Space #6 11/12/10
Wisdom
The wisdom literature of the Old Testament is neither prophetic in character nor does it see the need for temple. It is a way of thinking common to all peoples –that if you act well your life will turn out well. It is age and experience passing on to the next generation the message that life has a pattern to it. If you are truly listening to life’s message then there is a level of truth within you that you can rely on. Of course it may be blown away by circumstances, but basically it holds true. Proverbs 3:13-20 talks about the source of true wealth. “Happy are those who find wisdom and those who get understanding…” Jesus uses the same form of expression in the beatitudes: “happy are the poor in spirit, etc.” - i.e. these are Wisdom statements.
Wisdom is personified as a female relational being in the Old Testament. She is not simply something in your head or inherited right thinking, but a persona. Wisdom is a shadowy figure in the Old Testament. She is linked to the tree of life at the center of the Garden of Eden. See Proverbs 3:18, “She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her’. The implication is that through Wisdom, humans can attain life everlasting. In contrast, folly leads to death. Without wisdom people come to harm. There is no God of wrath. Instead we can choose to bring destruction upon ourselves by denying Wisdom, or choose life by following her paths.
The Lord, through Wisdom, created the earth. She is a beautiful person in relationship with God. She was there at the beginning, at the moment of creation (Proverbs 8:22-36). "When he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a master worker; and I was daily he is delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the human race”(v. 30-31). The word for “master worker” can also be translated as “little child” which seems to fit better contextually. The former is usually used though, because it is less relational and more Greek, so easier to deal with. Wisdom delights in us, God delights in Wisdom. It is a wisdom thing to do – to delight in other people. There is no need for a separate sacred place if the world is full of delight – no need in fact for a temple. Instead through Wisdom we find transcendence in each other. We find the fulfillment of God’s purpose in creation.
Wisdom is a minor key in the Bible – less dominant than the Torah, the prophets and the history of the kings. But still it is one of the strands. It is present throughout the Bible. In the Torah Joseph is in fact a Wisdom figure. He figures things out through his dreams which provide insight into actual circumstances. He reorganizes the food stores of Egypt so that they are able to survive the famine. His wise actions bring life.
The book of Proverbs (a wisdom book) is hard to date. It has material from the 10th century (the time of Solomon) but probably reached its final form in the 6th century. It is fairly well developed – particularly the first eight chapters. In the 2nd century Sirach, another Wisdom book, was written. This is considered deutero-canonical by the Roman Catholic Church, apocryphal by the Protestants. Jesus knew this book and was informed by it. Parts seem to have been used and developed by him. In Chapter 24 Wisdom praises herself in the presence of the Most High. “I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, and covered the earth like a mist…” (v.3). Here Wisdom is associated with the breath or the word of the Most High. There is an identification of Sofia (Wisdom) with the Logos (the Word). The Prologue in the Gospel of John uses this Wisdom thought, saying that all things were created through the Word. This is a wisdom theology. Jesus used Wisdom sayings and identified himself with the person of Wisdom – who invites people to eat and be filled and promises them life and peace.
In v. 13 Wisdom is depicted also as a great tree. “I grew tall like a cedar in Lebanon, and like a cypress on the heights of Hermon” In v.23 she is associated with the Torah, and in v. 31 forms a great river spreading across the earth.
In Ch 50:1-21 the scribe describes a temple service that took place at some point between 219-196 BCE when Simon son of Onias was high priest. It gives us a snap shot of the liturgy. The scribe sees this is a continuation of the world made good – It is a glorious picture of heavenly splendor come to earth. It is also the last time that Wisdom literature basks in its own confidence.
In 167 -164 the Seleucid kings of Syria take over Judea. Alexander the Great had conquered the known world at end of the 4th century. After his death, power was divided among his military leaders. Two powers in particular arose– the Ptolemies (Cleopatra was a member of this family) and the Seleucids who were centered in Damascus and Syria. The Seleucid leader, Antiochus Epiphanes, tried to turn the temple in Jerusalem into a place of Greek worship. As a part of this effort he erected a statue of Zeus - the infamous “abomination of desolation”. He also forbade circumcision and the reading of the scriptures. This was the first time that an invading army had tried to wipe out the Jewish religion. There were also Jewish Hellenizers in Jerusalem promoting the Greek way of life. They adopted Greek dress and built a gym in Jerusalem. Antiochus Epiphanes’ attempt to Hellenize the temple provoked a guerilla war. The successful rebellion was led by the Maccabee family. They were not a Davidic family instead they were a minor priestly family. Following the success of the rebellion they assumed leadership in Jerusalem. Herod the Great married in to the Hasmoneans – the last of the Maccabean line. Herod was regarded as an imposter because he was of Arab blood and also married to this non-Davidic family.
1 Maccabees 1:36-50 describes the defilement of the temple. Many chose to flee to the desert rather than accept pagan rituals and laws. 1Macc 2:29-41 describes how they were pursued into the wilderness. They were overrun on the eve of the Sabbath. They refused to fight on the Sabbath and so profane it: “ ‘Let us all die in our innocence; heaven and earth testify for us that you are killing us unjustly.” So they attacked them on the Sabbath, and they died, with their wives and children and livestock, to the number of a thousand persons” (vv 37-38).
The Maccabean leader, Matthias, is more secular minded. He justifies fighting on the Sabbath to prevent them from perishing. “When Matthias and his friends learned of it, they mourned for them deeply. And all said to their neighbors: ‘If we all do as our kindred have done and refuse to fight with the Gentiles for our lives and for our ordinances, they will quickly destroy us from the earth.’”
The initial non-violent group were, very probably, the forerunners of the Essenes (the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls). They sought holiness through purity, and refused to fight the Romans. They were not completely non-violent, however – according to the Qumran “War Scroll” they were prepared to fight when the angels came to lead them in the final battle to restore holiness to the land. The Pharisees also sought holiness through purity and were probably related in some way to this initial group.
In the context described, the project of Wisdom – that if you chose to live a righteous life you will do well – appeared to have failed. In response Wisdom thought becomes apocalyptic in the Book of Daniel. The premise of apocalyptic literature is that in order for good to prevail, for the righteous to live, God has to intervene directly. This book, the last of the four major prophets, was written at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes in 167-164 BCE. In Daniel 11: 29-35 there is an account of the Greek profanation of the temple. It also tells of non-violent resisters who fall by the sword. These wise among the people will give understanding to many. Though they fall by the sword, unresisting, this will be so that they might be “refined, purified and cleansed, until the time of the end, for there is still an interval until the appointed time.” (v 35). In Chapter 12: 1-4 we have the first clear description of resurrection in the bible. In this picture some of the dead will awake to everlasting life and then “those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky…”
Wisdom from being a broad picture of living well has shifted to a key of non-violence in a time of crisis. And logically connected to this the only way we are going to make the world turn out well for life is through resurrection. In this thinking it is not a reward of “salvation” in a heavenly hereafter, but as the only way a God of wisdom can bring about the fulfillment of his project. The violence of the world may destroy you – but the resurrection makes it right and becomes our hope.
The concept of sacred space breaks down. Violent power took over the temple and the people who finally triumph through violent rebellion are not the authentic descendants of David and quickly became corrupt. At the time of Jesus, the temple was compromised. Instead the wilderness was the place where people went to meet God, awaiting a breakthrough of a just life on earth. John the Baptist represents the movement away from the temple to the wilderness and apocalyptic. He becomes the link between the Old and the New Testaments. Jesus is then the fulfillment of Wisdom’s project for the earth.
Sacred Space #6 11/12/10
Wisdom
The wisdom literature of the Old Testament is neither prophetic in character nor does it see the need for temple. It is a way of thinking common to all peoples –that if you act well your life will turn out well. It is age and experience passing on to the next generation the message that life has a pattern to it. If you are truly listening to life’s message then there is a level of truth within you that you can rely on. Of course it may be blown away by circumstances, but basically it holds true. Proverbs 3:13-20 talks about the source of true wealth. “Happy are those who find wisdom and those who get understanding…” Jesus uses the same form of expression in the beatitudes: “happy are the poor in spirit, etc.” - i.e. these are Wisdom statements.
Wisdom is personified as a female relational being in the Old Testament. She is not simply something in your head or inherited right thinking, but a persona. Wisdom is a shadowy figure in the Old Testament. She is linked to the tree of life at the center of the Garden of Eden. See Proverbs 3:18, “She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her’. The implication is that through Wisdom, humans can attain life everlasting. In contrast, folly leads to death. Without wisdom people come to harm. There is no God of wrath. Instead we can choose to bring destruction upon ourselves by denying Wisdom, or choose life by following her paths.
The Lord, through Wisdom, created the earth. She is a beautiful person in relationship with God. She was there at the beginning, at the moment of creation (Proverbs 8:22-36). "When he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a master worker; and I was daily he is delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the human race”(v. 30-31). The word for “master worker” can also be translated as “little child” which seems to fit better contextually. The former is usually used though, because it is less relational and more Greek, so easier to deal with. Wisdom delights in us, God delights in Wisdom. It is a wisdom thing to do – to delight in other people. There is no need for a separate sacred place if the world is full of delight – no need in fact for a temple. Instead through Wisdom we find transcendence in each other. We find the fulfillment of God’s purpose in creation.
Wisdom is a minor key in the Bible – less dominant than the Torah, the prophets and the history of the kings. But still it is one of the strands. It is present throughout the Bible. In the Torah Joseph is in fact a Wisdom figure. He figures things out through his dreams which provide insight into actual circumstances. He reorganizes the food stores of Egypt so that they are able to survive the famine. His wise actions bring life.
The book of Proverbs (a wisdom book) is hard to date. It has material from the 10th century (the time of Solomon) but probably reached its final form in the 6th century. It is fairly well developed – particularly the first eight chapters. In the 2nd century Sirach, another Wisdom book, was written. This is considered deutero-canonical by the Roman Catholic Church, apocryphal by the Protestants. Jesus knew this book and was informed by it. Parts seem to have been used and developed by him. In Chapter 24 Wisdom praises herself in the presence of the Most High. “I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, and covered the earth like a mist…” (v.3). Here Wisdom is associated with the breath or the word of the Most High. There is an identification of Sofia (Wisdom) with the Logos (the Word). The Prologue in the Gospel of John uses this Wisdom thought, saying that all things were created through the Word. This is a wisdom theology. Jesus used Wisdom sayings and identified himself with the person of Wisdom – who invites people to eat and be filled and promises them life and peace.
In v. 13 Wisdom is depicted also as a great tree. “I grew tall like a cedar in Lebanon, and like a cypress on the heights of Hermon” In v.23 she is associated with the Torah, and in v. 31 forms a great river spreading across the earth.
In Ch 50:1-21 the scribe describes a temple service that took place at some point between 219-196 BCE when Simon son of Onias was high priest. It gives us a snap shot of the liturgy. The scribe sees this is a continuation of the world made good – It is a glorious picture of heavenly splendor come to earth. It is also the last time that Wisdom literature basks in its own confidence.
In 167 -164 the Seleucid kings of Syria take over Judea. Alexander the Great had conquered the known world at end of the 4th century. After his death, power was divided among his military leaders. Two powers in particular arose– the Ptolemies (Cleopatra was a member of this family) and the Seleucids who were centered in Damascus and Syria. The Seleucid leader, Antiochus Epiphanes, tried to turn the temple in Jerusalem into a place of Greek worship. As a part of this effort he erected a statue of Zeus - the infamous “abomination of desolation”. He also forbade circumcision and the reading of the scriptures. This was the first time that an invading army had tried to wipe out the Jewish religion. There were also Jewish Hellenizers in Jerusalem promoting the Greek way of life. They adopted Greek dress and built a gym in Jerusalem. Antiochus Epiphanes’ attempt to Hellenize the temple provoked a guerilla war. The successful rebellion was led by the Maccabee family. They were not a Davidic family instead they were a minor priestly family. Following the success of the rebellion they assumed leadership in Jerusalem. Herod the Great married in to the Hasmoneans – the last of the Maccabean line. Herod was regarded as an imposter because he was of Arab blood and also married to this non-Davidic family.
1 Maccabees 1:36-50 describes the defilement of the temple. Many chose to flee to the desert rather than accept pagan rituals and laws. 1Macc 2:29-41 describes how they were pursued into the wilderness. They were overrun on the eve of the Sabbath. They refused to fight on the Sabbath and so profane it: “ ‘Let us all die in our innocence; heaven and earth testify for us that you are killing us unjustly.” So they attacked them on the Sabbath, and they died, with their wives and children and livestock, to the number of a thousand persons” (vv 37-38).
The Maccabean leader, Matthias, is more secular minded. He justifies fighting on the Sabbath to prevent them from perishing. “When Matthias and his friends learned of it, they mourned for them deeply. And all said to their neighbors: ‘If we all do as our kindred have done and refuse to fight with the Gentiles for our lives and for our ordinances, they will quickly destroy us from the earth.’”
The initial non-violent group were, very probably, the forerunners of the Essenes (the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls). They sought holiness through purity, and refused to fight the Romans. They were not completely non-violent, however – according to the Qumran “War Scroll” they were prepared to fight when the angels came to lead them in the final battle to restore holiness to the land. The Pharisees also sought holiness through purity and were probably related in some way to this initial group.
In the context described, the project of Wisdom – that if you chose to live a righteous life you will do well – appeared to have failed. In response Wisdom thought becomes apocalyptic in the Book of Daniel. The premise of apocalyptic literature is that in order for good to prevail, for the righteous to live, God has to intervene directly. This book, the last of the four major prophets, was written at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes in 167-164 BCE. In Daniel 11: 29-35 there is an account of the Greek profanation of the temple. It also tells of non-violent resisters who fall by the sword. These wise among the people will give understanding to many. Though they fall by the sword, unresisting, this will be so that they might be “refined, purified and cleansed, until the time of the end, for there is still an interval until the appointed time.” (v 35). In Chapter 12: 1-4 we have the first clear description of resurrection in the bible. In this picture some of the dead will awake to everlasting life and then “those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky…”
Wisdom from being a broad picture of living well has shifted to a key of non-violence in a time of crisis. And logically connected to this the only way we are going to make the world turn out well for life is through resurrection. In this thinking it is not a reward of “salvation” in a heavenly hereafter, but as the only way a God of wisdom can bring about the fulfillment of his project. The violence of the world may destroy you – but the resurrection makes it right and becomes our hope.
The concept of sacred space breaks down. Violent power took over the temple and the people who finally triumph through violent rebellion are not the authentic descendants of David and quickly became corrupt. At the time of Jesus, the temple was compromised. Instead the wilderness was the place where people went to meet God, awaiting a breakthrough of a just life on earth. John the Baptist represents the movement away from the temple to the wilderness and apocalyptic. He becomes the link between the Old and the New Testaments. Jesus is then the fulfillment of Wisdom’s project for the earth.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Sacred Space #5
Here is the fifth in the series on Sacred Space, #6 coming shortly...
-Linda
Sacred Space #5 11/5/10
Ezekiel’s temple of doom and the temple of his dreams.
Ezekiel is one of the four major prophets (the others are Isaiah, Jeremiah and Daniel). All of these prophets pivot around the crucial event of the Babylonian invasion, the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the exile. Daniel, unlike the others, was not written at that time. It was written 400 years later, but gives its 2nd century prophecy added weight by placing it in the 6th century BCE. These prophets were a big deal. They preserved the faith of the people when they had lost their leadership, land and temple. In the process of preserving the faith in the midst of unthinkable loss, they actually created something new.
Ezekiel has been called a catatonic schizophrenic! His visions have an almost psychotic feel. Why then is he considered a major prophet? He stands out. His psychic state is a matter of public record and the psychosis he is dealing with is a national historical event. Jeremiah has a relentless message of judgment; Isaiah has words of consolation and a new vision of Zion. What Ezekiel has is an intense sense of violence. There is something about his understanding of the violence of the moment, and of Israel’s role in it. Ezekiel has a priestly, ferocious image of God – a God of wrath. Richard Dawkins in his book The God Delusion states that the Old Testament God is arguably the most unpleasant figure in literature. His description of a violent, autocratic and patriarchal deity is not far from Ezekiel’s vision of God. Ezekiel was a temple priest and his mind is formed by the temple. Unlike Jeremiah who had little time for the temple, Ezekiel cares deeply about it.
Ezekiel 1:1-28 gives a description of the divine chariot – the merkabah. The chariot was the fighting machine of the day (like a modern tank). God is kick-ass in an armored vehicle. It is a chariot of supernatural qualities – full of fire, wings and eyes. Filled with life and spirit, it can move in any direction and immediately, without turning. Angel imagery, picked up from the Babylonians, is incorporated into the description. Sitting on the top of the chariot is the glory of God. At this point Ezekiel’s language begins to break down. In v. 26 he starts using the phrase “something like” because he can no longer fully express God’s glory.
He has this vision in Babylon five years after the first exile occurred when Jehoichin (the 18 year old king) surrendered the city. Ezekiel was one of the 10,000 members of the court, the army, craftspeople and temple who were exiled with the young leader. The city is still intact at this point – it will be another five years before Jerusalem’s destruction. Ezekiel is writing in the midst of a secular, non-Jewish alien environment. He mentally compensates for the absence of the land, temple and culture. He has lost his holy place. It is in that gap that he sees this vision – a vision of the glory of God inhabiting the temple. Ezekiel is dealing with violence done to the most precious thing to him – the temple.
Ezekiel 22: 1-16 Ezekiel describes a city of idolatry and violence. A place where strangers suffer extortion, slander leads to bloodshed and people give false witness in court, women are violated while menstruating, and where “the princes …have been bent on shedding blood.” The spilling of blood is mentioned a lot. It is an account of a bloody city. Ezekiel has an aversion to blood spilled in the wrong place (v.26). It becomes a violation of the holiness which happens when blood is poured in the right place – in the temple. Sacrifice is the only acceptable form of bloodshed. Everything else renders things impure. The city is unclean and impure. Because of this, Ezekiel says, the Lord will make you even more impure. Ezekiel makes the mechanism of vengeance clear, violation of the holy brings violation of the people. He wants to blame the invasion on the sins of the people. They have created the sacrificial crisis. The people will thus be made the sacrifice. Here he prophesies the final destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians.
Chapter 9:1-10 is one of the most intolerable chapters in the Bible. Here God orders the slaying of the people. He pours out his wrath on Jerusalem, defiling his own temple with the dead bodies. The people have defiled him so he will defile them in turn to show his holiness. Only those who “sigh and groan over all the abominations” will be spared – having been marked on their foreheads by an emissary of the Lord. No mercy will be given to the elderly, women or children. No sanctuary found in the temple. Scholars think that this chapter, with its instructions to the executioner, is probably an account of what actually happened. In times of invasion people often gather at the temple as a last sanctuary. That is also the place where a conquering army would target. Their goal would be to profane that place, cutting the people down without mercy. What is at stake is the transcendence of the other, which you must destroy. The Romans did the same thing. Ezekiel describes the event then gives it a theological spin. Saying that it is all part of God’s nature and his plan.
In Ez 10:1-17 the chariot described in chapter one is here in the middle of the temple. The fire from the wheels is used to burn the city and the temple. In vv 18-22, after the slaughter, the chariot carrying the glory of God leaves Jerusalem. This chariot carrying the glory of the Lord lifts from the temple and parks itself on top of a mountain halfway between Jerusalem and Babylon. Only when the people are again dedicated to holiness and purity will God’s glory be restored to the temple.
Ezekiel is sometimes called the Father of Judaism. After the return from exile, his prophesy of the rebuilding of the ideal temple (found in Chapter 40) becomes a key text. Today it is important for Dispensationalist and fundamentalist Christians. Ezra and Nehemiah look to the Ezekiel tradition for their sense of national purity. The Pharisees at the time of Jesus have dedicated themselves to holiness laws and rituals in an attempt to keep God’s favor and to forestall further disaster. They are seeking not to repeat the mistakes of the past. For Ezekiel, the sacrificial system with its focus on sin, holiness and purity keeps things controlled and is the source of the people’s security. For Ezekiel the holy is everything. At the same time he has a sense of a genuine interior transformation (“a new heart and a new spirit I will give you”, 36:26). It is for this that the prophecy is remembered more than his concern of the temple. All the same Jesus stands very much in contrast to his temple ideology. He deliberately hangs out with the impure and heals on the Sabbath. He transforms the water jars, set aside for purification, into wine. He breaks the holy open by shutting the temple down.
-Linda
Sacred Space #5 11/5/10
Ezekiel’s temple of doom and the temple of his dreams.
Ezekiel is one of the four major prophets (the others are Isaiah, Jeremiah and Daniel). All of these prophets pivot around the crucial event of the Babylonian invasion, the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the exile. Daniel, unlike the others, was not written at that time. It was written 400 years later, but gives its 2nd century prophecy added weight by placing it in the 6th century BCE. These prophets were a big deal. They preserved the faith of the people when they had lost their leadership, land and temple. In the process of preserving the faith in the midst of unthinkable loss, they actually created something new.
Ezekiel has been called a catatonic schizophrenic! His visions have an almost psychotic feel. Why then is he considered a major prophet? He stands out. His psychic state is a matter of public record and the psychosis he is dealing with is a national historical event. Jeremiah has a relentless message of judgment; Isaiah has words of consolation and a new vision of Zion. What Ezekiel has is an intense sense of violence. There is something about his understanding of the violence of the moment, and of Israel’s role in it. Ezekiel has a priestly, ferocious image of God – a God of wrath. Richard Dawkins in his book The God Delusion states that the Old Testament God is arguably the most unpleasant figure in literature. His description of a violent, autocratic and patriarchal deity is not far from Ezekiel’s vision of God. Ezekiel was a temple priest and his mind is formed by the temple. Unlike Jeremiah who had little time for the temple, Ezekiel cares deeply about it.
Ezekiel 1:1-28 gives a description of the divine chariot – the merkabah. The chariot was the fighting machine of the day (like a modern tank). God is kick-ass in an armored vehicle. It is a chariot of supernatural qualities – full of fire, wings and eyes. Filled with life and spirit, it can move in any direction and immediately, without turning. Angel imagery, picked up from the Babylonians, is incorporated into the description. Sitting on the top of the chariot is the glory of God. At this point Ezekiel’s language begins to break down. In v. 26 he starts using the phrase “something like” because he can no longer fully express God’s glory.
He has this vision in Babylon five years after the first exile occurred when Jehoichin (the 18 year old king) surrendered the city. Ezekiel was one of the 10,000 members of the court, the army, craftspeople and temple who were exiled with the young leader. The city is still intact at this point – it will be another five years before Jerusalem’s destruction. Ezekiel is writing in the midst of a secular, non-Jewish alien environment. He mentally compensates for the absence of the land, temple and culture. He has lost his holy place. It is in that gap that he sees this vision – a vision of the glory of God inhabiting the temple. Ezekiel is dealing with violence done to the most precious thing to him – the temple.
Ezekiel 22: 1-16 Ezekiel describes a city of idolatry and violence. A place where strangers suffer extortion, slander leads to bloodshed and people give false witness in court, women are violated while menstruating, and where “the princes …have been bent on shedding blood.” The spilling of blood is mentioned a lot. It is an account of a bloody city. Ezekiel has an aversion to blood spilled in the wrong place (v.26). It becomes a violation of the holiness which happens when blood is poured in the right place – in the temple. Sacrifice is the only acceptable form of bloodshed. Everything else renders things impure. The city is unclean and impure. Because of this, Ezekiel says, the Lord will make you even more impure. Ezekiel makes the mechanism of vengeance clear, violation of the holy brings violation of the people. He wants to blame the invasion on the sins of the people. They have created the sacrificial crisis. The people will thus be made the sacrifice. Here he prophesies the final destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians.
Chapter 9:1-10 is one of the most intolerable chapters in the Bible. Here God orders the slaying of the people. He pours out his wrath on Jerusalem, defiling his own temple with the dead bodies. The people have defiled him so he will defile them in turn to show his holiness. Only those who “sigh and groan over all the abominations” will be spared – having been marked on their foreheads by an emissary of the Lord. No mercy will be given to the elderly, women or children. No sanctuary found in the temple. Scholars think that this chapter, with its instructions to the executioner, is probably an account of what actually happened. In times of invasion people often gather at the temple as a last sanctuary. That is also the place where a conquering army would target. Their goal would be to profane that place, cutting the people down without mercy. What is at stake is the transcendence of the other, which you must destroy. The Romans did the same thing. Ezekiel describes the event then gives it a theological spin. Saying that it is all part of God’s nature and his plan.
In Ez 10:1-17 the chariot described in chapter one is here in the middle of the temple. The fire from the wheels is used to burn the city and the temple. In vv 18-22, after the slaughter, the chariot carrying the glory of God leaves Jerusalem. This chariot carrying the glory of the Lord lifts from the temple and parks itself on top of a mountain halfway between Jerusalem and Babylon. Only when the people are again dedicated to holiness and purity will God’s glory be restored to the temple.
Ezekiel is sometimes called the Father of Judaism. After the return from exile, his prophesy of the rebuilding of the ideal temple (found in Chapter 40) becomes a key text. Today it is important for Dispensationalist and fundamentalist Christians. Ezra and Nehemiah look to the Ezekiel tradition for their sense of national purity. The Pharisees at the time of Jesus have dedicated themselves to holiness laws and rituals in an attempt to keep God’s favor and to forestall further disaster. They are seeking not to repeat the mistakes of the past. For Ezekiel, the sacrificial system with its focus on sin, holiness and purity keeps things controlled and is the source of the people’s security. For Ezekiel the holy is everything. At the same time he has a sense of a genuine interior transformation (“a new heart and a new spirit I will give you”, 36:26). It is for this that the prophecy is remembered more than his concern of the temple. All the same Jesus stands very much in contrast to his temple ideology. He deliberately hangs out with the impure and heals on the Sabbath. He transforms the water jars, set aside for purification, into wine. He breaks the holy open by shutting the temple down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
