19
The Depravity of Sodom
Enough said about that. Lot’s courage in offering his daughters, oh that my own father could be so righteous? Well, I suppose he was doing the best he could with what he knew. This seems to come up again and again, I wonder if it is a purposeful lesson or simply an idea of how much times have changed: what once seemed acceptable, if regrettable, is no longer even allowed in bar-jokes. Or is it?
Sodom and Gomorrah Destroyed
“But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.” The beginning of a Vonnegut book and, according to the footnotes, an explanation of an actual strange geological formation in the Dead Sea area. What an interesting scene. More than any passages I have read so far, this one seems very full of small meanings and great lessons. Lot’s being singled out as a innocent man, even in his slightly wicked ways; his inability to get his son-in-laws out of the city; his wife’s very human desire to look back, all are somehow moving. The scene is a mix between a riveting story of survival and a moral tale. Also, this is the J version, which up to date seems just a bit more wickedly imaginative…
The Shameful Origin of Moab and Ammon
Moabites and Ammonites. This episode, somewhat out of place, sounds like a dirty way to bash on your frenemies. “Yeah, don’t worry Mr. Moabite and Mrs. Ammonite, we mentioned you in the bible.” (snigger snigger) I guess we will see how the next mention of these two groups goes.
20
Abraham and Sarah at Gerar
Back to Gerar, but now told in the E source. “You have done things to me that not ought to be done.” When will we learn just what these things are, and why on earth is this a learned trait? Is it not something we should all be born with? Maybe we will learn, either later in the bible, or at the ‘end of the world as we know it.’ This brings to mind: how boring and short a book the bible might have been if only we knew better than to eat the fruit.
21
The Birth of Isaac
E, J and P sources all. Isaac means laughter, as Sarah laughs at her age in childbearing.
Hagar and Ishmael Sent Away
Ok. So third time, roughly of this story, this time the E version. Ishmael is a young boy, Hagar and Abraham’s son. They are sent away for “Isaac-ing” on the day of Isaac’s birth, but the Lord promises Abraham, this time ‘very distressed,’ that Ishmael too will be in some way more than ok. He is to become the father of Arabs. Is this all right? Very confusing to remember, so perhaps the repetition really is beneficial, if confusing.
Abraham and Abimelech Make a Covenant
E again. “And Abraham resided as an alien many days in the land of the Philistines.” So, he really is an alien, although the conflict is not as great as what it will become. He plants a tamarisk to signify the pact, and the pact signifies Israel’s ancient rights to the land. A bit of an important passage, if you’re into that sort of thing.
22
The Command to Sacrifice Isaac
E source. Upon first reading, very disturbing. But, once I read the footnotes I am reminded again of the gulf between cultures, even between practiced and perceived religions. Traditionally, the first son ‘belongs to god.’ Thus, Isaac is the Lord’s to take. Abraham knows this as surely as any Montanan knows it is their right to carry a gun. I cannot judge Abraham’s actions, which turn out to his (and his sons) benefit without fully comprehending the zeitgeist, if you will. A lesson in modesty. Also of note, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, where Abraham says “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.” Moving words, and once again they show the deep connection his people feel, and will feel for generations, to the land.
The Children of Nahor
J insert. Rebekah is a name I recognize, and I see she is coming up. I suppose this is just to provide some reference for family trees.
23
Not juicy. Relevant to followers as recognition of Holy (promised) Land, and astounding devotion to coverage of story from a literary standpoint. But, no murders. Yawn? Apparently, however, murders occur later according to Plotz. This becomes another contended site of Arabs and Jews, as if we needed another. How much pain and suffering can one text cause, even when it is not explicitly asking for it?
24
Abraham does not want his son to marry a Canaanite. One of the first restrictions? Where does this come from? It is frustrating, to not be able to love another, as in The Slave, where the Jew resists his feelings for the girl, with one reason being she is a Gentile. What is the historical or religious reason? Preservation of lineage? Pride? Anyways, hey Rebekah, welcome to Genesis.
25
Interesting foreshadowing in the account of Rebekah and Isaac’s children, Jacob and Esau. I must confess I am so ignorant of the Bible to know little of what will come to pass, but with or without this knowledge the passage is engaging. “Isaac loved Esau, because he was fond of game; but Rebekah loved Jacob.” This seems to be the first description of each parents’ feelings for the kids, a further enticing literary tool. The reader asks why, and reads on to find out. Is the bible intentionally full of small cliff hangers? Could it’s authors know that even the most devout would eventually need a little nudge?
Oh Jacob and Esau. A typical story of meathead and aspiring genius? J story, by the way, and it is hinted that this continues in later J translation in the footnotes. Congruity at last…
Also, Plotz notes the Genesis was written 1,000 years after Abraham was supposed to have lived. Just an interesting tidbit I would like to remember.
26
Once more God says “I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven…” (if you do this). And now people still expect this, and now there isn’t enough room. Bad call. I do wonder, why the emphasis on the spreading of the seed? Anyways, Isaac is off to Gerar. This J version closely resembles the E story of Abraham. Is this a purposeful repetition or a disagreeance of generation? I feel the answer could solve life’s riddles… Ok. So most likely a mistranslation or miscommunication. This follows too closely, and the ground with the wells and Philistines is named again, the same name.
27
“My son.” “Here I am.” Sounds familiar…just can’t quite place it. Oh right, sacrificial scene, how could I forget, no wonder those words are burned into Isaac’s memory. Once again, Jacob and Rebekah are conniving for Jacob’s success. Is this really the moral book I think it is? Is moral whatever God ordains, separate from human reason or intuition? Now his will is done, Jacob is master over his older brother, and perhaps this is the beginning of yet another feud.
Plotz calls to attention the difference, once again, between Sunday School heroes and the truth of the characters. I wonder, do the Sunday School teachers see something bright and shiny in these characters I do not, or do they choose not to see something. Are they trying to justify or make positive role models, hoping the children will never actually read the stories? I have little (NO) experience with bible school or true characters of the bible (working on it) but this just seems wrong. I protest.
Plotz also writes “God doesn’t suffer fools.” This is why he is allowed to be bamboozled. Huh. I have never seen intelligence to be too high up on the list for most….erm….everyday Christians. This must be some differing interpretation between the Jewish and the Christian ideals. Plotz mentions another difference between Christian and Jewish faiths, that of personal interest of God in everymans life. Makes one wonder just how much religion is based on a scripture, and how much based on a feeling.
28
P account of what just happened in the J story. This is much cleaner. It turns out Esau had already gave up his right to a blessing by marrying a Hittite woman, and so Jacob receives the blessing. He leaves to find a righteous wife, and on his way finds God. Of course. More endless loin-seeds sprouting everywhere, more importantly the consecrating of Bethel.
No comments:
Post a Comment