Job and his friends, by Ilya Repin (1869). . .

The Old Testament Daily Office Readings – the DORs – started with the Book of Job on Thursday, August 21, and those readings continue until Thursday, September 18.    (It’s a really long book, mostly filled with whining and complaining, by Job and his friends as seen above.)

But first a word about the patience of Job.   Wiktionary says that phrase indicates a person who has a great amount of patience, and refers to this book of the Bible, “where Job demonstrated faith and patience with God while suffering many severe trials.”  See patience of Job – Wiktionary, which added the expression seems to have started in James 5:11:

As you know, we count as blessed those who have persevered.  You have heard of Job’s perseverance and have seen what the Lord finally brought about.  The Lord is full of compassion and mercy.

(New International Version.)    But according to Isaac Asimov, Job really wasn’t all that patient.

Asimov first indicated that when the book was first written, Job was known as the hero of a well-known legend, about a wealthy sheik who lived east of Canaan, on the border of a desert.  This legendary Job was a “good man of superhuman patience” who suffered great misfortune without ever losing his faith in God.   Asimov also noted the appearance of Satan – indicating a “Persian influence” – and added that in the story Satan had (and has) the important role of testing human beings, to see if their faith in God was “staunch, or merely superficial.”

Be that as it may, Asimov indicated the “meat of the book” came in the series of question-and-answer speeches involving ethical and theological questions, many outside the realm of Bible study (including some interesting “astronomical references”).  He then noted:

In these speeches, Job is anything but patient and uncomplaining, and seriously questions the justice of God.  Nevertheless, this has not, for some reason, altered the common conception of Job as a patient, uncomplaining man. (E.A.)

Then too, Job is a good example of a Bible book that should be both approached with great caution and not be taken too literally.  For example, consider the following excerpts from Job 3:1-26, from the Daily Office Reading for Saturday, August 23:

Job opened his mouth and cursed the day of his birth…   “Why did I not perish at birth, and die as I came from the womb..?   For now I would be lying down in peace; I would be asleep and at rest…   Or why was I not hidden away in the ground like a stillborn child, like an infant who never saw the light of day?   There the wicked cease from turmoil, and there the weary are at rest.   Captives also enjoy their ease; they no longer hear the slave driver’s shout.   The small and the great are there, and the slaves are freed from their owners…   Why is light given to those in misery, and life to the bitter of soul, to those who long for death that does not come, who search for it more than for hidden treasure, who are filled with gladness and rejoice when they reach the grave?”

To say the least, such sentiments could definitely be “taken out of context.”

First Job cursed the day he was born and asked God why he didn’t die at birth, “as I came from the womb” or like a stillborn child.  He added that had he died, “I would be lying down in peace,” in a better place where “the wicked cease from turmoil” and the weary are at rest.  He then asked God why He gives life to those who long for death and who are “filled with gladness and rejoice when they reach the grave?”

For just that reason, guys like John R. W. Stott took issue with literalists who say the Bible should viewed as “inerrant per se.”  Instead – he said – the Bible should be viewed as inerrant “in all that it affirms.”  As applied to this case, Stott would say that the “plain meaning” of the text of Job should not be seen as affirming suicide, as would appear at first glance.

But since we’re running out of space and time, Stott’s views will be explored in a future post.

The upper image is courtesy of Job and His Friends – Ilya Repin – WikiArt.org.  See also Ilya Repin – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, on “the most renowned Russian artist of the 19th century, when his position in the world of art was comparable to that of Leo Tolstoy in literature. . .    His method was the reverse of impressionism.  He produced works slowly and carefully.  They were the result of close and detailed study.  With some of his paintings, he made one hundred or more preliminary sketches.  He was never satisfied with his works, and often painted multiple versions, years apart.”

As to Isaac Asimov on Job, see Asimov’s Guide to the Bible (Two Volumes in One),  Avenel Books (1981), beginning on page 474, up to the “not-so-patient” quote on page 480.  The “interesting astronomical references” include “Arcturas, Orion, and Pleiades.” (Job 9:9)

For other references on the role of Satan – as Accuser or Slanderer – in the “great scheme of things,” see On “St. Michael and All Angels” and/or On the readings for May 25.

James is the book of the Bible right after the Letter to the Hebrews and right before First Peter, “traditionally attributed to James the Just.”   See Epistle of James – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The full Daily Office Readings can be seen at The Lectionary – Satucket.com.

The lower image is courtesy of Understanding the Bible by John R.W. Stott — Reviews, ….  See also John Stott – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, which added that Stott was an Anglican cleric whom Time magazine ranked among the 100 most influential people in the world.  To view some of Stott’s 126 available books, see Amazon.com: John R. W. Stott: Books, Biography, Blog, ….

Then too, “requiring every word of the Bible to be inerrant” brings to mind what Jesus said in Matthew 23:4, as He chastised the scribes and Pharisees.  The Easy-to-Read translation says in pertinent part that such people “make strict rules that are hard for people to obey.  They try to force others to obey all their rules.  But they themselves will not try to follow any of those rules.”

*   *   *   *

First a note: This blog’s focus is the real Good News* – the positive parts of the Bible – and especially the Three Great Promises of Jesus. As noted elsewhere, the “DOR” in the blog-name stands for Daily Office Reading. The Daily Office is a set of Bible readings in a two-year cycle, so every two years you will have gone through the Bible at least one time. (I’m on my 16th trip through since 1992.) Which brings up the Daily Office readings for Sunday, July 20, 2014.

Those readings included Psalm 63:1-8(9-11), 98; and the evening Psalm 103. The others are Joshua 6:15-27; Acts 22:30-23:11; Mark 2:1-12. As for Psalm 63, I talked about it in a prior post, On “Patton,” Sunday School teacher. It noted the movie about him starring George C. Scott:

Patton was at a low point in his career during World War II, after the “slapping incident” in Sicily.  He was almost sent home in disgrace, but he found comfort in Psalm 63. . .  The film showed Patton praying, then going out to apologize to the troops. As he went, he recited Psalm 63, “humble and defiant.”  As abbreviated . . . the psalm went like this: “O God, Thou art my God, early will I seek Thee. My soul thirsteth for Thee…  But those that seek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth. They shall fall by the sword, they shall be a portion for foxes…   Everyone that sweareth by Him shall glory. But the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped.”

Also on the note of irony, the post pointed out that aside from believing in reincarnation, Patton read the Bible on a daily basis.   For example, during a tour of his private quarters an Army chaplain noted a Bible on a desk.  Later “the chaplain asked if Patton actually had time to read that Bible.  Patton said, ‘I sure do.  Every Goddamn day.’”

And finally, Psalm 98:1 was also covered by prior post including On the Gospel for May 18, and About this Blog.  The former post asked the musical question:

How can we do greater works than Jesus if we interpret the Bible in a cramped, narrow, strict and/or limiting manner?   For that matter, why does the Bible so often tell us to “sing to the Lord a new song?”   (For example, Isaiah 42:10 and Psalms 96:1, 98:1, and 144:9.)

Isaiah 42:10 says, “Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise from the end of the earth!”  Psalm 96 and 98 say pretty much the same thing, while Psalm 144:9 adds, “I will sing you a new song, O God, with a ten-stringed harp.”  (The Revised Standard and Living Bible versions, emphasis added.)  As to Psalm 144:9, if taken literally it seems to be a direct command that you can only sing a new song to God using a ten-stringed harp.  (Which would seem to be an absurd result, contrary to the intent of the person who drafted the directive.)

On the other hand, if interpreted metaphorically Psalm 144:9 could indicate that while God wants you to sing a new song to Him now, your best “song” will result from your unique experiences, as shaped and arranged according to lessons learned from other people who have sung songs that were new then, back when the Bible was originally written.   (Hmmmm.)

Okay, this is going to take a whole lot more thought. . .

*   *   *   *

As always, you can see the full readings at The Lectionary – Satucket.com.

As to “guilt trips,” see The Psychology and Management of Guilt Trips | Psychology Today: “Guilt trips are a form of verbal or nonverbal communication in which a guilt inducer tries to induce guilty feelings in a target in an effort to control their behavior.”  .

The “Thinker” image is courtesy of foliovision.com/images/2012/10/Rodin-the-Thinker.jpg. “The Thinker (French: Le Penseur) is a bronze sculpture by Auguste Rodin . . . a nude male figure of over life-size sitting on a rock with his chin resting on one hand as though deep in thought, and is often used as an image to represent philosophy.  There are about 28 full size castings. . .   Originally named The Poet (French: Le Poète), the Thinker was initially a figure in a large commission, begun in 1880, for a doorway surround called The Gates of Hell.” See The Thinker – Wikipedia.

*   *   *   * 

“Bob Dole doesn’t like that…*”

The Old Testament reading in the Daily Office for Saturday, May 17, is Exodus 40:18-38, where seven times Moses used the phrase:  “as the Lord had commanded Moses.”  That brings up illeism, the practice of referring to yourself in the third person.

Chapter 40 ends the Book of Exodus, the story of Moses, about Moses, and by Moses, and about his leading the Children of Israel out of Egyptian slavery and into freedom.

The next book, Leviticus, begins (in the King James Version; the one God uses), “And the Lord called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation…”  As noted, tradition says that Moses wrote this book himself.

In the reading for Saturday, May 17, Moses built a “portable dwelling place” for God.

He set up the tabernacle, spread a tent over it and put a tent-covering over that, “as the Lord had commanded Moses.”    He took the Ark of the Covenant – as in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” – and put it in the tent, “and screened the ark of the covenant; as the Lord had commanded Moses.”  He put a table in the tent and “set the bread in order on it before the Lord; as the Lord had commanded Moses.”   Then he set up lampstand,  “as the Lord had commanded Moses.”   He put an altar in and “fragrant incense on it; as the Lord had commanded Moses.”  He set a screen in front and presented “the burnt-offering and the grain-offering as the Lord had commanded Moses.”   He set up a basin with water, so Moses, his brother Aaron and/or Aaron’s sons could wash before approaching the altar, “as the Lord had commanded Moses.”

This then was the portable dwelling place for God (as “modeled” below), as He went with the Hebrews in their 40 years of wandering, before they entered their Promised Land.

That brings up illeism, “referring to oneself in the third person instead of first person,” used as a stylistic device in literature, while in real life it can reflect “different stylistic intentions…”

Julius Caesar used the device in his Commentaries about the Gallic Wars, while Xenophon of Athens – from whom the term xenophobia derives – used it in Anabasis, “‘one of the great adventures in human history,’ as Will Durant expressed the common assessment.”

Both Caesar’s Commentaries and Anabasis were, as Wikipedia put it, “ostensibly non-fictional accounts of wars led by their authors,” who used the device “to impart an air of objective impartiality to the account, which included justifications of the author’s actions.  In this way personal bias is presented, albeit dishonestly, as objectivity.”

Another note: Tradition says Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, also known as the Pentateuch or the Torah: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.  In those books Moses told the story of the Hebrew people, from the beginning of time up to the time Moses was about to die and the Hebrews were about to enter their Promised Land.

Which brings up a question.  In modern terms:  What did Moses know, and when did he know it?  When did Moses find out he was “on a mission from God?”  At the Burning Bush?  Before then, when he killed the Egyptian overseer?  More important, when did he start taking notes for this massive work, five of the most influential books in the history of the world?

So the better question might be:  When did Moses write, and when did he write it?

One answer is to ignore the question.  “The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.”  (Another way of saying, “For heaven’s sake, don’t make me think?“)  That approach seems to say super-heroes wrote the Bible and we shouldn’t even think we can become anything like them.

There is another approach.  At some point in his life, Moses had an experience that led him to believe he’d been spoken to by The Force That Created The Universe.  That experience changed the life of Moses and altered the course of history in a way seldom repeated.  And so you might think maybe – just maybe – the Bible was written by people very much like us, and the only difference is they – like Moses – had a “mystic experience with the Divine,” and we haven’t, yet.

Isn’t that what going to church should be about?  Isn’t that especially true because – as Jesus said in John 14:2 – He expects us to perform greater miracles than He did, and by extension, greater miracles than Moses?   (Of course that would mean a lot of work.) 

To be continued…

“Moses doesn’t like this. Moses doesn’t like this one bit…“

*  The Bob Dole image is courtesy of Wikipedia.   As for his habit of speaking of himself in the third person, see Urban Dictionary: Bob Dole, which defined him as:  “A guy who ran for president against Bill Clinton.  Known for speaking of himself in the third person…   [Example:] ‘Bob Dole doesn’t like this.  Bob Dole doesn’t like this one bit.'”

On the original tabernacle, see: Tabernacle – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Not Jethro Bodine. . .

. . . nor even Jethro Tull . . .

came up with the basic idea behind today’s Supreme Court.  That would have been “the original Jethro,” the one mentioned in the Old Testament part of the Daily Office reading (DOR) for Monday, May 5, 2014, to wit:

The Jethro mentioned in the Old Testament DOR for May 5[, 2014]  was the father-in-law of Moses.  He is shown in the painting at left, advising Moses on the idea of delegating authority.

But first a bit of background.

Previous DORs told of Moses hightailing it out of Egypt after: 1) learning that he was not a prince of Egypt, as he’d been led to believe all his life, 2) learning that he was actually a member of Hebrew people, who were then serving as slaves in Egypt, and 3) after killing an Egyptian overlord who was beating a Hebrew slave.

He ended up in Midian, somewhere in the deserts of the Sinai and/or Arabian peninsula, where he met Jethro, a priest of Midian in his own right, and married Jethro’s daughter Zipporah.

But by and by (“in the fullness of time”), Moses went back to Egypt after his ten-year exile and eventually – after persuasions including the Ten Plagues – got the Pharoah of Egypt to “let my people go.”  (All of which was covered in the Daily Office readings leading up to the one for May 5.)   We are now in Exodus 18, with the Children of Israel still wandering in wilderness before getting to The Promised Land, and after the incidents of God providing water-from-the-rock at Massah and/or Meribah, and providing manna and quail to eat.

In the reading for Sunday, May 4, Moses – upon his return to the land of Midian – “told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardship that had beset them on the way, and how the Lord had delivered them.”  In other words, Jethro welcomed his son-in-law back to Midian with open arms.

Then, in the reading for Monday, May 5 (Exodus 18: 13-27), Jethro watched as Moses tried to settle all the disputes that were coming up as the Children of Israel were still wandering around in the desert wilderness (with tempers no doubt getting extremely short).   And Jethro could see that Moses was wearing himself out in the process.

In today’s terms Moses was suffering burnout:  “someone who has become very physically and emotionally tired after doing a difficult job for a long time.”  So Jethro told Moses:

“What you are doing is not good.  ¹⁸You will surely wear yourself out, both you and these people with you.  For the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone.”

He advised Moses to appoint officers – in effect, lower-court judges – to settle the easier cases after teaching them the basic tenets of the law that was even then evolving in the wilderness, either as conditions dictated or as Moses had the law revealed to him by God (or perhaps a combination of both).   The passage continues:  “Let them sit as judges for the people at all times; let them bring every important case to you, but decide every minor case themselves.  So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. . .

“So Moses listened to his father-in-law and . . . chose able men from all Israel and appointed them as heads over the people, as officers over thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens.  And they judged the people at all times; hard cases they brought to Moses, but any minor case they decided themselves.”

And that, Dear Reader, is the basic idea behind the Supreme Court of the United States.  And that’s as set out in Article III, section 1 of the Constitution:  “The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”

In other words, that’s the basic idea behind the Supreme Court.  That it will deal with “hard cases,” leaving minor cases for lower courts.

On the other hand, see such recent books as Playing It Safe: How the Supreme Court Sidesteps Hard Cases and Stunts the Development of Law, by Lisa Kloppenberg.

The title alludes to the old legal adage that hard cases make bad law.

That phrase in turn is frequently attributed to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.  However, according to Wikipedia it was earlier used by a judge in the 1842 English case, Winterbottom v. Wright.  Wikipedia also cited legal scholar Glanville Williams, “What is certain is that cases in which the moral indignation of the judge is aroused frequently make bad law.”

On the other hand, Moses didn’t have a legislature to help him, nor did he have power separated into three different branches of “government;” legislative, executive and judicial, and that of the three the judicial – arguably deciding hard cases – was to be “the least dangerous branch.”  See e.g., What is the Proper Role of the Courts (by The Heritage Foundation).

All of which raises the question: Is the Bible “frozen in time,” or is it a living breathing document whose story continues “even to this day?”  In other words:  Is the Bible “grand and eternal” because it provides us with an anchor in a sea of shifting values?  Or is the Bible great because of its flexibility and ambiguity, which to some people attests to its ability to “grow and progress” along with society’s evolving sense of justice?

Put another way, does the Bible provide a set of “rock-ribbed rules” which must be followed every single day, on pain of suffering hellfire-and-damnation?  (As illustrated below.)  Or instead does the Bible provide a series of general principles that provide guidance from the past, and which should be adapted to the challenges of the present. . .

That’s a subject for future posts.

Notes and references:

The Jethro Bodine image is courtesy of itsallsatire247.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/jethro.jpg.

The “Jethro Tull” image is courtesy of Wikipedia, as is the image of “Jethro advising Moses,” a 1659 painting by Jan van Bronchorst.

The Supreme Court image is courtesy of www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/files … supreme_court_building.jpg.

The “burnout” definition was provided by www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burnout.

The lower image is courtesy of Fire and brimstone – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “A 19th-century illustration of Sodom being destroyed by fire and brimstone, while Lot and his family escape.”