Moses and the Burning Bush – subject of next Sunday’s Old Testament Bible-reading…

 

 

The last time I reviewed the next-Sunday Bible readings was November 30, 2015.  (On Advent – 2015.)  But this next Sunday, February 28, 2016, I’ll be up front, serving as lay reader and chalicist.  (A chalice is shown at left.)

Accordingly, it would behoove me to get familiar with those readings.

You can see the full readings at Third Sunday in Lent.

Those readings include:  1) Exodus 3:1-15 (on Moses and the Burning bush);  Psalm 63:1-9 (the psalm I call “Patton’s psalm … both humble and defiant”); and 1st Corinthians 10:1-13 (Paul’s “warning against idolatry.”)  They’re the ones I’ll be reading up front.

The Gospel – Luke 13:1-9 – will be read by “Father Paul.”

And a BTW:  The theme of that Gospel is “repent or perish.”  On the other hand, you could also say the Gospel is on a metaphoric “fig tree that bears no fruit.”  (And in turn you could say that ties in with the last post, on Conservative Christians content to stay “career buck privates.”)

Also incidentally,  et alia is Latin for “and others.” (As in, readings on Moses “and others.”) 

You can see the full Old Testament reading at Exodus 3:1-15.  For one interpretation, see Burning bush – Wikipedia, which said “the burning bush is the location at which Moses was appointed by Adonai (God) to lead the Israelites out of Egypt and into Canaan.”

The article noted other interpretations, including that Moses “may have been under the influence of a hallucinogenic substance when he witnessed the burning bush.”

(Note also Mount Horeb – where Moses saw the Burning bush – is where he later “struck the rock” and got water, shown at right.)

And finally, the Burning bush article directed the reader to “see also” the article on Theophany.

For another take, see The great religious leaders, a 1958 book by Charles F. Potter (1885-1962).  Potter was a “Unitarian minister, theologian and author.”  In 1923-1924, he became “nationally known through a series of debates with Dr. John Roach Straton, a fundamentalist Christian.”

And for starters, Potter noted the “pre-Mosaic religion of the Hebrews was a mixture of animism and fetishism.” (43)  But that all started to change when Moses had his theophany, his experience with the burning bush. (37)  The upshot?  Moses got commissioned by God in Exodus 3:10:  “I am sending you to Pharaoh.  You must lead my people Israel out of Egypt.”

Or as Potter put it, he got the divine call to every prophet:   A “great wrong to be righted, a task to be done, and then a sudden blinding realization that the task is one’s own.” (43)

Potter noted several important factors about this theophany of Moses.  One was that in all such experiences, “the hearing of the prophet seems much more acute than his vision.” (38)  See also Exodus 3:6, “Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.”

But perhaps more important:  A “new religion does well to build on the old.” (38)  And so, during his lengthy stay with his family – in exile, in Midian – Moses may have recalled some of the things he learned during the first part of his life, when he was a literal Prince of Egypt.

That is, he may have combined the “traditions of the fathers” with some things he learned as a “Prince of Egypt.”  In doing so he went on to forge a sense of collective self in the Children of Israel.  They became strong enough to go back and re-conquer their ancient Promised Land.

That is, Potter indicated that as such a Prince of Egypt, Moses was likely familiar with Akhenaten.  (Seen at left.)  He was the “heretic king” who had ruled Egypt a mere century before Moses. (36)

Briefly, Akhenaten introduced the idea of one God to Egypt – monotheism – but Egyptians just weren’t ready for that.  (They liked “traditional Egyptian polytheism.”  See Wikipedia.)

And so after his death the Egyptians abandoned Akhenaten‘s “new-fangled religion” and went back to their old ways.  But in the mind of Moses, Akhenaten‘s One God may have taken new form.

Recalling his suffering fellow Hebrews in Egypt, Moses may have thought this way:

The great gods of Egypt could not  be expected, of course, to help the Hebrews…  If only they had one great god to help them now!  Then Moses remembered the heretic [Akhenaten]…  [Perhaps] there was one great god, greater even than Aten.  Perhaps this unknown god had caused all things, even the sun, and really cared for suffering human beings, and would deliver the Hebrews from bondage and help them escape to some better land!

(36-37, emphasis in original.)  That was of course a nice thing to think about God.  (That “He” might redeem a nation of illiterate slaves.)  But then Moses realized this “new God” wanted him to do the “legwork.”  And so – not surprisingly – Moses protested his new assignment.  “Moses said to God, ‘Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?'”

Among other concerns, Moses knew the great God of the Burning bush was not the “God of their fathers” to the Hebrews back in Egypt.  (Remember their “animism and fetishism…”)

Moses also knew that this stubborn people – his fellow Hebrews who had not been “princes of Egypt” – would not “accept a totally new God.”  (Or a new religion.)  So he had to build on the past, as shown in Exodus 6:3.  There God told Moses, “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai – ‘God Almighty’ – but I did not reveal my name, Yahweh, to them.”

In other words, before Moses appeared, “God” had apparently only appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  (And then only as El Shaddai.)  It was not until the time after Moses that God appeared to the Children of Israel as Yahweh.  And so, after his “Burning bush experience,”  Moses went on to forge a new nation from a group of exiled, illiterate slaves:

Moses made the Hebrew tribes into a nation by giving them a God … but that God was not made de novo.  With [his] wisdom in dealing with men … Moses conveyed to his people the idea of one great personal God by using concepts already at hand…  His was the task of leading a people from animism to monotheism … and he did a piece of work which deserves admiration…  [T]o Moses belongs the glory of the pioneer.

(42-43)  And it all started with that “burning bush” experience.  Which is one big reason Potter said of Moses, “His burning bush still lights our world.” (61)

King Ahasuerus – getting sloshed – shortly before he married Esther of the Bible…

 

I last reviewed the readings for a Sunday coming up on August 7.  (See The OTHER readings for August.)  I said I was leaving town on August 10, and wouldn’t be back until August 27.  So here’s a summary of the Bible readings for September 27.  (A full month later.)

(And a BTW:  Today’s Gospel raises the question whether Jesus was a Liberal or a Conservative…)

Officially, the Bible readings are for the 18th Sunday after Pentecost – Proper 21.  The “Track 1” readings are Esther 7 [and] 9, Psalm 124, James 5:13-20, and Mark 9:38-50.

Now about that Gospel:

In Mark 9:38 a disciple told Jesus, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”  But Jesus said, “Don’t do that.”  Because – as He noted in Mark 9:40 – “whoever is not against us is for us.”  (See also Luke 9:50.)

Some people have pointed out that this contradicts what Jesus said in Matthew 12:30.  Matthew had Jesus saying, “Whoever is not with me is against me.”

Which raises a matter of legal presumptions.  In the Mark/Luke version, if you haven’t come out and said you’re against Jesus, you’re still on His side.  But in the Matthew version, unless you come out and say that you’re on the side of Jesus, you are presumptively against Him.  All of which could be extremely important when it comes to deciding if you’re “going to Hell.”

Then too, some other people have gone as far as to say that such contradictions in the Bible prove both that it’s a crock, and/or that there are “no supernatural entities – including God.”  (See for example, A List Of Biblical Contradictions, discussed further in the notes.)

But the issue here is whether today’s Gospel tends to prove that Jesus was either a Conservative or a Liberal.

(One quick point:  If Jesus had been conservative, we’d all be Jewish today.  “Not that there’s anything wrong with that!“)

But seriously, I discussed the issue raised by this Gospel reading in a post in May 2014:  Jesus: Liberal or Fundamentalist?  In that post I wrote:

Under [a] strict construction – used by [conservatives] – “ambiguous language is given its exact and technical meaning.”   Under that rule for Matthew [12:30], if you aren’t expressly for Jesus, you are against Him.  But in Mark [9:40], being “kind of against us” doesn’t put you “outside the pale.” In Mark, if you are not expressly against Jesus, you are for Him…  Also, by strictly interpreting those quotes – giving them their exact and technical meaning – you end up with Jesus contradicting Himself.

So which is it?  Did Jesus mean to say unless you’re expressly for Him, you’re against Him?  (And presumably going to Hell…)   Or that unless you expressly reject Him, you’ve still got a chance?

When resolving such issues, the primary question is:  “What did the writer intend?”  So, could Matthew and Mark have intended to create such a contradiction?  Certainly not.

To make a long story short:  The two passages reflect entirely different situations.  In Matthew 12, Jesus was dealing with demons.  (Matthew 12:22-37 comes under the heading “Jesus and Beelzebul.”)  But in Mark 9, Jesus addressed what to do with people; human beings.

Thus in the case of people – like us – Jesus liberally interpreted the Bible:

With demons, Jesus used a strict construction.  If a demon wasn’t expressly for Jesus, he was against Him.  But in the case of people, Jesus used a liberal construction.  By that construction the law was “reasonably and fairly evaluated so as to implement [its] object and purpose.”

In this case the “law” at issue is the Bible.  By using a liberal interpretation, Jesus was saying that “if a person isn’t expressly against Me,” He – Jesus – is willing to give that person the benefit of the doubt.  In other words, Jesus was prone to give us poor schmucks a break.

In further words, Jesus was a “Liberal” when it came to giving us humans the benefit of the doubt, but “Conservative” when it came to dealing with demons.  (Hmmmm.)

In still further words, Jesus seemed to be showing that He was a true moderate.  He wanted to see the Bible’s “object and purpose” fully implemented.  And to do that, He used a liberal approach when necessary, and a conservative approach when He had to.

And what is that “object and purpose?”  The best answer is in 2d Peter 3:9, where Saint Peter – holding “the keys to the kingdom” – said God “wants all people to have an opportunity to turn to him…”

*   *    *   *

Moving on to the Old Testament, the Book of Esther tells the story of a Jewish woman who married a king and in turn saved her people from annihilation.  Here’s what happened:

Ahasuerus was the king of Persia.  (He was also known as Xerxes.)  One day he got drunk with his buddies.  He then sent for his wife – Queen Vashti, who was very beautiful – with orders to come to the party and strut her stuff.  But she refused – she was very proud – so Ahasuerus decided to get rid of her.  In a process very much like today’s American Idol, Esther ended up being chosen as the new queen.

Which was a good thing, because the Grand Vizier – Haman – had hatched a plot against the Jews.  (Of which Esther was one.  This was during the Babylonian exile, one of the times when the Jewish people were carried away into captivity.)  Haman was jealous of Mordecai – Esther’s cousin – for reasons including but not limited to the fact that Mordecai “refused to do obeisance” to him.  So he tricked the king into giving orders to “exterminate this alien race.”  To that end, Haman had a tall gallows built, on which to hang Mordecai.

But in the reading for September 27, Haman’s plans come unraveled.  (As shown metaphorically at left.)

For one thing, Esther finally told the king that she was Jewish.  (Which is consistent with the “Seinfeld” theme noted above.)  And in the end, “they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai.”  (See Esther 7:10, with some translations reading that Haman was “impaled” on the pole he intended to use on Mordecai.)  But more than that, the Jewish people in the country were saved from annihilation, and all of which led to the present Jewish festival of Purim.

See also hoist on his own petard.  (A phrase originating in Shakespeare’s Hamlet.)

And finally – I’m running out of space – there’s the reading from James the brother of Jesus.  (See Epistle of James – Wikipedia.)  James wrote in part that “faith apart from works is dead,” which led to a controversy that continues “even to this day.”  (See James 2:26, and also On Mary and Martha of Bethany, which provided a possible solution.)

But in today’s reading he advised that “whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.”  So if you “bring someone to Jesus,” you’ll not only save that person, but also “cover up” a bunch of your own sins.  See James 5:20, raising what I like to call the “James 5:20 commission.”  (I’ll take any break I can get…)

And besides that, the reading gave rise to the rather domestic scene below.

 

“Christ in the House of His Parents … including James, the brother of Jesus.”

 

 

Notes:

The upper image is courtesy of Ahasuerus – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “Aert de Gelder, The Banquet of Ahasuerus.”  The site noted that the name “Ahasuerus is equivalent to the Greek name Xerxes, both deriving from the Old Persian language.”  See also AHASUERUS – Jewish Encyclopedia.com, noting he was the “Persian king, identical with Xerxes (486-465 B.C.).”

Re:  “Bible contradictions.”  The ostensible Matthew-Mark contradiction was pointed out in the For or against link at the Secular Web site, owned and operated by Internet Infidels, Inc.  The site added:  “The Bible is riddled with repetitions and contradictions, things that the Bible bangers would be quick to point out in anything that they want to criticize.”

The website took the Bible to task for not creating a “carefully constructed treatise, reflecting a well-thought-out plan.”  I addressed such criticisms in posts like The readings for June 15 – Part I.  I pointed out that Moses – for example – in writing the first five books of the Bible, was limited by “his audience’s ability to comprehend.”   The audience he “wrote” for was almost wholly illiterate – not to mention ignorant by present-day standards – and had been trained since birth only to be mindless, docile slaves.  Thus Moses was forced by circumstance “to use language and concepts that his ‘relatively-pea-brained contemporary audience’ could understand.” 

In further words, if Moses had written the “carefully constructed treatise” suggested by the “Infidels,” he almost certainly would be burned at the stake or stoned to death.  (Or both.)  See also Reflections on Volume 3 – Part II, which includes “The Stoning of Moses and Aaron.”

On this point see also Internal consistency of the Bible – Wikipedia:

Dietrich Bonhoeffer pointed out [the] conflict, between Matthew 12:30 … and Mark 9:40 [and] called these two sayings “the claim to exclusiveness and the claim to totality…”  D.A. Carson commented similarly, adding he thought [Mark 9:40] describe[d] the attitude listeners are to have to other possible disciples: when in doubt, be inclusive…

Other New Testament scholars have said these were not separate statements, “but rather one statement that has either been preserved in two different forms, or has been altered by the Gospel writers to present a point of view that expresses the needs of the Christian community at the time.” The site noted that Mark – the first Gospel to be written – presented the “inclusive” type of Christianity, while Matthew’s version is the more exclusive.

“Seinfeld” image courtesy of my123cents.com/2014/08/not-that-theres-anything-wrong-with-that.

The “No labels” image is courtesy of www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/80058/sticking-point.

Re:  “Haman’s plans come unraveled.”  The image is courtesy of the Wikipedia Mordecai link, with the caption, “The Triumph of Mordecai by Pieter Lastman, 1624.”

Re: “impaling.”  See also Vlad the Impaler:  “The name of the vampire Count Dracula in Bram Stoker‘s 1897 novel Dracula was inspired by Vlad.”

The lower image is courtesy of Epistle of James – Wikipedia.  The painting is by John Everett Millais, and was “immensely controversial when first exhibited because of its realistic depiction of a carpentry workshop, especially the dirt and detritus on the floor.”  For example, Charles Dickens said Millais portrayed Mary as so “hideous in her ugliness that … she would stand out from the rest of the company as a Monster, in the vilest cabaret in France, or the lowest gin-shop in England.”

But I thought it was a very nice, very “domestic” painting…

*   *    *   *

A side note:  The next major Feast Day is September 29, St. Michael and All Angels.  I did a post on August 10, 2014.  See St. Michael and All Angels, and also On St. Michael’s – Tybee Island: 

Michael is mentioned three times in the Book of Daniel, once as a “great prince who stands up for the children of your people.”  The idea that Michael was the advocate of the Jews became so prevalent that in spite of the rabbinical prohibition against appealing to angels as intermediaries … Michael came to occupy a certain place in the Jewish liturgy.

 

 

 

 

 

A visualization of the Bible’s “Song of Songs…”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Welcome to “read the Bible – expand your mind:”

For more on expanding your mind and horizons, see the Introduction.

The theme here is that taking the Bible literally is a good place to start.  But to be all that you can be in this earthly pilgrimage, you need to explore the “mystical side of Bible reading.*”

That’s what this blog is about.  Exploring that mystical side of the Bible.

Or see Some basics, on the Three Great Promises of Jesus:  1) He’ll accept anyone who comes to Him;  2) He wants us to live abundantly; and  3) He wants us do greater miracles than He did.

In the meantime:

I’m leaving town on Monday, August 10, and won’t be back until August 27.  (A matter of some “unfinished business,” canoe-trip-wise.)  So here’s an analysis of the Bible readings for Sunday, August 16, 23 and 30.

(You can see the full readings for all three Sundays at Twelfth Sunday after Pentecost – Proper 15, Thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost – Proper 16, and Fourteenth Sunday after Pentecost – Proper 17.)

In the readings discussed below, we see a rare Biblical glimpse on the beauty of sexual love, and on David finally dying, or “sleeping with his ancestors.”  They also tell about Jesus as both the Bread of Life and as the Light of the World.

But first, a note that on August 16 there’s a switch in the Old Testament readings.

Up until August 9, those readings were from the Second Book of Samuel.  On August 16 – and 23 – they switch to the First Book of Kings.  The two books “of Kings” were originally one, but they were so long that they had to be put on two different scrolls.  (The ancient Hebrews didn’t have “books” as we know them.  Their books were actually scrolls.)

The Two Book of Kings present the Bible view of the “history of ancient Israel and Judah from the death of David to the release of his successor Jehoiachin from imprisonment in Babylon.”

Then for August 30 the OT reading changes again, from Kings to the “Song of Solomon” or Song of Songs.  (After that, during the month of September the Old Testament readings are from the Book of Proverbs.)

The “Song of Songs” is unique.  It doesn’t refer to The Law (illustrated at right), or to the Covenant, or to Yahweh.  And the song doesn’t teach wisdom “in the manner of Proverbs or Ecclesiastes:”

Instead, it celebrates sexual love.  It gives “the voices of two lovers, praising each other, yearning for each other, proffering invitations to enjoy.”  The two are in harmony, each desiring the other and rejoicing in sexual intimacy; the women (or “daughters”) of Jerusalem form a chorus to the lovers … whose participation in the lovers’ erotic encounters facilitates the participation of the reader.

But more about that later.

The OT reading for August 16 – 1 Kings 2:10-12; 3:3-14 – starts: “David slept with his ancestors, and was buried in the City of David,” that is, Jerusalem.  (This was after he’d been King of Israel for 40 years.)  It then introduces Solomon – David’s son – as the new King.  (Though not without a bit of drama, in the form of a struggle over the succession.)

Wikipedia said Solomon was known most for his wisdom, and the reading shows Solomon praying for such wisdom.   God responded by giving him “wisdom plus:”

It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this.  God said to him, “Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches … I now do according to your word…   I give you also what you have not asked, both riches and honor all your life; no other king shall compare with you…  (E.A.)

All of which provides a wonderful object lesson in the proper way to pray to God.

The OT reading for August 23 – 1 Kings 8:(1, 6, 10-11), 22-30, 41-43 – includes a similar prayer with Solomon praising God.  He did this in the process of bringing the Ark of the Covenant back to the First Temple in Jerusalem.

( 1st Kings 7 described the process of building the Temple.  Note that the Ark had been with David when he fled Jerusalem “at the time of Absalom‘s conspiracy.”  It was later returned, and during the 13 years that Solomon built the Temple, it was kept in “a special inner room, named Kodesh Hakodashim, or Holy of Holies.  See 1st Kings 6:19.)

The OT reading for August 30 – Song of Solomon 2:8-13 – follows the Introduction (1:1–6) and a “Dialogue between the lovers (1:7–2:7).”  In this reading the “woman recalls a visit from her lover (2:8–17).”  Passages include “My beloved is like a gazelle or a young stag,” and the beloved speaking to her, “Arise, my love, my fair one, and come away.”  (Wikipedia noted the Christian tradition, “appreciating the literal meaning of a romantic song between man and woman,” but also seeing the poem as “an allegory of Christ (the bridegroom) and his Church (the bride).”)

The psalms for these three weeks include Psalm 111, Psalm 84, and Psalm 45:1-2, 7-10.  The International Bible Commentary (IBC) described Psalm 84 as “A pilgrim’s testimony.”  It added that the psalm rivals Paul’s letter to the Philippians as an expression of spiritual joy.”  The psalmist finds in God “true security and abundant blessing, to which a life of [attempted] moral integrity is the key according to the covenant.”  (See “the Covenant, above.)

(“Attempted” in brackets is a reminder that we’re all still “works in progress,” and will remain so…)

And speaking of weddings, the IBC said Psalm 45 was a “wedding song for a king and his bride.” Continuing the theme begun in Song of Songs – above – Psalm 45:2 reads:  “You are the fairest of men; grace flows from your lips, because God has blessed you for ever.”  And Psalm 45:8 reads: “All your garments are fragrant with myrrh, aloes, and cassia, and the music of strings from ivory palaces makes you glad.”

The New Testament readings are Ephesians 5:15-20, Ephesians 6:10-20, and James 1:17-27.

As noted in Wikipedia, Ephesians 5:15-20 is part of Paul’s discourse of instructions about ordinary life and different relationships.   But in  Ephesians 6:10-20, Paul moves on to the “imagery of spiritual warfare (including the metaphor of the Armor of God).”  And James begins with an introduction, with an additional instruction to “be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceive themselves.”  (James 1:22.)

That simple phrase set up a spiritual battle that continues even to this day.  See Mary and Martha of Bethany:  “the debate over which is the better path – faith or works – has been going for most if not all the 2,000 years since the Church was born.  See Faith and Works.”

Martin Luther for one characterized James’ letter as an ‘epistle of straw,'” mostly – he thought – because it supposedly conflicted “with Paul on the doctrine of justification.”  (Like I said, that spiritual battle continues “even to this day,” but maybe the answer isn’t “either-or,” but rather “both.”  See Mary and Martha.)  Note also that readings from James will continue throughout the month of September.

The Gospel readings are John 6:51-58, John 6:56-69, and – in another switch – to Mark 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23.  In the readings from John’s Gospel, Jesus continues His Bread of Life Discourse:

In the Christological context, the use of the Bread of Life title is similar to the Light of the World title in John 8:12 where Jesus states: “I am the light of the world: he who follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”  These assertions build on the Christological theme of John 5:26 where Jesus claims to possess life just as the Father does and provide it to those who follow him

See also The readings for August 9, which added that “part of that ‘light of life’ or ‘bread of life’ approach is to know how to process anger and/or misunderstandings…”

The Gospel for August 30 includes Jesus being criticized by “Pharisees and some of the scribes.” (They saw some disciples eating with “unwashed hands.”)  He responded by quoting Isaiah 29:13 and concluding, “You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.”  Incidentally, Mark 7:9 is skipped over in this reading, but in it Jesus continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!”

Another example of the proper way not to approach God…

 

“Woe unto You, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!“

 

The upper image is courtesy of religion.lilithezine.com/The-Song-of-Solomon.  The article doesn’t have a readily-identifiable attribution, but it appears to be the work of Aubrey Beardsley.  Beardsley (1872-1898) was a noted English illustrator and author:

His drawings in black ink, influenced by the style of Japanese woodcuts, emphasized the grotesque, the decadent, and the erotic. He was a leading figure in the Aesthetic movement…   [His] contribution to the development of the Art Nouveau and poster styles was significant, despite the brevity of his career before his early death from tuberculosis.

See Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The canoe image is courtesy of  Canoe – Wikipedia.  Caption:  “Voyageur canoe shooting the rapids.”

Re: First and Second Kings.  The consensus is that First and Second Chronicles repeat much of the material in First and Second Kings.  See Wikipedia: “Much of the content of Chronicles is a repetition of material from other books of the Bible, from Genesis to Kings.”  But see also Chronicles and Kings – A Comparison – Mark Haughwout, and/or The Relationship between … Kings and Chronicles.

The “Law” image is courtesy of Torah – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “Presentation of The Torah (1860) –Museum of Jewish Art and History.”  The Torah is also known as The Law:  

Christian scholars usually refer to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible as the “Pentateuch” … or as the Law, or Law of Moses.  Muslims refer to the Torah as Tawrat (توراة, “Law”), an Arabic word for the revelations given to the Islamic prophet Musa (موسى, Moses in Arabic).

The “Solomon dedication” image is courtesy of the First Temple Wikipedia article.  The caption:  “In an artistic representation, King Solomon dedicates the Temple at Jerusalem (painting by James Tissot or follower, c. 1896–1902).”

The Martin Luther image is courtesy of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The caption:  “Luther as a friar, with tonsure.”  See also Tonsure – Wikipedia, referring to  practice “in medieval Catholicism, abandoned by papal order in 1972.”

The lower image is courtesy of Woes of the Pharisees – Wikipedia.  The full caption:  “James Tissot, Woe unto You, Scribes and Pharisees, Brooklyn Museum.”  See also Light of the World – Wikipedia. The quote including “hypocrites” is from Matthew 23:14.

 

 Jesus, sharing the “Bread of Life” at Emmaus – as discussed in the Gospel for August 9…

 

Welcome to “read the Bible – expand your mind:”

For more on expanding your mind and horizons, see the Introduction.

The theme?  Taking the Bible literally is a good place to start.  But to be all you can be  –  on this earthly pilgrimage  –  you need to explore “the mystical side of Bible reading.*”

That’s what this blog is about.  Exploring that mystical side of the Bible.

Or see Some basics, on the Three Great Promises of Jesus:  1) He’ll accept anyone who comes to Him;  2) He wants us to live abundantly; and  3) He wants us do greater miracles than He did.

In the meantime:

There’s more on the Bible readings for August 9 below.  But first, here’s an update:

I talked about David and Bathsheba – and how they “met” – in the readings for July 26.  She was married at the time – to Uriah the Hittite – when David secretly watched her taking a bath “in the altogether.”  To make a long story short, he got her pregnant.

Then he tried to cover it up by bringing Uriah back from the battle-front and inviting him to sleep with Bathsheba.  (So Uriah would think the baby was his.)  When all that didn’t work, David basically had Uriah killed in battle, but managed to make it look like an accident.

In the OT reading for August 3, the “stuff hit the fan.”  (See 2 Samuel 11:26-12:13a.)  First, Bathsheba heard that Uriah had been killed in battle, and not much later she became David’s wife and “bore him a son.”  But God wasn’t too happy about it, and so sent His prophet Nathan.

Nathan told David a story about a “little ewe lamb,” and how it got stolen by some “fat cat” (as illustrated at right).  But Nathan didn’t name the Fat cat.  Then David got all bent out of shape and said the man deserved to die.  That’s when Nathan told David, “You are the Fat cat!”  (A loose translation.)   Nathan then described what would happen next.

First, “the sword shall never depart from your house.”  That meant David would undergo nothing but trouble for the rest of his life.  Also, God said (through Nathan), “I will take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives,” in public.  (All of which came to pass, by the way.)  The August 3 reading ended with David confessing: “I have sinned against the LORD.”

And incidentally, the psalm for August 3 was Psalm 51:1-13.  As noted in Readings for July 26, David wrote it after – and because of – this incident involving Bathsheba and Uriah.  In turn Psalm 51 is widely recognized as “one of the best-known and most often read penitential texts” in the Bible:  “David threw himself on the mercy of God after committing adultery and murder…  His two-fold repentance provides a model that we should follow.”

(Although the better course would be not to do what David did in the first place…)

Moving right along, that brings us to the Bible readings for Sunday, August 9.  (See Eleventh Sunday after Pentecost – Proper 14.)  The Old Testament reading – 2d Samuel 18:5-9, 15, 31-33 – tells about the death of Absalom, David’s third and favorite son.

Unfortunately, the Lectionary readings went from the beginning of Chapter 12 to the beginning of Chapter 18 in the Second Book of Samuel.  In doing so they skipped over a lot of juicy stuff, like incest, rape and murder.  Basically, David’s oldest son raped his half-sister, who happened to be the full sister of Absalom.  Absalom was David’s third and favorite son.  But in the course of some revenge killings and other mayhem, Absalom ended up leading a revolt against David – his father – and ultimately forcing him to flee the capital, Jerusalem:

After [Absalom’s] full sister Tamar was raped by Amnon, their half-brother and David’s eldest son, Absalom waited two years and avenged her by sending his servants to murder Amnon at a feast after he was drunk…  (2 Samuel 13).

To go over some of the other skipped materal, 2d Samuel 15 tells about the beginning of Absalom’s revolt.  And among other things, 2d Samuel 16 tells about Absalom taking over David’s palace and “sleeping with” his concubines.”

This fulfilled Nathan’s prophecy: “they pitched a tent for Absalom on the [palace] roof, and he slept with his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.” ( 2 Samuel 16:22.)

But Absalom was eventually killed in battle, despite David’s orders that he not be harmed.  The death of Absalom is shown at left, courtesy of Absalom – Wikipedia.  This happened at the battle “in the Wood of Ephraim,” as father and son struggled for supremacy over Israel.  But again, despite his son’s revolting against him, David ordered his troops to “deal gently with the young man Absalom.”  (The troops were led by the same  Joab who carried out David’s orders to have Uriah put out front in battle, “where the fighting is fiercest.  Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”  2d Samuel 11:15.)

So, here’s what happened after the battle started turning against Absalom:

Absalom happened to meet the servants of David…  [He] was riding on his mule, and the mule went under the thick branches of a great oak.  His head caught fast in the oak, and he was left hanging between heaven and earth, while the mule that was under him went on.  And ten young men, Joab’s armor-bearers, surrounded Absalom and struck him, and killed him.

Naturally David’s troopers thought Absalom’s death was good news, but when he heard about it, David broke down and wept: “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom!  Would I had died instead of you, O Absalom, my son, my son!”  (2 Samuel 18:33.)  See also O Absalom – My Son, My Son! : Christian Courier, for a deeper analysis.

All of which brings us up to speed for the Old Testament Bible readings leading up to August 9.  And incidentally, the psalm reading is Psalm 130, discussed in Oscar Wilde and Psalm 130.

The New Testament reading – Ephesians 4:25-5:2 – is part of Paul’s set of instructions about ordinary life and different relationships.  One of the best-known passages is Ephesians 4:26, “do not let the sun go down on your anger.”  (As shown at right.)  For further analysis see Don’t Let the Sun Go Down on Your Anger – FaithGateway.

And finally, the Gospel for August 9 is John 6:35, 41-51, which includes the Bread of Life Discourse.  The reading begins with Jesus saying “to the people, ‘I am the bread of life.  Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.'”

Unfortunately, this selected reading skips over what I consider the most important passage in the Bible.  That’s John 6:37, where Jesus promises He will never turn away anyone who comes to Him.  (See also Some basics.)   The skipped-over parts include Jesus saying He came down from Heaven to do the job God sent Him to do, including “my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

So anyway, the reading picks up where people start complaining, for reasons including that they knew Jesus.  “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know?  How can he now say, `I have come down from heaven?'”  Nevertheless, Jesus continues:  “I am the living bread that came down from heaven.  Whoever eats of this bread will live forever:”

In the Christological context, the use of the Bread of Life title is similar to the Light of the World title in John 8:12 where Jesus states: “I am the light of the world: he who follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”  These assertions build on the Christological theme of John 5:26 where Jesus claims to possess life just as the Father does and provide it to those who follow him.

And part of that “light of life” or “bread of life” approach is to know how to process anger and/or misunderstandings.  As discussed in FaithGateway, ” One approach you might want to try is reading Proverbs 14:29 out loud three times (or ten, if necessary):  ‘People with understanding control their anger; a hot temper shows great foolishness.'”

 

Jesus – the Light of the World…

 

The upper image is courtesy of  Road to Emmaus appearance – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  (In the “Gallery of Art” at the bottom of the article, under Abraham Bloemaert.)  See also File: Abraham Bloemaert – The Emmaus Disciples.  Bloemaert (1566-1651) was a Dutch painter, printmaker, etcher and engraver.  He was a “Haarlem Mannerist,” starting around 585, but changed styles at the turn of the century (1600). He specialized in history subjects and also taught.  (Training most of the “Utrecht Caravaggisti.”)  He did Emmaus Disciples in 1622.

Re:  “all that you can be.”  See Slogans of the United States Army – Wikipedia, re: the recruiting slogan from 1980 to 2001. The image at left is courtesy of http://www.toywonders.com/productcart/pc/catalog/aw30.jpg.

*  Re: “mystical.”  As originally used, the term mysticism “referred to the Biblical liturgical, spiritual, and contemplative dimensions of early and medieval Christianity.”  See Mysticism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, and also the post On originalism.  See also On the Bible and mysticism.

The “fat cat” image is courtesy of Fat cat (term) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The lower image is courtesy of Light of the World – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The caption:  “Detail on stained glass depicting Jesus: I am the light of the world, Bantry, Ireland.”