Unsettled Christianity

One blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
May 18th, 2011

Scratchpad: Final NT 1 Paper – 1 Peter 2.1-10 (Part 3)

Are we still that community?

Early Christian interpretation of 1 Peter begins with Hermas. Hermas was connected to the church at Rome, or at least Tradition tells us this. In this, he would have no doubt had a long standing access to Peter’s letter. While this may not be an exact interpretation of 1 Peter 3.18-4.6, Hermes most diffidently has a certain strain of Tradition in mind which may help us understand how the early Church thought of the ‘preaching to the dead.’ In 16:5-7 we find a description of the Harrowing of Hell in which Christ (and by Hermas’ account, the Apostles) rescued from the hand of death those disobedient souls in prison. This is not the only section from the Shepherd which we find a connection to the Petrine epistle. In 2.4-9, we find the Shepherd speaking about stones building together a tower, which is of course later interpreted to mean the Church. What is seen is that the community to which Peter wrote received his letter and no doubt, even today, we can see the effects of that suffering community obeying his charges to them to remain strong and to be built up as living stones.

Today, however, we have allowed ourselves to be fractured over various things which we insist are doctrinal and thus Apostolic. Peter’s letter, unlike Paul, was not to correct doctrinal matters, but to encourage the saints to suffer the insults of being outside the power structures of the Imperial world and thereby reveal the Glory of God through Jesus Christ. The Church today has taken generally one of two paths. It either renounces power or it tries to take power. But Peter is advocating a third way. In modern times, the Ugandan martyr Bishop Janani Luwum spoke of the sanctification of power which recognized that his people suffered because they had chosen to remain outside the ‘public and political sphere[1]’. He labored intensely to be a positive Christian voice, even to dictators, to inform them of where the Church stood on the matters which related to the governing of the people. In doing so, through coups and other forms of violence, Bishop Luwum eventually lost his life at the hand of a governmental assassin. He served as a true priest, while today his theological descendants are attempting to serve as kings in forcing conservative (American) theology upon Ugandans. He whispered in the ears of tyrants to bring good to his people but they and so many in the West use the name of Christ to shout down the message of God.

A priest is not of the ruling class, but a priest is one which brings the sacrifices of the people to God. Peter was not advocating an attempt and capturing the culture for Christ, or in today’s terms, cultural warfare, but was advocating that they become the Priests in an order already secured for them by the victory of Christ who suffered as they did. Today, we are at a crossroads in the West, wherein we see the effects of a powerless Church who for so long sought to engage in physical warfare, dependent upon laws and other instruments of a human’s mind; and yet, I find that there is hope in the word of the Petrine epistle, even for the West. Even today, we find that those who are engaging in prophetic movements are suffering at the hands of Imperial powers, albeit these powers are doctrinal or hierarchal and often times, Christian. Those we are seeking different aspects of Christianity, of the witness of Christ are coming under attacks, with their name and honor being challenged and even denied, because they are trying to live God’s call. I think of Liberals and Conservatives, Pentecostals and Emergent, and even Catholics and Mainline Protestants who are experiencing change and yet, in this apocalyptic atmosphere must endure suffering at the hands of their brothers and sisters who resist the humble and give a special place to the proud.

In regards to the use of Scripture, I think that Peter’s example is one which must be heeded to. I find so many using the text to justify their doctrines and their beliefs, and yet, not being guided, shaped or molded by the text. While it may be a fine line, the difference is one which allows the Text to be used, and the other which allows one to be used by the Text. Peter wasn’t proof-texting, but was using Scripture, something it was obvious that both he and his audience would know well enough, to show the community what they were to become. I would much rather a Christianity which allowed itself to be guided by Scripture, allowing Scripture to set the bench mark, than a Christianity which uses certain passages, here or there, to justify their actions.

A Christian reader who has endured a transition of faith and the subsequent suffering forced upon them by their former associates and the lack of a solid foundation will find hope in the words of this epistle, even today. It is the quintessential ‘catholic’ epistle in that it is for all Christians, at all times, to teach them to use Scripture, to endure, to love, and to not seek socio-political powers, but to assume what has already been given to them, and to develop their heavenly citizenship as the Temple of God wherein they act as Priests by the extension of honor of Christ. Further, if we were to take it at its word, it is from the hand of one who witnessed the sufferings of Christ first hand, who is waiting to share in the revealed glory, and sits in the heart of the beast. Can we find no better encouragement then that?


[1] Mark Noll and Carolyn Nystrom, Clouds of Witness, Christian Voices from Africa and Asia, Downers Grove, 2011, p113-114

Enhanced by Zemanta
May 18th, 2011

Scratchpad: Final NT 1 Paper – 1 Peter 2.1-10 (Part 2)

Peter denies Christ. Houbraken. In the Bowyer ...

Image via Wikipedia

The Homeless’ (New) Temple, 1 Peter 2.1-10

Peter tells his audience to endure suffering, gives the example of Christ as one who endured suffering, and tells them of their reward (and possible detriment in failing to stand the test) but in this section, the audience is affirmed in their position, and it is one which turns Roman social structure upside down. In 2.1-3, which is part of the literary unit of the previous chapter, we are given a miniature vice list for the people to avoid. In 2.4-5, we find not just a comparison between Christ and the community, but an extension of who Christ is to the community, as if he was extending his position to the community through their shared suffering. I would identify this with early baptismal traditions, especially when comparing this particular passage with Romans 6.1-7 and in particular 1 Peter 1.1 (putting away) with Romans 13.12, Colossians 3.9 and other such passages in speaking of putting away old things in exchange for the new. This idea of transference of position, or perhaps the granting of position and status, looms in 1 Peter. Moving into 1 Peter 2.6-10 we find not the typical justification of the Christian community by using the Scriptures (such as Matthew’s use in prophetic fulfillment) but the use of Scripture as a guiding factor for the community as it prepares to assume, fully, the status already given to it by Christ. For Peter, the Scriptures must be read through the lens of Christ to guide the community into forming what we would later call the Church but what he may have seen as being guided into the ideal community.

In 1 Peter 2.1-3 the author, in continuing the thought separated by a later invention of chapters and verses, calls the community to a standard which would prohibit their reward and harm their newly assigned position. Peter is concerned not so much with the spiritual maturity as some commentators would note (cf ESV Study Bible), but with maintaining the ability to retain the position. For example, the Levites were born Levites, but to maintain their priestly status, they were given certain qualifications[1] which they had to meet. The same is being said here to the effect that while they are now priests, they must put away these internal blemishes in order to be effectually made priests. These vices were πᾶσαν κακίαν καὶ πάντα δόλον καὶ ὑποκρίσεις καὶ φθόνους καὶ πάσας καταλαλιάς (1 Peter 2:1 BGT) with ‘all’ being applied to evil, deceit to which has coupled the like-minded words of hypocrisy and envy all of which include the notion of being an individual who is situationally based, and slander. Peter urges the community, since they have responded to truth and love (1.22-25), and thus been purified for the coming positions, to continue growing into their newness (as indicated at the baptismal language of ‘putting away.’)

1 Peter 1.22-2.3 is in an elliptical pattern in that it starts with the assumption of having been purified, goes through the next necessary steps, and ends with 2.3 which is an allusion to Psalm 34.8 in which the Psalmist declares that one should taste the Lord and see that he is good (NET; the LXX has χρηστὸς which is no doubt Peter’s source). But what is tasted? Having the ‘spiritual milk of the word of God’ so close to the tasting of the Lord draws our attention, but doesn’t fully settle the question. Two paths are set forth and both are easily argued. In one, the word of God (which rarely if ever applies to the whole of Scripture, as many take it to mean now) is to be tasted, while in the other, it is the milk, or sustaining life force from the Lord. It is only answered in noting that with Peter, the salvic moment is already past, so it is better to read this portion of the epistle as “Long for the pure milk, since you have already tasted the Lord and found him kind/good.” Since this allusion is to Psalm 34.8, the reader must keep this entire psalm in mind.

In doing so, we find that David is said to have written the psalm after his escape, but pretending to be insane, from King Abimelech. Psalm 34 is a psalm which is pertinent to the community, and again, while not serving as a proof-text in the style of the Evangelists, serves as a guide in how the community is to respond to their oppressors. In reading the psalm, we find that it could be used on the occasion of the weak escaping the powerful. We find an overall connection between the psalm and Peter’s letter in 34.6, 8, and 10 as well as other verses. It is no doubt then that Peter is trying to convey the same sense of excitement over the poor man’s escape from the rich oppressor by the redeeming (34.22) help of God. Further, the word translated as ‘taste’ is generally applied only to foods, but in the Psalm and in Peter, it is God who is said to be tasted. We may assume then that the situations produced such an experience which can only be said to be experiencing the very presence of God himself and in such a way as to enliven, and embolden David, and in Peter’s hope, the community which is suffering. Therefore, Peter is calling to mind the past experience of God’s goodness, and urging them to grow more in to salvation which is the word of God.

In 2.4-5 we find the turning point in the argument of the passage. The audience has thus for been told what has happened (the salvic moment) and what was expected of them (growth and maturity), but now they are given their position and will be told what this means (2.6-10). In this brief section, Peter begins to call attention to the role of the new community, and that as the Temple of God, but in doing so, their position must be assigned to them. Positions, honor, and hierarchy were important to Roman society, but as Christians (a name which was not glorious but one of ridicule), they were experiencing the treatment due to a lower class. Yet, Peter is telling them that society and culture cannot give them a position of honor, but that this comes through Christ who was God’s ‘choicest’. Now, it is said that the community shares in the position of Christ due to the extension (2.10) of mercy. Quoting Isaiah 28.16 several times in this passage, Peter is guiding the Christological thought of the community and preparing them for their ecclesiological service. Christ is said to be the living stone in verse 4 while the community are also living stones in verse 5. Christ was rejected, which is detailed throughout the Christological passages in Peter, and so too the community of believers whose suffering is the occasion of the letter. Further, in verse 5, the community is reminded that their ‘spiritual sacrifices’ (2.5 NASB) are now acceptable through Christ, allowing again, the application of Christ’s honor to the people.

In 2.6-10, Peter is attempting a theological reflection upon 2.4-5 but with the focus on the community in that we have now a focus on ecclesiology rather than Christology. Does Peter break with the tradition of applying Isaiah 28.16 to Christ? We find that Paul uses it in Romans 9.33 and the Evangelist is using it in Mark 12.10-11 to refer to Christ. Yet, Peter seems to apply it to the suffering community. This would not be out of the ordinary for Peter to use Scripture as experiential model for the believers to follow. However, like the transference of ‘living stones’ from Christ to the community, we can find the allowance in this passage to transfer the application of ‘cornerstone’ from Christ to the community without either breaking with tradition or assuming a low Christology. Beale notes that has at various times had different interpretations, such as the ‘temple, the Davidic monarchy, the remnant, Zion, faith, (and) the Messiah’[2] has been applied to Isaiah 28.16. As this is the case (Beale goes on to quote Qumran and other ancient sources), then using this passage to apply to both Jesus and the community would not be breaking with Jewish Tradition.

Isaiah 28.16 is not alone in being quoted in this brief passage. Peter quotes as well from Exodus 19.5-6, Psalm 118.22, Isaiah 8.14 as well as Hosea 1.10 and 2.23. Peter is following an interpretive principle called gezerah shavah[3] which allows for words to be connected to create and overall thought from selected texts. In doing so, Peter proves again that he is not merely proof-texting (or speaking to a primarily Gentile audience, as such a technique would be lost on them), but that he is using Scripture to guide, or prod, his audience into action. The verses which are used form a cohesive thought which allows the audience to understand that because Christ is, they are. If we were to take this passage (2.6-10) and apply it to Christ, we see that he is the living stone which is the cornerstone, reject by men, but chosen by God. Because he was chosen by God, and is found valuable, Christ now occupies the place of power, sitting at God’s right hand. Further, he is precious, valuable, and the stumbling stone. If we apply this passage to the community, following the example set in 2.4-5, we find that the community are all these things, but that to them Peter appends that they are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation and the people which are God’s own possession called out of darkness to praise God (Isaiah 60.21; 61.3; Jeremiah 13.11).

This passage forms the core of the argument for 1 Peter. The occasion of the letter is to encourage those who are suffering for being a Christian (4.16). Throughout the short work, Peter quotes from the Scriptures of his ancestors in an effort to move the community to an ecclesiological goal while reading the them through a Christological lens, and it is no more evident than in this passage. Beginning with the acknowledgement of the already salvic moment, Peter is encouraging them to move to a realized life which places them outside of their socio-political structures of honor, duty, and other forms of Imperial power centers. Their status is not assigned to them because of their birth or their race, but because of their new birth and their chosen status, but more than that, they are given honor above all in the empire because their assignment of status comes by extension of who they are, and that is, they are those who have been given mercy by Christ who has attained for them honor. Because of whom they now are, due to an event that already occurred; they are being built into a new Temple of God which allows for the full mental (theological) investment of Temple ideology into this passage. Peter is not merely commending to them some notion of Imperial honor, but moving them from merely relying upon a Christological hope to forming an ecclesiological reality wherein they, this community, is assuming a special status among humanity, and that of the royal priesthood and a holy nation, bringing to mind all of the promises made both to the Levites in particular and the nation of Israel in general.


[1] Numbers 18.1-8; Exodus 28.1 cf Lev. 21.17-23

[2] G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 1025 (Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, UK: Baker Academic; Apollos, 2007).

[3] Craig S. Keener and InterVarsity Press, The IVP Bible Background Commentary : New Testament, 1 Pe 2:7 (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993).

Enhanced by Zemanta
May 18th, 2011

Scratchpad: Final NT 1 Paper – 1 Peter 2.1-10 (Part 1)

St. Peter Denying Christ, by Gustave Doré

Image via Wikipedia

The goal of the assignment was to write 5 pages on your overall view of Peter, 5 pages on your selected passage and then 5 pages of theological reflection. When writing this paper, I did so in 11pt font. I like that font because it looks neater, and frankly, I think 12pt font is for those who cannot fill up a page with good thoughts. The professor has this 15 page rule (I understand it. I don’t like it, but I understand it). So when I blew up the font to 12pt, I was 14.75 pages – up from 13.25. So I rushed a final paragraph, had my wife edit it and sent it on its way.

So, this is the rough draft. I am not happy with it because I ran out of time. I wrote it in 8 hours, but I had about 8 weeks to do it in. I’m  a slacker.

Part’s 2 and 3 will follow this post in short order.

_____

1 Peter is about the holiness of life lead in Christ, but as Barth noted[1], holiness is not holiness if it is only in itself; instead, the author of 1 Peter is calling for his audience to seek a place during their persecution and suffering to be a part of God’s graciousness in effecting a New Creation, in that they reject the Roman notions of honor and duty and instead assume their birthright of being a kingdom of priests, holy and wholly devoted to God in Christ. It is difficult for the Western Christian to fully grasp the sitz im leben of 1 Peter as often times we rest upon miniscule controversies which we, through our traditions and interpretations, have created, especially around such ideas as the role of the wife (3.1-6). Modern, Western readers, seem to be ignoring the suffering of the community and how that might factor into a proper reading, or they place their own current political sufferings as similar to that of the community. In getting lost in the forest which we have grown around 1 Peter, we fail to see the tree of life which Peter is planting in the garden of his reader’s minds, which is that the only honor, politics, and future which his community has need of, is that of Christ and Christ alone.

This Epistle is written from Babylon (5.13), identified as the City of Rome, to those who are ‘temporarily residing abroad (1.1 NET) in Roman provinces. It is this light that causes us to read the letter in light of Imperial policies and contemporary culture, which was one of honor, duty, and assigned roles as well as a culture which was hesitant to allow a new religion, which only later came to be call Christianity, which looked to overthrown cultural boundaries. This letter takes on the form which is calling for encouragement instead of providing correction. Peter’s intent is not to lay out doctrine, but to call his readers to remain steadfast as a Chosen People (1.2; 2.9) so that as the End nears (4.7), the Glory of God in Christ may be revealed through them (4.13). It also serves as a warning not to falter and to remember that a position in life (5.5), in society, matters not to the one who has all Glory and Power (4.11).

Peter is writing to a people who have not a home. They are exiles and alien in the Roman province while he himself is but an alien (an immigrant from Palestine) in the most powerful city on earth. These homeless, then, are a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, who can trace their roots to the prophets and no need of the justification of existence save that of the death of Christ who preceded them in their sufferings. If we were to read this from the perspective of the audience, we might would note that Peter signs the letter, so to speak, as he sat in the City of Rome, under the Imperial eye but that his audience is homeless. Peter’s residence is of importance in reading the letter just as his audience’s is in that he is reminding them that his community is in mortal danger as well, so that he is not just united to them as a pastor, but as a fellow sufferer for Christ. Peter’s position also serves to stand as a symbol that the believing community is not to withdraw from society and culture, not to renounce the world, but to sanctify it by their suffering and remain within the social constructs around them. This may well feed into the modern argument of a personal versus private faith and if so, Peter was answering his community that in the Grace of God, they were serving (as a Wesleyan may put it) as an instrument of God’s grace which goes before and therefore, separation or exclusion was the answer, that they must suffer persecution for the name of Christ so that Christ may be glorified.

1 Peter, for such a short book, makes substantial use of the ‘Old Testament’ which should not be unexpected as Peter is writing to a community with a majority of Jewish believers in Christ. This is easily recognized by the fact that the use of ‘Gentile’ is retained in speaking to people outside of the receptive community (2.12; 4.3; although Green[2] suggests that Gentiles were included in the letter especially in light of Peter’s use of anti-pagan words and phrases in 1.14, 18; 2.10, 25; 4.3-4). In several instances formulas are used, such as dioti gegraptai, dioti periechei en graphē, dioti, and gar, but about 20 quotations aren’t introduced; however, because those quotations are lengthy, the readers no doubt would have recognized the Scripture. Several authors further see a great deal of allusions in 1 Peter (Osborne (1981: 65) counts thirty-one; Schutter (1989: 43) has forty-one). The author makes regular use, which is not uncommon for the New Testament authors, of Isaiah and Psalms. Achtemeier (1996: 12–13) suggests that the citations/allusions used by the author is not as proof-text but as illustrative points, giving a facet of how New Testament authors used Old Testament Scripture. This clearly indicates that Peter didn’t see a break with his Jewish tradition, but instead saw his community as a continuation of the Israel of Scripture, which would not be outside mainstream New Testament thought. This view, that the present community was the continuation of God’s covenant with Israel was not uncommon, even for isolationist groups such as those at Qumran.

Of special consideration to the following exegesis is the Petrine Christology. As with the rest of the epistle, Peter’s view of Christ is centered on the passion of Christ. Although there is not a developed doctrine of Christ,[3] we are still able to draw from three passages (1.18-21; 2.22-25; 3.18-4.6) Peter’s view of Christ. Since 1931, when Gustaf Aulén issued his work on the study of the ancient atonement theory of Christus Victor, New Testament readers have been given a new lease on reading ancient cosmology alongside the text and in examining Peter’s Christology, we arrive at Aulén’s configuration of Christus Victor. In 1.18-22 Christ is the spotless lamb that has redeemed (NASB) those previously engaged in idol worship. The focus here is the redemptive power of Christ made possible through his suffering and it is this suffering which has already brought about their liberation. Peter, in this passage, is still well within the Jewish notion of Ideal Preexistence[4] (v20) with Christ being foreknown but now revealed during this last times.

In 2.4, Christ is set as the example for the community which is further detailed in 2.22-25. In this latter passage, Christ is the sinless sacrifice (cf Isaiah 53) which serves the broader reason of redemption. It is here that we see again the connection between suffering and God’s grace. Christ suffered so that believers were already made a part of the community and could now ‘cease from sinning and love for righteousness (2.24 NET). It is not that Christ suffered, but that he prevailed in his suffering which is the key to understanding this epistle. Neither is it a sacrifice which brings about the liberation of the believer, but the victory of Lordship over even the dead, which is what we have in 3.18-4.6.

It is in this passage which we see the sacrifice of Christ become what we might subscribe to as the Christus Victor model. Here, we are told that Christ has turned his face against those who do evil (3.12), and that by our suffering we are bringing glory to God through Christ. Further, we are told that Christ suffered once to bring us to God (3.17), that the loss of life was countered by the victory in the resurrection. Not only is the audience now able to live righteously, but Christ in defeating death, went to the spirits in prison and preached to them what we can only assume the gospel of liberation. In what is classically called the Harrowing of Hell and celebrated in some forms of the Apostles’ Creed, Christ is seen as rescuing from the prison of disobedience even those who had refused God in life. Once this battle was won, Christ assumed his position as victor over the angels, authorities and powers which are now subject to him. Peter goes further to state that as Christ suffered we must also suffer a part from the hedonistic and pagan lifestyle of the culture. Here, I focus on the ‘wanton idolatries’ (4.3 NET) which Christ defeated and now Peter is calling for his community to resist. He tells his community that the victor Christ will not judge and that this is the reason that the Gospel was preached to those who are now dead. Early Christian interpretation (Hermes Similitudes 9.16.5-6; Melito of Sardis On the Passion 102) provides us with the understanding that Peter is telling his audience that Christ has triumphed over the powers and authorities, even those who are causing them to suffer, even to the point which Christ has exercised Lordship over all things, even the dead. It is then the revelation of this power brought about through suffering, makes both the beginning and the end of the community.

Throughout 1 Peter, the author is addressing a community undergoing persecution, and while no direct examples are given, we may assume that they are living as exiles from the social structure which surrounds them. While it may be of a scholarly pursuit to examine which persecution 1 Peter was addressing, instead, I believe that Peter is not addressing one particular persecution, such as the one brought on by Nero, but a general suffering brought on by being a believer in Christ and suffering as a Christian. This suffering is due to the believers having left their previous socio-political structure behind which included idol worship, a common enemy to the early believers in the Roman Empire (1.18; 2.1, 11; 3.1-6; 4.3). We find that this suffering is part of the current age and must take place, but through this suffering the community of Messiah-believers become more like Christ and will participate in his victory.

However, throughout 1 Peter, the author uses Christ as the supreme example of the glory revealed through suffering. The audience is reminded that their reward is reserved in heaven for after the trial (1.4) which will be over when Christ is revealed (1.7, 13). It was this Christ who, through Peter’s Christology, suffered and died and was then resurrected serving first as the sacrifice who redeemed the community, already a past redemption, and then as the Eternal Evangelist who preached to the spirits and the dead who had served only disobedience to further extend his Lordship over all Creation, even now reigning over the angels, the powers, and the authorities. They are reminded as well that the ‘eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous’ but that his ‘face is against those who do evil’ (3.12 NET). Further, it is the suffering through Christ which first liberated the community, and now, it is the service to God to suffer and thus glorify Christ. The community is then promised to be exulted in due time (5.6). It is here that we find the connection to Christ as well. Whereas Christ suffered and was glorified, the community is now called to suffer. Whereas Christ was exulted, the community will be exulted. Whereas Christ is the chief cornerstone, so too is the community living stones, ready to be built up together to be God’s home.


[1] Barth, “Christian’s Place,” p.276

[2] Joel B. Green, The Two Horizons New Testament Comment, 1 Peter, Grand Rapids, MI, 2007: 5-6)

[3] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, vol. 16, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of Jude, New Testament Commentary, 13 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001).

Enhanced by Zemanta
May 4th, 2011

Scratchpad: Gorman’s Explicit Relationships – 1 Peter 2:1-10

The text of 1 Peter 2:1-10 does not fit an action event (cf Hebrews 12.21-24), but there are chronological markers. There is the action which is required:

  • Getting rid of all evil so that the community can grow ‘up to salvation’ (v1-2) but this is only allowable after we have experienced the Lord (v3) (experience comes before growth)
  • There is also the notion that the community must now proclaim the virtues of Christ because (in the past) the community was called out of darkness and made a people of God.
  • These two retellings of the event of salvation buffet the intervening categorization of who Christ is, what the Community is, and what the role of the Community now is.

Logical markers include:

  • The ‘therefore’ (v1 – NASB), the ‘so’ (v2), and the ‘if’ (v3). The pattern is revealed is: Do x, because you are y, and you need to get to z. It is also the condition.
  • V4-5 includes the purpose – because Christ is the Living Stone Rejected and now the community are living stones, rejected as well, but striving to be acceptable to Christ (in my mind is the tower mentioned in Hermes) as building stone for the new community.
  • V-6-8 gives the scriptural evidence of such a thought (means?)
  • V9-10 gives the reason that they are the loving stones – because God chose them and further, it alludes to the result/consequence. They are the new priesthood.

I continue to think that this passage serves as the core of the epistle and is meant to give the struggling community the awesome sense of purpose that while they are castdown, they are not forgotten. Indeed, while they seem to be rejected by their neighbors and indeed God through the effects of persecution, they instead are the ones who are living instead of dying, following Christ and are themselves chosen above all.

May 2nd, 2011

Brief Exegesis: Song of Solomon 2-3.4

Passover

Image via Wikipedia

There is so much more to be said about this wonderful book, but I only have 1500 words.

________________

The Song of Solomon is a work which has often been purposely clouded in allegorical mystery; however as this exegesis will show, the work fits well into the subtle, but sexually passionate, protest songs as often song by women in the Ancient Near East, with this passage in particular showing the work of the more a humanistic Deuteronomist[1] mindset. We cannot interpret the Song either hyper-literally, or hyper-erotically, but must rely upon social context to drive our understanding of this deeply beautiful text. We should de-euphemize the text, setting the whole work within the frame of the ANE love poem as often performed (and ‘written’ in some cases) by women who were challenging the patriarchal worldview at the moment.

Contextual Analysis

The passage in question is 2.1-3.4 which is a song sung by the Beloved (female), first to her Lover (male), then to the Maidens (audience), which includes an oath, an interaction between the two, and finally a story of longing. 2.1-3 contains a sort of emblematic parallel which has the Beloved speaking (v1), the Lover (v2) and the Beloved again (v3), with each line containing nearly the same thought. The flower mentioned in verse 1 is often translated as ‘rose’, which would have made it nearly impossible to fit within the author’s timeframe, as the introduction of the rose is late to Palestine. Instead, it is better translated as meadow-saffron (NET, 2.1 note). The saffron plant was used in a variety of ways, and more notably in Egypt as an aphrodisiac[2]. It would have been a desert flower and was used as a symbol of God’s pleasure with Israel (Isa 35.1). This agricultural imagery is not reserved only for the Beloved, as the apple tree is used to represent the Lover. The apple was often times a symbol of romantic as well as sexual love (S.N Kramer, The Sacred Marriage Rite, 100-101) and is used in the Song to represent sexual desire (2.5, 7, 9) and in other parts of the Hebrew bible to represent fertility (Joel 1.12). Verse 3 is important in our later discussion because it shows that the Beloved is taking pleasure in (delight) in the kisses (fruit) of her Lover. The shade mentioned in this verse should be seen as a sort of protection afforded the Beloved by the Lover (cf John 4.6) especially given the fact that her skin has been darkened due to her own management of her vineyards. The temptation to interpret this passion in a hyper-erotic manner leaves us without the proper context. Vineyards are used as a symbol of sexuality (2.15), but the Beloved has been left on her own to ‘manage’ this field, which informs us that she was an independent person who wasn’t merely being passed around as property, but could in fact engage in courtship herself and select her own mate.

In 2.4-6, we may see signs of a fertility ritual, but what we more easily see is the expression of the sexual passion which the Beloved has for her Lover. The LXX, later mimicked by medieval Hebrew MSS (NET, note on 2.4), casts this verse in the imperative, so that this entire passage is seen as the Beloved demanding to be brought into the banquet hall and to be refreshed due to her lovesickness. The commands are in plural imperatives which give us the notion that the speech is meant to be given passionately.  The foods mentioned in v5 are foods often associated with ANE virility rites (cf 2 Sam 6.19; 1 Chron 16.3) and are cures for what is only best described as a near death state caused by the lack of sexual passion. These demands are met by the Lover who takes her into his arms for an embrace which may in fact be sexual union. Regardless of the actual outcome of the demands, it is noticeable that it is the woman who initiates the actions, not through beguiling or seduction, but by demanding the embrace of her Lover.

2.7-9 is the oath of the Beloved in which there is almost a step back from the demands presented in 2.4-6. Note that the oath is made ‘by the gazelles and the young does’, replacing the ancient witnesses of the heavens and the earth (Deut 32.1). These were symbols of romantic love (Pro 5.19), with other ANE literature associating them with sexual fertility. It was not uncommon to use the animals in this passage as an incantation for fertility, as we find in Mesopotamia, “With the love-[making of the mountain goat] six times, with the lovemaking of a stag seven times, with the lovemaking of a partridge twelve times, make love to me! Make love to me because I am young! And the lovemaking of a stag…Make love to me!” (R. D. Biggs, Ancient Mesopotamian Potency Incantations [TCS], 26, lines 4-8).”

2.10-17 is an interaction between the two lovers. The turtledove in v12 (and dove in v14) was a symbol of romantic love and is used here by both speakers. In 2.10-17 we return to the notion of security for the Beloved, as we note that she is in the clefts of the rocks (cf Jer 48.28) where her Lover must find her. No doubt, managing her own vineyards, she would need to have a secure place from which to commune with her Lover. In 2.15, we counter the temptation to see her as a defenseless woman with more imperative demands of her Beloved as well as a return to the euphemism of the Vineyards. In 2.17, we find another temptation to interpret this passage too aggressively, but here it may be one in which we yield too. Verse 17 is clearly an invitation, or demand, for a night long furlough into sexual passion. HALOT notes that the phrase “to turn” means to sit at the table and is heavily nuanced. If so, then the invite is for the Lover to turn into the Beloved, which is accompanied again with the symbols of sexual virility.

3.1-4 is set immediately after the invite in 2.17, leaving us with a Beloved longing for her Lover who has disappeared. She searches for him in the city streets and being found by the night watchmen finds her lover. She takes him to her mother’s house, which can stand for several things such as the place of marriage proposal, or that the mother’s house is the place where consummation may happen. The latter is probable, given that in 8.5, consummation occurs under the apple tree where the Lover was conceived. Regardless, the mother’s chamber was a private place where men weren’t allowed.

Synthesis

The woman presented in the Song of Songs is not the usual woman as seen in the wide range of biblical literature. While Ruth is often praised for her initiative, women are generally used as a symbol of what makes a man fall; however, in the Song, we have a woman who is equal in the chase, so to speak, and perhaps even more aggressive, than that of her Lover. It is not condemned in anyway (neither are other excesses), but has long been considered as something holy. Following Foucault, Laqueur and others, Carr supposes that this Song may have helped, or been intended to help, shape sexuality in Ancient Israel. It would have had social predecessors, such as Deuteronomy, which sought to shape the community. What is seen is that this work, which is similar to those performed (and in some cases ‘written) by women in other ANE societies, serves as a patriarchal protest and sets the female on par with that of the male. Carr notes (p240) that the Israelite male had certain rights over that of the female, and yet here, it is the female demanding and exercising her rites. The Beloved is not the archetypical woman, but serves in the same way that Deuteronomy does, to counter established norms and perhaps to try to caress Israelite society to a certain point, and this point is made clear by the (social) obstacles they must continuously overcome (i.e, the night watchmen).

Reflection

I am reminded of the early Christian sermon found in 2nd Clement (ch 12) which supposes that the Kingdom of God will come, “When the two shall be one, and the outside like the inside, and the male with the female, neither male nor female.” The Song of all Songs provides for us today a better understanding of the development of Israelite sexuality, which may serve to help modern believers address such topics with a more canonical focus. The female is aggressive for her lover, and is neither ashamed of it nor shamed by others (Tradition) for it.


[1] I note the influence of the Deuteronomistic way of thinking, especially in assigning humanity to God (see Carr 244-245). Song reflects the attitude of social change as found in Deuteronomy.

[2] Willard, P. (2001), Secrets of Saffron: The Vagabond Life of the World’s Most Seductive Spice, Beacon Press, ISBN 0-8070-5008-3, retrieved 2009-11-23

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 28th, 2011

Working Thesis Statement for the Song of Solomon Exegesis

Cover of "Gender (Key Concepts in Critica...

Cover via Amazon

The assignment is due tomorrow and is limited to 1500 words (1500 words!!!!!) so I have to be concise. I am exegeting Song of Solomon 2.2-3.4 which deals with the song from the Beloved (female) to the Lover, an offer, and the plight of trying to find the Lover in the dark of the night.

My main concern is not to interpret the Song as a hyper-erotic tale of ancient pornographic love, but to try to focus on de-euphemizing the text and setting the whole work with in the frame of the ANE love poem as often performed (and ‘written’ in some cases) by women who were challenging the patriarchal worldview at the moment. Here, I rely upon David Carr in his JBL entry, Gender and the Shaping of Desire in the Song of Songs and Its Interpretation, for some this backdrop. It’s not a feminist interpretation, to be sure, but one which seeks to analyze the why of the ‘whoa, should I be reading this’ aspect of the book while tempering the rush to see it as an oppressed view, oppressed by males for centuries.

So the thesis statement is essentially this:

The Song of Solomon is a work which is often purposely clouded in allegorical mystery, set either for or against sexual oppression and often times read in the tenor male voice; however as this exegesis will show, the work fits well into the subtle, but sexually passionate, protest songs as often song by women in the Ancient Near East, with this passage in particular showing the work of the more humanistic Deuteronomist.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 28th, 2011

Brief Exegesis – Song of Songs 2.7

Rocky Mountain Goat (Oreamnos americanus) enjo...

Image via Wikipedia

All those deer in the Song of Solomon are, well, not just deer…

I adjure you, O maidens of Jerusalem,
by the gazelles and by the young does of the open fields:
Do not awaken or arouse love until it pleases! (NET)

“With the love-[making of the mountain goat] six times, with the lovemaking of a stag seven times, with the lovemaking of a partridge twelve times, make love to me! Make love to me because I am young! And the lovemaking of a stag…Make love to me!” (R. D. Biggs, Ancient Mesopotamian Potency Incantations [TCS], 26, lines 4-8).

One of the temptations in looking at the Song of Songs is to interpret it ‘hyper-erotically.’ Unfortunately, with a brief examination of the book alongside that of similar types of ANE literature, it is difficult to not to do so. In this passage (Songs 2.2-3.4), we have what amounts to be we a long song from the Beloved (female), putting her sexuality on an equal plane of that with the Lover (male.) Here, she is not seen as the concubine, or other of the similar types of ‘bad’ biblical women, but as one who longs for her soon to be husband with an intense passion, so intense that she has become sick with love (2.5) and needs to be refreshed only with the love, the very powerful physical love, of her soon to be husband. Her oath here is by the symbols of her desire, the gazelles and the stags which we find as literary metaphors for a passionate experience between two lovers.

note… this is not the final, and it may not ever make it into the final exegesis

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 27th, 2011

Scratchpad: Exegesis of Song of Solomon 2.2-3.4

Apples are an all-American success story-each ...

Image via Wikipedia

Thanks to Bob on an earlier comment for directing me to this passage, as well as Gez, via Twitter as well. I’ve decided to go with this chapter for no apparent reason than I need to have the assignment done by Friday, but with two people recommending to me what I consider a whole passage, I figured I might go for it. It begins,

Like a lily among thistles is my darling among young women.

Like the finest apple tree in the orchard is my lover among other young men. I sit in his delightful shade and taste his delicious fruit.
He escorts me to the banquet hall; it’s obvious how much he loves me.
Strengthen me with raisin cakes, refresh me with apples, for I am weak with love.
His left arm is under my head, and his right arm embraces me.
Promise me, O women of Jerusalem, by the gazelles and wild deer, not to awaken love until the time is right. (Sol 2:2-7 NLT)

The beauty of this book has often been hide by prudent intepreters, favoring the more allegorical – and if no other place, they will always allegorize this section – than the less than euphemistic literal thought.

It is the week of the Royal Wedding, so this sort of suits the mind set, don’t you think?

I know what you are all relieved…

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 27th, 2011

A Translation of the Song of Solomon

Torah inside of the former Glockengasse synago...

Image via Wikipedia

What is it that we can know of Songs that this is the best? There are 30 songs in the Psalter. (Psalms 30, 45, 46, 48, 65, 66, 67, 68, 75, 76, 83, 87, 88, 92, 108, and the Psalms of Ascent 120-134) And there are others in the Scripture – like The Song of the Sea Exodus 15:1, or of Deborah and Barak in Judges 5:1 or of David in 2 Samuel 22:1 (= Psalm 18 – not named as a song!) This article by Chris Brady at Targuman lists the top ten from the Targum on the Song. It is an intriguing list because it reveals how the compiler of the Targum read the Scripture as a whole. Chris Brady’s article is very worth reading. (Midrash etc is also posting on the Song. Adam Couturier posting on Heschel is also worth noting in this respect.)

via Dust: The Song of Songs which is of Solomon – Part I.

I am exegeting a passage from the Song which is the greatest of all Songs for my OT class – you know, simply because it is Royal Wedding week, and the Song is about the love of two royals. Anyway, Bob MacDonald stopped by and shared a link, which I am not sharing with you all.

On a side note, can/should you make a translation which which makes unhidden the euphemisms in this book?

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 26th, 2011

Scratchpad: Exegeting Song of Solomon

Capital from the Song of Solomon in Winchester...

Image via Wikipedia

I have to write a short exegesis, 1500 words, for my Old Testament class by Friday (which, ironically enough, is the date of the Royal Wedding, which will be my official excuse for exegeting Song of Songs). I am thinking of doing the Song of Solomon, just for the fun of it, and because, well, oh, you know…. ;)

So, how would you break it down? This is one suggestion, put forth by David Carr, I think:

1:2-2:7 Anticipation
2:8-3:5 Found, and Lost – and Found
3:6-5:1 Consummation
5:2-8:4 Lost – and Found
8:5-14 Affirmation

And here is another one I found, and I think is related to more Jewish allegorical interpretation:

Verses 1:2-3:6 are believed to represent the Exodus, Sinai, the sin of the golden calf, the construction of the tabernacle and entry into Canaan. “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth” was understood to allude to the Oral Toral given to Israel by God. Vs 3:6 “What is that coming up from the wilderness, like a column of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all fragrant powders of the merchant?” was seen as Israel’s triumphant entry into Canaan.

Verses 3:7-5:1 are believed to concentrate on the Temple. Ch 4, verses 6-7 “Until the day breaths and the shadows flee, I will hasten to the mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense. You are altogether beautiful, my love; there is no flaw in you.” was understood as God’s promise of protection as long as Israel remained faithful.

Verses 5:2-6:1 refer to Israel’s sin and repentance, and includes the experience of the Babylonian Exile. Indeed the anguish of the exiles may be well reflected in the pain of the female lover when she wakes to find her beloved gone, and is abused as she searches fruitlessly for him. “I opened to my beloved but my beloved had turned and was gone. My soul failed me when he spoke. I sought him but did not find him; I called him but he gave no answer. Making their rounds in the city the sentinels found me; they beat me, they wounded me, they took away my mantle, those sentinels of the walls. I adjure you, o daughters of Jerusalem, if you find my beloved, tell him this:I am faint with love.”(5:6-8)

Verses 6:2-7:11 commemorate the post-exilic reconciliation of God and Israel, and the rebuilding of the Temple. The Shulamite’s declaration “I am my beloved’s and his desire is for me” rings out as a response to God’s declaration (Ex 6:7a) “I will take you as my people and I will be your God.”

Verses 7:12-8:14 mark Israel’s exile in the Roman empire and look forward to an ultimate redemption. The Messianic tradition is said to be represented by 8:2, “I would leave you and bring you into the house of my mother, and into the chamber of the one who bore me.” In the final verses God receives the prayers of Israel as Israel awaits her final redemption.

I am trying to pick a passage out, something nice and neat, to write up real quickly.

Any suggestions?

Oh, and just to be clear. This is an exegesis and not an attempt at theologizing. This is about what the text meant to the earliest readers/redactors/canonizers, etc… not how the Church has (badly, at times) interpreted this book, so no, don’t expect me to point everything in this work to Christ. To do so is dishonest, in my opinion.

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 18th, 2011

1 Peter 3.7 – A Turnabout Theme

What is easily recognized is that 1st Peter is a letter written to those who were being persecuted.

Although scholars find more than one theme in Peter’s epistle, they agree that the theme suffering is woven into the fabric of the entire letter. In every chapter Peter discusses this theme. In his first explicit reference, he states that the readers “now for a little while … may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials” (1:6). In his last statement, he once more speaks of the brevity of suffering: “And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast” (5:10). In between, Peter mentions suffering in many passages.

….

Peter addresses slaves who suffer unjustly at the hands of cruel masters (2:18), wives who live with unbelieving husbands (3:1–6), and all others who suffer for the sake of righteousness (3:13–17) and must submit to a “painful trial” (4:12). He informs them that they are in the world to do the will of God. Thus, he exhorts the believing wife that she must seek to convert her husband with her purity and reverence (3:2) and win him not by argument but by conduct. Peter admonishes Christians to show proper respect to the king by honoring him (2:17); yet he uses the pseudonym Babylon when he refers to Rome, the imperial capital (5:13). Peter wants the Christians to live honorably in the midst of unbelievers. In the words of Jesus, believers should “be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves” (Matt. 10:16).[1]

One of the things that we struggle with is the use of Peter’s language in describing the woman as the weaker vessel -

NAU  1 Peter 3:7 You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.

NET  1 Peter 3:7 Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as the weaker partners and show them honor as fellow heirs of the grace of life. In this way nothing will hinder your prayers.

NLT  1 Peter 3:7 In the same way, you husbands must give honor to your wives. Treat your wife with understanding as you live together. She may be weaker than you are, but she is your equal partner in God’s gift of new life. Treat her as you should so your prayers will not be hindered.

Preceding that is the comparison between the weak and the strong. Is it possible that 1st Peter 3.7 is a rhetorical device which pits the woman in society as the weaker – because she was in Roman society – while the husband is the stronger. Our author them commends to use their status to gain their husbands for Christ (like the persecuted who are commanded to survive in obedience which will show Christ’s glory). The husbands, then, are commanded to be mindful of this fact but not to live as if it matters before Christ.

Thoughts?

[1] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen], vol. 16, New Testament Commentary : Exposition of the Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of Jude, New Testament Commentary, 21 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001).