#Biblical Studies | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

Visit Blog

Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.

Fun Fact

The “We are the 99%” Tumblr blog became the slogan for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

hopethroughscriptureministries · 23 days

Text

The Parable of the Lost Sheep:

Redemption and Restoration

In the parable of the Lost Sheep, Jesus conveys a deep message about the relentless pursuit of redemption and the boundless grace of God. Let us delve into this timeless story and explore its significance in our lives today.

A certain shepherd had a hundred sheep, yet one of them strayed from the fold. Undeterred by the ninety-nine, the shepherd embarked on a relentless search for the lost sheep. He scoured the hills and valleys until, at last, he found the wayward sheep, weary and alone.

Filled with compassion, the shepherd tenderly lifted the sheep onto his shoulders and rejoiced, calling together his friends and neighbors to celebrate the sheep's return. In the same way, Jesus explains, there is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance (Luke 15:3-7).

This parable reminds us of the depth of God's love and his unwavering commitment to seek out and restore the lost. Just as the shepherd pursued the lost sheep, so too does our Heavenly Father pursue each one of us with relentless love and compassion.

No matter how far we may have strayed, God's arms are always open wide, ready to welcome us back into His embrace. His grace knows no bounds, and His forgiveness is freely offered to all who humble themselves and turn back to Him.

The parable of the Lost Sheep challenges us to reflect on our own lives and consider those areas where we may have wandered away from God's path. It beckons us to return to the fold, to repent of our sins, and to experience the joy of reconciliation with our Heavenly Father.

Just as the shepherd rejoiced over the lost sheep's return, so too does God rejoice over each one of us when we turn back to Him. Our repentance brings joy to heaven, and our restored relationship with God brings fulfillment and purpose to our lives.

Broader context:

Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:3-7):

This is the main passage where the parable is found.

God's Pursuit of the Lost:

Ezekiel 34:16 - God seeks out the lost and brings them back to safety.

Isaiah 53:6 - We all, like sheep, have gone astray, but the Lord laid on Jesus the iniquity of us all.

Matthew 18:12-14 - Jesus' teaching about the shepherd who leaves the ninety-nine to seek the one lost sheep.

Psalm 119:176 - Like a lost sheep, seek your servant, for I have not forgotten your commands.

God's Rejoicing over Repentance:

Luke 15:10 - There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.

Luke 15:32 - It was fitting to celebrate and be glad, for your brother was dead, and is alive; he was lost, and is found.

Acts 3:19 - Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.

God's Unfailing Love and Faithfulness:

Psalm 23:1-3 - The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul.

Psalm 36:5 - Your steadfast love, O Lord, extends to the heavens, your faithfulness to the clouds.

Psalm 136:1 - Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever.

Lamentations 3:22-23 - The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases; his mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is your faithfulness.

The Shepherd's Role as a Metaphor for Jesus:

John 10:11 - I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.

Hebrews 13:20 - Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant.

Call to Repentance and Restoration:

Joel 2:12-13 - "Yet even now," declares the Lord, "return to me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning; and rend your hearts and not your garments."

Revelation 3:20 - Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.

The Joy of Salvation:

Romans 15:13 - May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may abound in hope.

Psalm 51:12 - Restore to me the joy of your salvation and uphold me with a willing spirit.

Questions:

Have I strayed from God's path, and if so, am I willing to humble myself and turn back to Him?

Do I fully grasp the depth of God's love and His relentless pursuit of me, even in my moments of wandering?

How can I share the message of God's grace and redemption with others who may feel lost or disconnected from Him?

What steps can I take to deepen my relationship with God and experience the fullness of His joy and restoration in my life?

Let us pray:

Heavenly Father, we thank you for your unwavering love and grace, demonstrated to us through the parable of the Lost Sheep. Give us the courage to humble ourselves, repent of our sins, and return to you with open hearts. May we never forget the depth of your love for us and the joy that comes from being reconciled to you. In Jesus' name, amen.

27 notes · View notes

entanglingbriars · 4 months

Text

Y'know, it'd be really nice if the so-called clobber verses in the Bible used to justify homophobia really were mistranslations that referred to temple prostitution, pedastry, and child sex abuse. But like... they're not that. Definitely not the ones in the Hebrew Scriptures and probably not for at least most of the New Testament ones (I really wish I had Greek on par with my -- admittedly not great -- Hebrew).

Early Christianity and Judaism were homophobic and their earliest extant writings reflect that. If you want to find a place for queer people in churches and synagogues you have to face that head on and find a way to balance the clear condemnation of gay sex (or at least male anal sex if you're only talking about the Torah and want to make a very narrow interpretation) in the Bible and the reality that gay sex isn't immoral.

#christianity #judaism #bible #homophobia #torah #new testament #biblical studies

39 notes · View notes

a-queer-seminarian · 2 months

Text

Walter Brueggemann's Chosen? Reading the Bible amid the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (2015)

I've been searching for biblical scholarship on disconnecting biblical Israel from the modern nation of Israel. It felt necessary to read Brueggemann's take, as he is one of the best-known Hebrew Bible scholars of our time. So for those interested, here are my thoughts! (Btw, I've posted this same piece on Medium if you prefer reading it there.)

My review in one sentence:

I did find this book helpful in articulating the distinctions between biblical Israel and modern Israel, as well as how both modern Israel and Christian Zionists have co-opted the biblical narrative to serve their own agendas;

however, I strongly disagree with Brueggemann's staunch support of modern Israel, which he maintains as he acknowledges that its military is vastly overpowered and that its treatment of Palestinians is unconscionable.

Summing up my summary:

If you want to know the key points Brueggemann makes without reading through the rest of this post, here they are:

How biblical Israel and modern Israel are not the same:

While biblical Israel was a theocracy relying on theological claims, modern Israel relies on military might and power politics (as well as support from Western powers like the United States).

Deuteronomy and the prophets emphasize that while God gave the Israelites the "promised land" unconditionally, their retaining of that land is conditional on whether they obey Torah. Modern Israel's violence against Palestine is absolutely not obedient to Torah, which emphasizes protection of "the other."

Other key points:

Trying to apply scripture to any modern issue is complex and risky, because scripture is an ancient collection of differing viewpoints; our own personal biases will color which biblical voices we uplift to further our own agendas.

Even so, taking all of scripture together, God's reach is clearly towards "the Other" — towards the most vulnerable of society — and our interpretation should reflect that. Ultimately, none of us should be able to morph biblical symbols or themes into an uncompromising ideology to justify our violence or bigotry.

Zionist Jews more or less hold that Judaism = Israel / the "promised" land. Other Jews emphasize that they are "people of the book" (Torah), which means that Judaism can be practiced anywhere!

Meanwhile, Christian Zionists co-opt Jewish Zionism to serve their own agenda to Catalyze The Eschaton lol (i.e. how to make the Second Coming of Christ happen; learn more about this at christianzionism.org). Christians also appropriate the biblical concept of Jews being God's chosen people for our own uses, which is supersessionist.

My full summary, key quotes, and longer review are below the readmore. Alternatively, read or share this piece as a Medium article.

I'm going to write about the stuff I actually found helpful in this book first, and then end with more critique of Brueggemann's personal politics. After all, I read this book for help with the biblical scholarship side of things, not for opinions about a "solution" to this issue, and the book did deliver on what I came to it for. Even so, awareness of the author's personal views is important in noticing where his scholarship leans towards that bias (as I believe Brueggemann would agree).

Book Summary:

Introduction:

Brueggemann notes that "much has changed" since he wrote a previous book on this topic (The Land, 1977): since then, Israel has become an immense military power, has escalated its occupation of the West Bank, and continues to be "indifferent" to Palestinians' well-being.

Thus this new book aims to clarify that “...peace will come only with the legitimation of the political reality of both Israelis and Palestinians.”

Book thesis: a warning to and hope for Christians:

“It will not do for Christian readers of the Bible to reduce the Bible to an ideological prop for the state of Israel, as though support for Israel were a final outcome of biblical testimony.”

“It is my hope that the Christian community in the United States will cease to appeal to the Bible as a direct support for the state of Israel and will have the courage to deal with the political realities without being cowed by accusations of anti-Semitism.”

Chapter 1: Reading the Bible in the Midst of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Chapter’s aim: determine how to read the Bible responsibly in the face of this conflict — can the Bible guide us at all here? Trying to apply scripture to any contemporary issue is risky, because the Bible’s multiple voices allows us to draw the conclusions we want to.

Modern Israel claims that God gave ancient Israel the “promised” land unconditionally, so that it remains promised to Jews today.

They’re drawing from the ancestral narratives of Genesis

But other biblical voices hold a different point of view: Deuteronomy and the prophets understand the land as given unconditionally but held conditionally — if the people break their end of the bargain, they can (and eventually do!) lose the land.

Among the biblical authors reckoning with Judah’s fall, there are exclusionists and inclusionists

Ezra the exclusionist: “Ezra referred to the community as ‘the holy seed’ (9:2). That phrase intends a biological identity…” Ezra had foreign wives expelled in order to guarantee “the purity of the land and of Israelite society”; modern Israel favors this reading, uses it to argue for “one people in one land”

Post-exilic inclusionists pave the way for expressions of Judaism that welcome the other:

Jonah is sent to show God’s mercy to Nineveh, a major oppressor of Israel; Ruth the Moabite is part of David's line; Isaiah 56:1-8 radically welcomes foreigners & eunuchs [my personal fave passage in all of scripture btw]

So any arguments using one of these two voices tend to fail because the other one is also present in the text

However, throughout scripture God’s reach tends to be towards the other. Thus any view that excludes the other should be met with skepticism – more likely to be about our own fears and hopes “that serve self-protection and end in destruction”

“The Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be resolved until the human rights of the other are recognized and guaranteed. These human rights are demanded by sociopolitical reality. They are, moreover, the bottom line of Judaism that has not been preempted by Zionist ideology.”

Desmond Tutu: “...the liberation of Palestine will liberate Israel, too.”

Chapter 2: God’s Chosen People: Claim and Problem

The Hebrew Bible makes no sense if we ignore its claim that Israel is God’s chosen people — a claim which carries on into Judaism today. The chapter explores whether this chosenness is revocable and if not, who carries it today. Ultimately, it concludes that any “chosen” group must “choose beyond their chosenness” to end the violence.

At least 3 traditions in scripture imply that Israel is God's chosen, all without explaining why God chooses Israel — it's beyond explaining, doesn't need to be explained

Ancestral tradition of Abraham — God promises “to be God to you and to your children after you” (Gen. 17:7). “The drama of the book of Genesis, in each generation, is whether God will grant an heir who can carry the promise and live as God’s covenant partner.”

Exodus tradition — here God declares that “Israel is my firstborn son” (Exod. 4:22). Firstborn son = role of “special privilege and entitlement but also one of responsibility.”

Sinai tradition — “Israel is given opportunity to be God’s ‘treasured possession out of all peoples’ (Exod. 19:5).”

“In these traditions, however, the specific language of “chosen” is not exactly used. It remained for Deuteronomy, which represents perhaps a later tradition, to utilize the most direct and unambiguous rhetoric for Israel’s status as God’s chosen people:

“For you are a people holy to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on earth to be his people, his treasured possession” (Deut. 7:6).

Deuteronomy gives a reason for this chosenness: it’s not because Israel is more numerous or righteous, but because God “set his heart” on Israel and “loved” Israel (7:7–8; 10:15).

The exilic texts also reaffirm that Israel remains God’s chosen — beautiful in the face of all the seeming rejection of being humiliated and displaced.

But there are two big questions that problematize the chosenness that the biblical authors take for granted:

1. Is this chosenness conditional? Most biblical texts seem to assume it is unconditional and permanent; but places like Exodus 19:5 and parts of the prophets name a conditional if — that the people’s covenantal chosenness depends on their obedience to the Torah.

2. Has this theological claim morphed into an ideological claim that functions as self-justification? — particularly in the context of the modern state of Israel, but also…

Christians have appropriated the concept of being “God’s chosen”

The United States has too — we are the “city set on a hill” according to the first Puritan governor; we are God’s emancipated, coming from the “wilderness” of Europe to the “promised land” of the New World. And now we are Moses to the “benighted peoples” of the world, butting in with our military to “save” them.

Even liberation theology takes the concept of chosenness and applies it to the poor. “Jon Levenson, a noted Jewish interpreter, has protested against the notion of the poor as God’s chosen people, as though to usurp the claim from the Jews to that status.”

Another issue: what about the unchosen?

Genesis’ ancestral tradition is aware of other peoples, makes a place for them “as those who are blessed by the life of Israel”

Paul takes this “good news” that God’s promise reaches beyond Israel to argue for the “admission of Gentiles”

Prophets also explore this issue — through Amos 9:7 and 3:2 we find that Israel is “chosen for obedience but without monopoly of God’s saving deeds, especially when presumed upon.”

Ultimately, those who are “chosen” — be they Israel, USA, or church — must “choose beyond their chosenness” or expect present violence to yield to a future of endless violence.

Chapter 3: Holy Land?

Digging deeper into the biblical theme of land in the light of all that’s happening in Palestine. Even though it’s only a “small ingredient” in the current conflict, it is one that needs to be explored. Within Judaism, Zionists equate Judaism and the land, while other Jews focus on being "people of the book" (Torah), meaning that Judaism can be practiced anywhere!

Reiterates how “the land is given to Israel unconditionally, but it is held by Israel conditionally."

Adds that one thing that leads to disobedience, which then leads to land loss, is “the temptation to self-sufficiency” (drawing from Deut. 6:18)

Another interesting point is that the Torah, “the most authoritative textual tradition in the Hebrew Bible, ends before Israel enters the land (see Deut. 34:4). That is, Israel’s original or earliest tradition is not about having the land; it is about anticipating the land.”

Turns out that the prophets’ “if” is correct; the land is losable, as Israel and Judah do fall, with many Judeans deported

And yet — “The story does not end with land loss, displacement, and grief. Most stunningly, in this season of deeply felt abandonment there wells up a bold and vigorous reassertion of the land promise.”

The prophets argue that God will “reperform the land promise”

One key question: how central and indispensable are the land and land promise for Judaism’s existence?

The Zionist movement argues Judaism = the land (disregarding the Deuteronomic if)

But in the 5th century BCE as Judaism was developing, different Jews had differing opinions; some exiles were not “smitten with” returning to the land.

“One compelling alternative to land theology is the recognition that Judaism consists most elementally in interpretation of and obedience to the Torah in its requirements of justice and holiness. Such intense adherence to the Torah can be done anywhere at all.”

[PS: if you're interested in an anti-Zionist Jewish view from the early 1900s, check out this article on the General Jewish Labour Bund]

Second key question: Is today’s Israel the biblical Israel?

No. While biblical Israel was a theocracy relying on theological claims, modern Israel relies on military might and power politics.

Furthermore, any appeal to theology for self-justification holds no weight among Israel’s “adversaries”; it’s just not compelling to anyone outside Zionism.

Chapter 4: Zionism and Israel

Opens with discussion of “Zion” as the poetic name for Jerusalem, has poetic force

The restoration of Zion is a primary theme in places like Second Isaiah

Delves into the history of Jewish Zionism, from the nineteenth century, through the Balfour Declaration, into 1948. [JVP has an article that delves into this history more thoroughly.]

By 1967, this ideology had “hardened” into something completely uncompromising, wanting Palestinians to just go away.

Differences between Jewish and Christian Zionism, and different branches under each umbrella

It seems like Brueggemann would call himself a Christian Zionist, of the kind that resists weird End Times versions of it, but wholeheartedly supports Israel even while insisting on critique of its violence…

His problem with Zionism isn’t that we shouldn’t have an ethnostate or whatever, but that Zion has been morphed from a biblical “symbol” into an uncompromising ideology, and thus Israel uses Zionism to claim itself beyond critique.

Brueggemann's closing statement: “...it is characteristically the ongoing work of responsible faith to make such a critique of any ideology that co-opts faith for a one-dimensional cause that is taken to be above criticism. Indeed, ancient prophetic assessments of the Jerusalem establishment were just such a critique against a belief system that had reduced faith to a self-serving ideology. Because every uncompromising ideology reduces faith to an idolatry, such critical work in faith continues to be important.”

___

Key Quotes

For even more excerpts from the book, visit this Google Doc.

On the complexity of biblical interpretation/application

“We may draw these conclusions about reading the Bible.

It is important in any case to recognize that the Bible refuses to speak in a single voice. It argues with itself, and we must avoid simplistic, reductionist readings of any ilk.

Any “straight-line” reading from ancient text to contemporary issues is sure to be suspect in its oversimplification. Such a reading disregards the huge impact of historical distance between the text and our current context.

Such a straight-line reading that ignores historical distance is most likely to be propelled by an ideology, that is, by a deeply held conviction that is immune to critical thought and is unswayed by argument, by reason, or by the facts on the ground. That is, it disregards complexities in the process of interpretation. A one-dimensional, uncritical appropriation of the ancient land promises for the state of Israel is exactly such a conviction that is immune to critical thought, reason, or facts on the ground. ...

...Tribalism, often in Christian practice expressed as sectarianism, tends to absolutize its claims to the exclusion of all else. The tribe or sect characteristically imagines that it has a final formulation, a final interpretation. Absolutist readings of the Bible lead to violent actions against one’s opponent…"

On the Land

“The dispute between Palestinians and Israelis is elementally about land and secondarily about security and human rights. ...while the state of Israel continues to 'negotiate' with the Palestinians, the dominant Zionist appeal to land promises continues to hold intransigently to the exclusionary claim that all the land belongs to Israel and the unacceptable other must be excluded, either by law or by coercive violence.” (ch. 1)

“As we ponder the grand sweep of this vision that runs from Abraham to King Cyrus of Persia, two questions arise: First, how central and indispensable are the land and the land promise for Judaism’s existence? The contemporary Zionist movement would have us believe that Judaism is equated with the land and, consequently, with support for the state of Israel as the present embodiment of the land of promise. ...That approach, however, amounts to a particular interpretive trajectory that is not required by the tradition, and it disregards the Deuteronomic if: that the land is held conditionally. This interpretive position, like every interpretive position, requires a careful reading of carefully selected texts. More crucial is the recognition that while the land tradition is of immense importance for the textual tradition, Judaism as it took form in the fifth century BCE was in fact not uniform and represented a variety of interpretive possibilities. Specifically, there were many Jews in exile who were not smitten with the land of Judah and who did not feel compelled by faith to return to the land. One compelling alternative to land theology is the recognition that Judaism consists most elementally in interpretation of and obedience to the Torah in its requirements of justice and holiness. Such intense adherence to the Torah can be done anywhere at all. Thus, land theology is, at least in some traditions of Judaism, relativized by the recognition that Judaism is a “religion of the book” (the Torah) and consists in the practice and interpretation of texts. Robert Alter has noted that Judaism is primarily a “culture of interpretation” that refuses absolutizing any conclusions from the text; we may assume that this includes absolutizing conclusions about the land…” (ch. 3)

Distinctions between Modern Israel & Biblical Israel

“...there is a huge difference between the ancient Israel of the biblical text and the contemporary state of Israel. While defenders of the state of Israel insist upon the identity of the two, many more-critical observers see that there is a defining difference between a covenant people and a state that relies on military power without reference to covenantal restraints.” (Q&A)

"...[T]he state of Israel can, like any nation-state, make its legitimate political claims and insist upon legitimate security. But appeal to the ancient faith traditions about land promise in order to justify its claims carries little conviction except for those who innocently and uncritically accept the authority of that ancient story. At most, appeal to the land tradition can “energize the base,” that is, evoke support from adherents to the ancient promise. Such an appeal, however, carries little if any force for any who are outsiders to that narrative. It is no claim to be used in negotiations because it is grounded in theological claims to which Israel’s adversaries will give no weight. ...The appeal to the biblical promise must simply be set alongside very old claims made by the Palestinians." (ch. 3)

On Chosenness — what about the "unchosen"?

“The matter of other peoples who are not chosen is a very important element in any talk about the chosen people. In the tradition of the ancestors in Genesis, there is clearly an awareness of the other peoples and an effort to make a place for them as those who are blessed by the life of Israel. ... One can, moreover, see at the edge of the Old Testament an inclusion of other peoples in the sphere of God’s attentiveness, an inclusion that intends to mitigate any exclusionary claim by Israel. In Amos 9:7, in which the prophet intends to critique sharply the pride of Israel, he makes a claim that God enacts exoduses for other peoples as well as for Israel:

Are you not like the Ethiopians to me, O people of Israel? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?

In the later lines of this poem, the prophet names ancient Israel’s two most immediate enemies, the Philistines and the Arameans, as recipients of God’s deliverance. The text does not go so far as to name them as chosen of God, but the claim may be implied. Of course, it is this same Amos who says in his polemic against Israel:

You only have I known [chosen] of all the families of the earth; Therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.” (3:2)

In this verse, the prophet acknowledges the singular chosenness of Israel, but it is that chosenness that evokes harsh divine judgment. The evident tension between Amos 9:7 and 3:2 indicates the edginess of the claim of chosenness, thus chosen for obedience but without monopoly of God’s saving deeds, especially when presumed upon. (ch. 2)

Making Room for the Other

“Welcome to the other appears to be a romantic dream in the world of real politics, and certainly current Israeli policy would find such openness to the Palestinians to be absurd. But if welcome to the other is considered romanticism, so ultimate exclusion of the other is a suicidal policy, because the other will not go away and cannot simply be wished away or forced away. As a result, the question of the other becomes the interpretive key to how to read the Bible. The other can be perceived, as in Zionist perspective, as a huge threat to the security of the state and the well-being of the holy seed. Conversely, the other can be perceived as a neighbor with whom to work at shalom.” (ch. 1)

Brueggemann's Suggestion for How Christians Should Respond to the so-called "Israeli-Palestinian Conflict"

“In the end, Israelis and Palestinians are finally neighbors and have long been neighbors. When ideology coupled with unrivaled power is preferred to sharing the neighborhood, the chance for neighborliness is forfeited. Christians must pay attention to the possibility for neighborliness and must refuse protection and support for neighborhood bullies. Christians must support political efforts to strengthen the hand of the “middle body” of political opinion among Israelis and Palestinians to overcome the dominance of extremists on both sides who seem to want war and victory rather than peace and justice. Christians must call for new thinking in the U.S. government and do some new thinking that no longer assumes the old judgments about the vulnerability of Israel. Prophetic faith is characteristically contemporary in its anticipation of the purpose of God; it insists on truth-telling that is attentive to bodily suffering, and it refuses ideological pretenses. It will tell the truth in the face of distortions that come with ideological passion and unrestrained power. When truthfulness about human suffering is honored, new possibilities of a just kind can and do emerge. Thus, being able to differentiate between old mantras and urgent truthfulness is a beginning point for faithful engagement in the real world.” (Q&A)

“God’s Holy Mountain” by Oscar (Asher) Frohlich

___

Returning to My Disagreements with Brueggemann’s Politics

In the introduction to Chosen? (2015), Brueggemann alludes to his previous book on this topic, The Land (1977). He admits that that book needs revising, as it didn’t contend with Palestinians’ suffering under Israeli occupation. Yet he is quick to emphasize right off the bat (and in pretty much every chapter) that he continues to support the state of Israel wholeheartedly, considering its continued existence necessary for the security of Jews worldwide:

“Mindful of the long history of Christian anti-Semitism and the deep fissure of the Shoah [e.g. Holocaust], we have surely been right to give thanks for the founding of the state of Israel and the securing of a Jewish homeland. But the issues have altered dramatically as the state of Israel has developed into a major military power that continues administrative-military control of the Palestinian territories.” (Acknowledgements)

For alternative perspectives, I recommend anti-Zionist Jewish perspectives like here, and here, and here, and here. In short, shipping all Jews off to a settler colony is not the solution to bigotry and violence against Jews; instead, every culture actually dealing with its antisemitism is.

(Then there are the glaring facts that Israel is racist about which Jews it prioritizes; has a long history of mistreating Shoah survivors; and discriminates against Jews who show support for Palestine. If an ethnostate is truly the only way to keep all Jews safe, Irael is majorly failing that assignment.)

But back to the book: Brueggemann takes for granted that modern Israel is the correct response to the problem of worldwide antisemitism — in essence, to what he calls the “continuing vulnerability of Jews.” Still, he sees that Israel’s military has “long since moved past the vulnerability of the beginning of a fragile state” (Q&A).

So keep the state, but reduce its military; that’s Brueggemann’s solution in a nutshell — at least insofar as he states it in this book. To be fair, this text’s goal isn’t to formulate an airtight “solution” to the violence against Palestine. Still, what solution Brueggemann does suggest in Chosen? can be summed up in this bit from the Q&A at the end:

“There is, in my judgment, no realistic hope for any two-state solution. For all of the pretense and obfuscation of Israel, it never intends to allow a viable Palestinian state, so two-state negotiations simply buy more time for the development and expansion of the state of Israel.

It may be that the solution will be found in a one-state solution that insists upon well-protected human rights for Palestinians while the Israeli occupation is fully recognized. A settlement will require an even-handed engagement by the Great Powers (including the United States) as well as acts of greater courage and political will by the immediate parties to the conflict.”

Again, I know it’s not his goal to come up with a perfect solution, but I have so many questions about this version of a one-state solution. For one thing, will Palestinians be made full citizens of Israel in order to ensure their rights are protected? Or will they permanently be second-class (non-)citizens / trapped in this limbo of not being allowed to exist as their own recognized state? What about their right to self-representation? Furthermore, must Israel remain an ethnostate in order to be this supposed safe-haven for all Jews?

My last comment on Brueggemann’s perspective is that, if he does understand that Israel is the oppressor of the Palestinians, he still — at least as of the writing of this book in 2015 — has work to do in un-internalizing a mindset that pretends the two sides are equally responsible for this “conflict.” Indeed, the use of the term “Israeli-Palestinian Conflict” in the book’s very title highlights this issue — this term implies equal footing between the two sides, rather than making it clear that Israel is the aggressor and any violence that Palestinians respond with is resistance to that aggression, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and yes, even genocide.

Along with the book’s title, other comments throughout the text imply equal footing between Israel and Palestine. Here are two examples, both from chapter 1:

“…Israeli Zionists want Palestinians to go away. Conversely many Arabs wish Israel would go away. But they will not.”

Palestinians’ and Israelis’ fear of the other, said to be grounded in the Bible, has been transposed into a military apparatus that is aimed at the elimination of the other…”

Both of these comments fail to emphasize the different sources of these wishes and fears for Israelis versus Palestinians. For Israel, the wish that Palestinians would “go away” is a desire to take the land from — to literally seize and dwell in the homes — Palestinians. Meanwhile, any Palestinians who wish Israelis would just “go away” are wishing to be left alone in their own homes that they built, the agricultural lands they have long tended.

Same with their respective “fear of the other”: Israel spins propaganda to represent Palestinians as hateful and antisemitic, a threat to Israeli’s peace, taking incidents of resistance out of context to do so; Palestinians’ fear of Israelis is based in real and recurring incidents of ethnic cleansing, imprisonment and torture, and daily deprivations and insults.

To speak of the desires and fears of both sides as if they are equivalent, without carefully emphasizing the power dynamic between oppressor/oppressed, colonizer/colonized, is negligent and dangerous. It does nothing to “take seriously” “the brutalizing, uncompromising policy of Israel toward the Palestinian people and their political future” (Q&A) as Brueggemann purports as his aim.

This article, “The Myth of the Cycle of Violence,” discusses the problems with treating Israeli and Palestinian violence equally.

Wrapping up

I am very curious to know whether and how Brueggemann’s perspective between the time of this book’s publication in 2015 and today. How did he respond to the explosion of violence in 2021? To October 7, 2023, and Israel’s ongoing bombardment of Gaza? Does he continue to believe that the state of Israel is necessary for Jewish well-being worldwide? I only did a cursory search; if anyone has any information on Brueggemann’s views today, please do share.

Or if you have thoughts of Brueggemann's take, share that too!

Finally, if anyone has suggestions for more texts I should read as I explore the relationship between scripture and modern Israel’s ongoing occupation of Palestine, let me know!

Stay tuned for more summaries and reviews. In the meantime, one source I recommend but won’t be reviewing is Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg’s recent newsletter post “Debunking the conquest narrative.”

#christians for palestine #biblical studies #biblical israel #modern israel #walter brueggemann #reading and studying the bible #bible tag #zionism #essays #review #long post #chosen? reading the bible amid the israeli-palestinian conflict #log #spring 2023

13 notes · View notes

mainlysarcastic · 19 days

Text

There are so many badass Prostitutes in the Bible who use their sexuality to ensure their/their families safety and they’re never condemned for being a prostitute nor criticized for using their sexuality to undermine man’s evils

#rahab #Esther #but we don’t ever talk about that #biblical studies #exvangelical #jael

9 notes · View notes

divinum-pacis · 1 year

Text

"Science, in its proper context, deepens and enlarges everything it touches. The night sky supplies a perfect example. Its beauty is available to all. But an astronomer looking at the sky sees that beauty and more. She sees the moon in the east and imagines its gradual outward spiral. She sees a string of planets -- Saturn, Mars, Venus, Mercury -- like a diamond necklace running downward toward the western horizon. She knows Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune turn under her feet. She gains a palpable sense of Earth's place and motion through the tilted, turning solar system. These things sit in the foreground like bugs on a windshield compared with the stars beyond and the long arc of the circling galaxy, and she sees it all at once. She spots the Andromeda Galaxy in the southwest and can almost feel it falling ninety miles per second, toward her. Beyond that, she can imagine vast voids and walls of galaxies, galaxy clusters, and quasars stretching outward to an infinite horizon. It's all in motion and lit by fusion, and every piece of this panorama evokes wonder and teases her with new questions.

Something similar happens when a biblical scholar reads the Bible. Like the stars on a clear night, the words sit there on the page, freely available to all. But depth beyond depth is revealed to those who have read it closely for years, learned the original languages, studied the history and culture of the ancient Near East, and become acquainted with biblical theology and the history of biblical interpretation. The more you know, the more you see, and the more questions occur to you."

-- Love and Quasars: An Astrophysicist Reconciles Faith and Science, Paul Wallace, 2019, pgs 66-67.

Image: The Andromeda Galaxy with satellite galaxies M32 (center left above the galactic nucleus) and M110 (center right below the galaxy)

#religion #science #christianity #biblical studies #astronomy #love and quasars #quotes #divinum-pacis

82 notes · View notes

magpiecollectingknowledge · 2 months

Text

Reading old biblical commentaries can be confusing as fuck, but it's nice when you finally understand what they're on about. Including some Koine Greek analysis in my essay better get me brownie points istg

#studyblr #studying #study #studygram #study aesthetic #study space #studyinspo #studyspo #study tips #notes #religion #bible #biblical studies #theology

7 notes · View notes

artofkhaos404 · 2 months

Note

where would you say is a good place to start off reading the bible? im kind of overwhelmed by just how much there is and im not sure if i should just start off from the beginning or not

Hey there lil brother/sister in Christ! Welcome to the spiritual family, I'm so excited to have you!

The cornerstone of our faith is Jesus Christ... because without His life, burial, resurrection and promise to return again... we have nothing. That being said, the Gospels are the best place to start. If you don't know, the Gospels are New Testament books called Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They tell the story of Jesus' life through the eyes of different disciples who followed him and tried to put his teachings into practice. I would say the book of John is where you should start; learn about how Jesus lived his life as our example in the flesh and learn about how much He loves you.

The Bible tells us to pray for the wisdom to understand, so it may be helpful to do this before beginning your studies!

"If any man lacks wisdom, let him ask it of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him."

James Chapter One, Verse Five

Please feel free to leave another ask or even DM me privately if you would like more thoughts, support or advice on your spiritual journey. I'm so excited for you!!!

#ak answers #ak asks #the bible #biblical teaching #biblical scripture #biblical studies #the gospel #christianity #christian #jesus christ #jesus #jesus loves you

10 notes · View notes

deliacore · 4 months

Text

Merry Christmas!

Jesus probably wasn't a carpenter. The word translated to carpenter actually literally translates to "materials worker" which could mean anything from a construction worker to a stonemason to a carpenter. But carpenters were extremely skilled and expensive crafts and its unlikely there would have been one in a region as poor as Galilee. Jesus is also not referred to with the kind of respect you would expect the son of a carpenter to be given early in his ministry. There was, however, a large construction project near Galilee completed right around the time Jesus starts his ministry. The city of Tiberius, constructed by Herod Antipas, finished much of its construction around 20 CE.

So it's most likely that Jesus was a construction worker who got laid off after the project he spent years working on was finished and started his ministry after that.

The new city also involved forcibly resettling large parts of rural Galilee and as a result, the sea of Galilee became more crowded and polluted, ruining the livelihoods of fishermen along the sea. This could explain why fishermen were important early disciples for the Jesus movement. The new city also brought in new bureaucracy (like tax collectors).

It's very interesting to remember that the Bible is actually describing a real place with very in-the-moment concerns!

#jesus #christmas #merry christmas #theology #bible #biblical studies

10 notes · View notes

aelstudies · 7 months

Text

Tuesday September 26th

More library photos, as that is where I’m studying this afternoon. I still can’t get over how pretty my college library is. There are several other libraries on campus, but I haven’t yet explored any other than my own because this one is so lovely.

Had New Testament class this morning. I spent almost an hour afterwards talking with the professor about New Testament textual criticism. It was really fun.

I have class again this evening, so I will stay around the college. There’s not really much point in going home; especially since I get more done and less distracted when I’m on campus.

#aelstudies #studyblr #university #dark academia #university studyblr #dark acadamia aesthetic #academia aesthetic #study motivation #books #library #new testament #textual criticism #religious studies #biblical studies

14 notes · View notes

entanglingbriars · 5 months

Text

Perhaps Paul was committed to the idea that covenantal circumcision of necessity could occur only on the eighth day of the male child's life (see Phil 3.5), a position that would limit it specifically to Jews. He would have on his side the Greek text of Genesis 17.14: "And the uncircumcised male, who shall not be circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin on the eighth day, that soul shall be cut off from his people, for he has broken my covenant" (LXX; cf. Jub 15.25-26). Lacking this phrase "on the eighth day," the Masoretic text of this verse opens up the possibility of circumcision at other times and, thus, of circumcision as a rite of entry of an adult non-Jew into Israel....

Allied to the more stringent, genealogically restrictive view -- and it must be said, to a minority view -- Paul according to this construction holds that circumcision was of no value for the adult male gentile, whether Christ-following or not. Proselyte circumcision would not bring him into Israel's covenant -- just, indeed, as Ishmael's circumcision at age thirteen did not bring him into Israel's covenant (Gal 4.21-31; Rom 9.7). "Circumcision benefits, if you keep the Law. But if you a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become foreskin" (Rom 2.25). When Paul speaks this way in Romans, he speaks to a Judaizing gentile, and has the law of eight-day circumcision specifically in mind. The Judaizing gentile -- clearly older than eight days -- who subjects himself to circumcision accordingly transgresses the "law of circumcision" even as he tries to honor it, precisely because he is more than eight days old; hor him, then, circumcision still counts as uncircumcision. His circumcision notwithstanding, the pagan is still a pagan, still outside the covenant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; still trapped, accordingly, in his servitude to the flesh, to sin, and to death (Rom 7); still enslaved to the stoicheia of the universe (Gal 4.9-10). The only way for the gentile to share in the blessing promised to Abraham, Paul urges, is through Christ, thus through spirit; not through flesh, thus not through circumcision.

- Paula Fredriksen Paul: The Pagans' Apostle pp 129-130

#christianity #new testament #biblical studies #paula fredriksen #theology #circumcision #conversion

8 notes · View notes

areadersquoteslibrary · 4 months

Text

“Thomas Aquinas had delivered the medieval judgment on the Bible in his emphatic sentence: "The author of the Bible is God." This notion of inspiration naturally led to the opinion that God had hidden in the sacred text all sorts of esoteric truths about various subjects. In a paradoxical way, the belief that God had dictated the various books of the Bible to inspired writers contributed to the medieval habit of not reading the Bible as a book-or as the collection of books that it is. It became rather a treasury of proof texts to be used as needed for the support of this or that doctrine propounded by theologians and preachers. God was everywhere equally in it. With the allegorical interpretation, anything could be found in all of it.” ― Richard Marius, Martin Luther: The Christian between God and Death

#bible #quotes #biblical studies #interpreation #biblical hermeneutics #bible interpretation #luther #martin luther #lutheranism #scripture #faith #God #religion #spirituality #God's word

6 notes · View notes

asinglesock · 1 year

Note

what from the poem is relevant to Jeremiah? please i must know

Louise Glück, from “Blue Rotunda”, Averno

Copying the text above for context.

Thank you for asking! (watch out. dangerous levels of interest.)

One thing we're talking about in my Jeremiah class is that the book of Jeremiah is a piece of trauma literature. Depending on your view of scripture you can be more or less set on the authorship of the book--you can definitely make a case that Jeremiah was a real person with real prophecies about the Babylonian conquest before it happened, but often historical-critical perspectives will use knowledge of historical events inside a text as evidence that it was written (or revised to its current form) after that event took place. And Jeremiah has. uhh. a lot of that.

But even from a literalist perspective there's lots of evidence that the book of Jeremiah was gradually compiled over time. For example, in chapter 36 there's a narrative of YHWH telling Jeremiah to write, Jeremiah telling Baruch what to write, Baruch spreading the message to the public & to officials, and Jehoiakim getting his hand on the scroll to destroy it bit by bit as he reads because he views it as a political threat. After the scroll is destroyed, Jeremiah and Baruch get right back to work and "many similar words were added" (36:32). The earlier draft is destroyed but a new version, with some new content, is created. (I LOVE when there's a text about the creation of the text.)

There's also that lots of bits seem to be out of order--we go from oracle to wisdom saying to narrative to oracle again to narrative from later to narrative from earlier and it's not always clear why. Sometimes things are grouped for thematic reasons instead of being ordered chronologically. There was a redactional tradition in the generations after the first pieces were written--a generation that lived, as the remnant in Judea or as exiles in Babylon. Either way, the editors of Jeremiah lived through the trauma of the Babylonian conquest.

Why does it matter that they lived through the conquest? The Babylonian conquest could potentially overturn all the assumptions a believer in YHWH might have about YHWH establishing the throne of David and defeating all of Judah's enemies. It's theodicy: if God is on my side, why are bad things happening to me? One pretty straightforward explanation could be that YHWH is not as powerful as the gods of Babylon, and that the Jewish population ought to assimilate and worship these gods instead. But instead, the book of Jeremiah argues that YHWH was always supporting the Babylonian conquest, because it was to punish the people of Israel and Judah for breaking their covenant with him. Weirdly enough, this makes Jeremiah's insistance that the people should not fight back into a text of resistance (against the eradication of the people, but also against assimilation).

Here's where the self-blame comes in. If Judah broke the covenant with YHWH, then YHWH never abandoned them. He was punishing them, according to the terms of their covenant, and ultimately would always bring them back to prosperity and wellbeing. (This is the context of Jer 29:11's statement "I know the plans I have for you...")

So the Jewish communities in exile ought to prioritize keeping their people alive and well, and also keep their ethnic & religious identity intact since YHWH still cares about them. Now the problem is something they can control--not that they're a tiny little nation dangerously placed between big, hungry empires--but that they as a people need to wholeheartedly worship YHWH and live justly in their communities.

God is still powerful, God still likes them, and the only problem is something they can address in their behavior. It's a great solution.

It's great that this narrative helped sustain Jeremiah's community through a trauma with effects that are still felt today, but we should be aware of this context when we read the harsh rhetoric against the people of Judah. It's coming from within, and it's coming from people who blame themselves for what happened to them. Taken out of context, this rhetoric can turn into victim-blaming pretty easily, and I'm sure that it has been historically used in antisemetic ways. If it's in the victim's power to fix things and things don't get fixed, doesn't that mean it must be the victim's fault?

I've seen this kind of victim blaming in Christian faith healing contexts. I think praying for people who are injured or sick can be an act of love, but when you have absolute faith that God not only can but will heal someone unless they lack faith, suddenly it becomes the fault of the injured/sick/disabled person when they are not miraculously healed. That is not love. So I can really see the appeal of framing something as your own fault, because you can change your own behaviors and expect a different result. But it can be a dangerous line of thought, because you risk perpetuating self-hatred if/when things are out of your control.

Personally, when I read Jeremiah and other biblical texts through this trauma lens (a lot of Hebrew Bible was put in writing or revised into recognizable forms around this period) it makes me feel more inclined to look at the people of Israel and Judah with more sympathy. They weren't uniquely wicked so much as they were self-critical.

Here's a source on trauma in Jeremiah that I'm using for my research project:

Claassens, L Juliana M. “Preaching the Pentateuch: Reading Jeremiah’s Sermons through the Lens of Cultural Trauma.” Scriptura 116, no. 2 (2017): 27–37. doi:10.7833/116-2-1313.

#a sock speaks #grad school tag #long post #biblical studies #hebrew bible

20 notes · View notes

Last Seen Blogs

hollybee8917

Writer's Lagoon

ttfello

Reckless.Child

just-a-simple-dyke

rain down on me

1kribblindepresso

wtfsyndrome

spadesolace

spade