Monday, 19 August 2013
Google+ and comments
Google + comments on this blog have all disappeared since I have reverted to Blogger comments. Google's motto was 'do no evil'. In the case of comments, they have failed to do good. Sorry about conversations that are now lost. But there is no technical solution that allows both.
Wednesday, 14 August 2013
Faith and its expression
At great risk of displaying my foolishness, I am stimulated by two posts from people I have never met in person to form a statement of faith that expresses something. Each post asks "Where should a statement of faith begin?" The first that I read is here and the second is linked to it. Each post is reasonably good in its own way. It is a bit of a word challenge - what do you do with Jesus, Christ, and God in terms of their character, and their role from our point of view.
For fun, I will start at the beginning. The source of my words is (of course) in the Bible. All versions of the canon of Scripture in the tradition in which I am taught, start with the second letter of the Hebrew alef-bet. It is said that Alef was willing to let Bet go first, even though Alex was first according to the list of letters. So faith as a statement is must be willing to let faith which is expressed in action go first. When we look at that first partial sentence in Genesis, the first action is creating. In our lives, as we become aware, we are faced with that which is created (from our point of view) and we have no known subject for this act. The subject is therefore God.
We too, created in the image of God, are to be (first), creative. We do not begin with explanation.
When we have been creative, we may then attempt to express in words what it was that made us so, a prevailing strength, hard work, daily practice, an inner force of determination, an inner change of heart, and so on. These are aspects of what may be called the human spirit, and of what may be determined as an anointing, or Christ-like behaviour. (Note I did not say Jesus-like, but Christ-like.) This Anointing Spirit who broods over the disorder of the formless deep is likewise an unknown actor, presupposed by us who act in a creative way and seek to explain such action.
As the chosen people said (somewhere) - we will do and we will understand. The doing is first. The Alef gives up its desire to be first. (But it is also noted that the first letter of the Decalogue is Alef.)
Where is the doing of God best illustrated? It is a long story and tortuous, a history filled with violence and passion, and with tenderness, with vulnerability and exploitation, with self-seeking and self-protective behaviour and with self-giving. I have noted before the five-fold repeated description of 'the LORD' in Book 5 of the Psalter - Yhwh who makes heaven and earth. This God is named by the name that was revealed to Moses - a name by which this God is to be remembered for all time. The actions of this God are to make heaven and earth - the phrase is expressed as an active ongoing participle. (We may think that created is in the past, but it is really ongoing as the Psalms make clear - and as one could translate Genesis 1:1 also: see e.g. here. I am willing to believe Holmstedt on Grammar. He's done his homework.) These actions are summarized with the fifth mention of this phrase in Psalm 146. This is a God who keeps truth forever, who does judgment for the oppressed, who gives bread to the hungry, releases prisoners, gives sight to the blind, consoles the disturbed, loves the righteous, shelters the guest, restores orphan and widow, and subverts the way of the wicked.
This is a 'go and do likewise' moment.
Who is the obedient but the one who does what was desired from the beginning at the same cost that was invested in the beginning, even before the foundation of the world? Dare I say that the power to become such children is given by the same Spirit that broods like a Mother over the formless waste and the waters of destruction that so easily temporarily get the better of us?
There is plenty of unity in these statements. They circle back on each other. There is plenty of trinity in these statements also but there is no salvation in belief without obedience. And the hearing and obeying is a costly act of creation paid in one's own kind, flesh and blood.
We may jump to conclusions, creeds and confessions, but salvation and deliverance come through an inexpressible Anointing, aka Christ, an anointing that results in hearing and doing. Words there are indeed that are Spirit and Life. The poor and the hapless do not remain downtrodden when the Spirit moves. In truth, the Bible may begin with the second letter of the alef-bet, but the second letter takes creative power from the first and the Spirit is a brooding and redeeming warrior through her brood. Wisdom is justified in her children. If Jesus had not been mortal, temporal, like us, we would not know this hope so clearly. The same hope exactly is expressed in the psalms. We are called into the same hearing, the same drama, the same courtroom, the same life.
It is pretty clear that most religions agree that we must care for the poor and the hapless - but do we really go the whole nine yards? Do we subvert the way of the wicked or do we rather admire the way in which people get ahead in this world? Do we even protect and allow and encourage such self-service in the cafeteria before us? It must also be clear that we mortals have a very difficult problem. We are beset with conflict in ourselves. Should we not eat, drink, and be merry? The oracle Psalm 36 has it right - on the transgression of the wicked within my heart... there is no dread of God before its eyes. The following acrostic (Psalm 37) on the wicked shows, as does Psalm 1, how important the wicked are. They are the ones who have the opportunity to work out their deliverance in fear and trembling, if indeed we will. Note it is the way of the wicked that is subverted so that the wicked one might come to its corporate and individual senses and not be insensitive or senseless or foolish (and say in its heart - God is of no account, Psalms 14, 53).
The obedience is spelled out in the Psalms - and from these texts Jesus reads the whole conversation with the one who created the heavens and the earth and who teaches humanity knowledge (a phrase I learned with delight from Kimhi). We may read and be taught (Torah) with Jesus. Such is the Gospel.
For fun, I will start at the beginning. The source of my words is (of course) in the Bible. All versions of the canon of Scripture in the tradition in which I am taught, start with the second letter of the Hebrew alef-bet. It is said that Alef was willing to let Bet go first, even though Alex was first according to the list of letters. So faith as a statement is must be willing to let faith which is expressed in action go first. When we look at that first partial sentence in Genesis, the first action is creating. In our lives, as we become aware, we are faced with that which is created (from our point of view) and we have no known subject for this act. The subject is therefore God.
We too, created in the image of God, are to be (first), creative. We do not begin with explanation.
When we have been creative, we may then attempt to express in words what it was that made us so, a prevailing strength, hard work, daily practice, an inner force of determination, an inner change of heart, and so on. These are aspects of what may be called the human spirit, and of what may be determined as an anointing, or Christ-like behaviour. (Note I did not say Jesus-like, but Christ-like.) This Anointing Spirit who broods over the disorder of the formless deep is likewise an unknown actor, presupposed by us who act in a creative way and seek to explain such action.
As the chosen people said (somewhere) - we will do and we will understand. The doing is first. The Alef gives up its desire to be first. (But it is also noted that the first letter of the Decalogue is Alef.)
Where is the doing of God best illustrated? It is a long story and tortuous, a history filled with violence and passion, and with tenderness, with vulnerability and exploitation, with self-seeking and self-protective behaviour and with self-giving. I have noted before the five-fold repeated description of 'the LORD' in Book 5 of the Psalter - Yhwh who makes heaven and earth. This God is named by the name that was revealed to Moses - a name by which this God is to be remembered for all time. The actions of this God are to make heaven and earth - the phrase is expressed as an active ongoing participle. (We may think that created is in the past, but it is really ongoing as the Psalms make clear - and as one could translate Genesis 1:1 also: see e.g. here. I am willing to believe Holmstedt on Grammar. He's done his homework.) These actions are summarized with the fifth mention of this phrase in Psalm 146. This is a God who keeps truth forever, who does judgment for the oppressed, who gives bread to the hungry, releases prisoners, gives sight to the blind, consoles the disturbed, loves the righteous, shelters the guest, restores orphan and widow, and subverts the way of the wicked.
This is a 'go and do likewise' moment.
Who is the obedient but the one who does what was desired from the beginning at the same cost that was invested in the beginning, even before the foundation of the world? Dare I say that the power to become such children is given by the same Spirit that broods like a Mother over the formless waste and the waters of destruction that so easily temporarily get the better of us?
There is plenty of unity in these statements. They circle back on each other. There is plenty of trinity in these statements also but there is no salvation in belief without obedience. And the hearing and obeying is a costly act of creation paid in one's own kind, flesh and blood.
We may jump to conclusions, creeds and confessions, but salvation and deliverance come through an inexpressible Anointing, aka Christ, an anointing that results in hearing and doing. Words there are indeed that are Spirit and Life. The poor and the hapless do not remain downtrodden when the Spirit moves. In truth, the Bible may begin with the second letter of the alef-bet, but the second letter takes creative power from the first and the Spirit is a brooding and redeeming warrior through her brood. Wisdom is justified in her children. If Jesus had not been mortal, temporal, like us, we would not know this hope so clearly. The same hope exactly is expressed in the psalms. We are called into the same hearing, the same drama, the same courtroom, the same life.
It is pretty clear that most religions agree that we must care for the poor and the hapless - but do we really go the whole nine yards? Do we subvert the way of the wicked or do we rather admire the way in which people get ahead in this world? Do we even protect and allow and encourage such self-service in the cafeteria before us? It must also be clear that we mortals have a very difficult problem. We are beset with conflict in ourselves. Should we not eat, drink, and be merry? The oracle Psalm 36 has it right - on the transgression of the wicked within my heart... there is no dread of God before its eyes. The following acrostic (Psalm 37) on the wicked shows, as does Psalm 1, how important the wicked are. They are the ones who have the opportunity to work out their deliverance in fear and trembling, if indeed we will. Note it is the way of the wicked that is subverted so that the wicked one might come to its corporate and individual senses and not be insensitive or senseless or foolish (and say in its heart - God is of no account, Psalms 14, 53).
The obedience is spelled out in the Psalms - and from these texts Jesus reads the whole conversation with the one who created the heavens and the earth and who teaches humanity knowledge (a phrase I learned with delight from Kimhi). We may read and be taught (Torah) with Jesus. Such is the Gospel.
Monday, 12 August 2013
Reading about illuminated Psalters
 |
| Detail of fol. 135r, illustrating Psalm 77. |
The Eadwine Psalter
The Anglo-Catalan is more useful and colourful. See here for some additional images.
Sunday, 11 August 2013
How long can you maintain radio silence?
Or how long can I keep silent when reading?
re Terrien, (Terrien, Samuel. (2003). The Psalms, Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary.)
I remain mystified by his strophic structure. His notes like 3-2 3-2 3-4 etc are not explained or linked to any words in the poems. They are neither stress units nor word counts. Without an intro such as this one it is impossible for the reader to engage with Terrien's book in this aspect of his analysis. Of course it is impossible to do it in English, period, and his book in the edition that I have access to is English only - so I count this major aspect of the book a failure in communication. He may have been good - even very good, but a reasonably informed English reader cannot possibly follow him without something else in hand.
I have not yet critiqued his translations but they are at times without justification - e.g. Psalm 1:6, but the way of the ungodly vanishes in the sands. This is an odd gloss - no sand in the text, and sand would conflict with the metaphor of 'as the sand of the sea', a symbol for abundance. Or does he mean the sands of time - an even worse import into the text, strange in English or French. No other translator has so rendered this verse as far as I can see.
re Caird
His position changes from the 1962 book on Luke (Penguin commentary series). In the lectures, I hear a dependency on Jewish tradition for interpreting the NT. This is very good in my opinion. The book in contrast has uncritical assumptions. It is the assumed old (pre-shoa) rather than new(er) perspective on Paul. I am still looking for both the gifts of Psalm 68 and the discipline required in obedience from a New Testament writer. Assumptions of supercession, old Israel versus new Israel, is not a reading that I can any longer bear with.
re Psalms through the Centuries and Jewish and Christian Approaches to the Psalms, Conflict and Convergence, (papers from Oxford 2101) I am thoroughly enjoying these. There is an SBL review of Psalms through the Centuries here. I have the paperback edition from 2012. You cannot get the full sense of this book from a review. Nor could you get it without knowing the psalms very well. But this is a comprehensive review of the history of the reception of the psalms - a thorough pleasure for me at this time in my learning. I do not regret having concentrated my study on this one book of Tanakh.
I recall teachers who knew nothing. And teachers with an axe to grind. None of the above falls into these categories.
I recall teachers who may have known much but who could not communicate it, and teachers who have presented very well the things they learned in their youth but had not yet developed their own real reflections on it.
The teacher is rare who can present clearly and encourage in their students a freedom of response to the data so that we might grow into what is complete, measured into the fullness of the maturity of the gifts that are ours.
re Terrien, (Terrien, Samuel. (2003). The Psalms, Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary.)
I remain mystified by his strophic structure. His notes like 3-2 3-2 3-4 etc are not explained or linked to any words in the poems. They are neither stress units nor word counts. Without an intro such as this one it is impossible for the reader to engage with Terrien's book in this aspect of his analysis. Of course it is impossible to do it in English, period, and his book in the edition that I have access to is English only - so I count this major aspect of the book a failure in communication. He may have been good - even very good, but a reasonably informed English reader cannot possibly follow him without something else in hand.
I have not yet critiqued his translations but they are at times without justification - e.g. Psalm 1:6, but the way of the ungodly vanishes in the sands. This is an odd gloss - no sand in the text, and sand would conflict with the metaphor of 'as the sand of the sea', a symbol for abundance. Or does he mean the sands of time - an even worse import into the text, strange in English or French. No other translator has so rendered this verse as far as I can see.
re Caird
His position changes from the 1962 book on Luke (Penguin commentary series). In the lectures, I hear a dependency on Jewish tradition for interpreting the NT. This is very good in my opinion. The book in contrast has uncritical assumptions. It is the assumed old (pre-shoa) rather than new(er) perspective on Paul. I am still looking for both the gifts of Psalm 68 and the discipline required in obedience from a New Testament writer. Assumptions of supercession, old Israel versus new Israel, is not a reading that I can any longer bear with.
re Psalms through the Centuries and Jewish and Christian Approaches to the Psalms, Conflict and Convergence, (papers from Oxford 2101) I am thoroughly enjoying these. There is an SBL review of Psalms through the Centuries here. I have the paperback edition from 2012. You cannot get the full sense of this book from a review. Nor could you get it without knowing the psalms very well. But this is a comprehensive review of the history of the reception of the psalms - a thorough pleasure for me at this time in my learning. I do not regret having concentrated my study on this one book of Tanakh.
I recall teachers who knew nothing. And teachers with an axe to grind. None of the above falls into these categories.
I recall teachers who may have known much but who could not communicate it, and teachers who have presented very well the things they learned in their youth but had not yet developed their own real reflections on it.
The teacher is rare who can present clearly and encourage in their students a freedom of response to the data so that we might grow into what is complete, measured into the fullness of the maturity of the gifts that are ours.
Saturday, 10 August 2013
Radio opera - The Wandering Jew by Robert Saxton
Robert Saxton is footnoted in Susan Gillingham's reception history of Psalm 137 - a hard hitting section of the book Jewish and Christian Approaches to the Psalms. Particularly interesting is the second of those three videos on The Wandering Jew, a radio opera.
Wednesday, 7 August 2013
Political and social consequences of believing in God
Whoa - Bob - too big a title - and you are supposed to be reading.
Yes, I am reading and listening (with half an ear) to George Caird, and I just found his short commentary on St Luke (Penguin Books 1963) which I think I will reread.
In the introduction, my first introduction in the 60s to the synoptic problem (without the help of Mark Goodacre), he writes of the intent of Luke's gospel with the fifth of his opening rhetorical questions:
He does this by growing people made in his image into the fullness of their capacity for love.
I could prove this by a number of words - but no. The word now is out to those who have a sense of the inner life of truth. Russia is out from the point of view of the prejudice of their current leadership. Well, we could have figured that out couldn't we. It would not have taken much to out the Russians.
So that deals with 'consequence' in my title. The consequence of hearing that the Russians are out is to say to them - no. Let your no be no - as Jesus said. You, O motherland, may not be in favour of violence that supports your prejudice and that stems from your own fear.
What about political and social? - well, it is more than a matter of big-money and gold-medal-glory. Do we (who are not Russia) want to win on crooked ground? Better to say no to ourselves than to say yes to what is not straight. The crooked will be made straight (the root is from equity - ישר) - but not, O motherland, in the fashion you imagine in your own sin - your ways are not my ways, says that same ancient text of the book of consolation (see Isaiah 40ff).
Who among the nations will now judge with equity where there is deceit and violence? (see e.g. here and here) The political response will be what - just words? From the north? from the south? from the east? from the west? Who knows? (I doubt that this little essay will make much difference. But for the record, since 1994 or thereabouts I changed my understanding after much struggle of what is meant by certain clobber texts in the ancient writings. I am being dug, watered, fertilized, and grown by a gardener that knows me. I won't be going to Russia for the games - unless they ask for a lecture on my book. - O Bob watch out! - No fear - Bible is not an Olympic sport.)
What about believing in God? Shouldn't I have written - that particular Abba of Jesus, the Galilean who was executed? Or should I have written the consequences of "a passion for truth", or "a passion for justice". Those are the measures of God, in human terms: truth and justice. For he will judge the nations with equity (ישר) (Psalm 67). And here is a moment of judgment with equity which those who have a passion for truth can exercise. I doubt that this truth is confined to Christendom. Doesn't even that good book speak of "all who fear God", "all who do what is right"?
Isn't it strange that we among the nations must judge according to the equity of the judgment of God? Will we?
See this related article by Stephen Fry (if you can get to it). Traffic volume is very high on his server.
Yes, I am reading and listening (with half an ear) to George Caird, and I just found his short commentary on St Luke (Penguin Books 1963) which I think I will reread.
In the introduction, my first introduction in the 60s to the synoptic problem (without the help of Mark Goodacre), he writes of the intent of Luke's gospel with the fifth of his opening rhetorical questions:
Are Christians suspected of antisocial behaviour? He [Luke] will portray the author of their faith as a figure of nobility, grace, and charm, able to reproduce these same qualities in the lives of his followers and to raise to decency and dignity even the outcasts from the society of men.Yes - Caird and his editor Nineham, like their contemporary Lewis, use language that is 'man' oriented - but humanity is intended. And humanity includes 'all sorts and conditions of' the same. And such conditions include but are not limited to race, gender, social status, sexual orientation, colour, creed, and confession. So how does 'the author of their faith', by whom Caird means Jesus of Nazareth, "raise to decency and dignity even the outcasts"?
He does this by growing people made in his image into the fullness of their capacity for love.
I could prove this by a number of words - but no. The word now is out to those who have a sense of the inner life of truth. Russia is out from the point of view of the prejudice of their current leadership. Well, we could have figured that out couldn't we. It would not have taken much to out the Russians.
So that deals with 'consequence' in my title. The consequence of hearing that the Russians are out is to say to them - no. Let your no be no - as Jesus said. You, O motherland, may not be in favour of violence that supports your prejudice and that stems from your own fear.
What about political and social? - well, it is more than a matter of big-money and gold-medal-glory. Do we (who are not Russia) want to win on crooked ground? Better to say no to ourselves than to say yes to what is not straight. The crooked will be made straight (the root is from equity - ישר) - but not, O motherland, in the fashion you imagine in your own sin - your ways are not my ways, says that same ancient text of the book of consolation (see Isaiah 40ff).
Who among the nations will now judge with equity where there is deceit and violence? (see e.g. here and here) The political response will be what - just words? From the north? from the south? from the east? from the west? Who knows? (I doubt that this little essay will make much difference. But for the record, since 1994 or thereabouts I changed my understanding after much struggle of what is meant by certain clobber texts in the ancient writings. I am being dug, watered, fertilized, and grown by a gardener that knows me. I won't be going to Russia for the games - unless they ask for a lecture on my book. - O Bob watch out! - No fear - Bible is not an Olympic sport.)
What about believing in God? Shouldn't I have written - that particular Abba of Jesus, the Galilean who was executed? Or should I have written the consequences of "a passion for truth", or "a passion for justice". Those are the measures of God, in human terms: truth and justice. For he will judge the nations with equity (ישר) (Psalm 67). And here is a moment of judgment with equity which those who have a passion for truth can exercise. I doubt that this truth is confined to Christendom. Doesn't even that good book speak of "all who fear God", "all who do what is right"?
Isn't it strange that we among the nations must judge according to the equity of the judgment of God? Will we?
See this related article by Stephen Fry (if you can get to it). Traffic volume is very high on his server.
יִשְׂמְחוּ וִירַנְּנוּ לְאֻמִּים
כִּי תִשְׁפֹּט עַמִּים מִישֹׁר וּלְאֻמִּים בָּאָרֶץ תַּנְחֵם סֶלָה |
67.5
|
Make tribes glad and shout for joy
for you judge peoples with equity and tribes on the earth - you guide them Selah |
Tuesday, 6 August 2013
Reading, reading reading, and listening
I am not writing (!)
I will spend a month in my discernment period, reading and listening. Here's the reading list so far - help me add to it if you like.
Terrien, A strophic and theological commentary on the Psalms (not my favorite but I am giving him a second chance to reveal his assumptions).
Gillingham - two books,
I will spend a month in my discernment period, reading and listening. Here's the reading list so far - help me add to it if you like.
Terrien, A strophic and theological commentary on the Psalms (not my favorite but I am giving him a second chance to reveal his assumptions).
Gillingham - two books,
- the first is all the papers from the Oxford Psalms Conference, Jewish and Christian Approaches to the Psalms, Conflict and Convergence - samples here.
- the second her Blackwell commentary, Volume 1 on the reception history of the Psalms, Psalms through the Centuries.
Both of these are full of delights.
Listening: - I am listening to Caird's lectures as advertised by Mark Goodacre here. Lecture 3 is delightful - and shows me how NT theology is impossible without knowledge of how the Hebrews read the Bible (i.e. Torah, Prophets, and Writings - the 'Old Testament'). This might get me back into the NT...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
