The Bible

MadArchitect · Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:26 pm Post subject: The Bible

Some time ago Chris and I discussed the possibility of a forum discussion of the Bible and all of the complications that arose therefrom. At the time, I offered to serve as discussion leader, but the idea never progressed much from there until a few weeks ago when I picked it back up. Since then, I’ve been doing some prepatory work, and I’m almost ready to get underway. This seems like as good a time as any to announce the group reading. In this post, I want to discuss as briefly as possible the difficulties behind a group discussion of the Bible and some of the ways I hope to address those difficulties. I realize that this is a long post, but such is the complexity of our project; you can rest assured that future posts will be much abbreviated by comparison. Even if you skip most of the material in this post, please read the last section, entitled “Bibles” if you are planning to participate as the issue it addresses is likely to have a huge impact on the discussion. If you don’t see any particular reason to read the Bible, skip to the fourth section, “Purpose and scope of the discussion”, for some good general reasons; you may have more reason to be interested than you think.

Requirements
I hope that there will be a great deal of interest in the reading, but I also realize that the nature of the beast makes it more than a little daunting. Here’s what you’ll need to fully participate in the discussion:
1) a Bible,
2) an hour or two per week in which to read it.
Further on in this post I’ll talk a bit about getting a Bible, and in a future post I’ll outline the plan that allows us to spread the material out enough to keep the expected reading to a minimum. I’ve endeavored to do most of the work on my own so that as many people can participate as would like to, regardless of other obligations. If you’ve got enough time to contribute to BookTalk once or twice a week, you’ve likely got time enough to read along.

Of course, if you’d like to bring more to the discussion, you’re welcome to do so. As moderator, I plan to supply a lot of related information from a number of scholarly sources. At the very least, I’ll be drawing clarification from the Mercer Dictionary of the Bible -- not as well known as the Cambridge but I’ve worked with it enough to recognize its worth as a general resource -- as well as a small personal library of works related to theology and comparative religion. In addition to that, I have access to a rather large university theological library, to which I plan to make regular trips during the course of the reading. I’ll be more than happy to research any topics related to our current reading on request, and I’ll make some effort to supply whatever information I think interesting or pertinent as well. All of which is to say that additional effort and reading on the part of contributers is welcome, but not required.

Everyone is invited, regardless of background.

The need for a plan
One of the first things that should strike anyone hoping to read the Bible in its entirety is the heterogenous nature of the material. While Bible may literally mean “book”, it’s probably more apt to think of it as “library” -- that term better reflects the diversity of the material and the manner of its collection. The problem of approaching the Bible as a group is that, given the number of books and the diversity of their contents, discussion is likely to be sparse and piecemeal if we aren’t all reading more or less the same section during the same period. For that reason, I’ll be acting as moderator, and I’ve spent the last few weeks attempting to work out a general plan for approaching the material.

The length of the work is also a concern, and without some sort of itinerary to keep the reading moving along there’s a good chance that such a discussion could straggle on interminably. Provided that completion is part of the desire to read the Bible, it is in our best interests to set out with a plan and to follow that plan within reasonable limits. The plan that I am proposing below should not be taken as writ in stone. I hope that it will be a workable plan with many advantages, but it is, of course, open to revision should we as a group feel the need to follow a different course.

The plan in general
Given the average size of each book in the Bible, and the demands placed on discussion, I’ve decided that likely the most fruitful rate will be between 30-40 pages per week (assuming the page length in the New Revised Standard Version as the standard). In most cases, this means that we’ll be reading one book of the Bible per week. On some occasions, it will mean that a single book gets stretched out over a period of several weeks; during one week, we’ll likely attempt to tackle nine short books all at once. In each of these cases I’ve attempted to plan out the readings such that all the material that we handle in a given week has some sort of logical connection, and that the readings progress according to a logical plan. The most material we’ll handle in any given week is 47 pages, when we tackle the book of Genesis.

In drawing out the plan, I’ve tried to keep the reading requirements low enough to
1) encourage participation,
2) make it easy for people with varying amounts of reading time to keep up, and
3) allow discussion to go as in-depth as desired.
At the same time, I’ve had to keep in mind that, given the number of books included in the Bible, any extension of the standard reading time per 30-40 pages would add not days but months to the itenerary. Allowing two weeks per 40 pages, for example, would necessitate that we plan to read for nearly two years. We may find that the limitation of one week per book, on average, doesn’t allow us as much time for discussion as we’d like, but I think it’s a necessary compromise. The point is, of course, open to debate.

Further, the alotted week is for reading only. Discussion of any book that we’ve already read is welcome at any time (as are, to some extent, anticipations of books we are scheduled to read in the future). Once the week has ended, the reading will officially move on to the next book, unless we’ve found good reason to delay the reading (eg. technical problems, current events, general malaise). Because we’ll be reading in relatively small segments, it will likely be possible for latecomers to the discussion to catch up on any books they’d like to read, and there’s no reason why they shouldn’t discuss those books as the reading progresses. My advice, though, is to label clearly what book you’re discussing if you’re addressing books after the group has moved on.

I should note that I have planned to read the books outside of their canonical order. That means, among other things, that we will not be reading Genesis first. That may seem like a needlessly unorthodox way of approaching the Bible, but I think I have good reasons for planning it such, and I’ll attempt to frame those reasons in the next section, as well as when I spell out the order in another post.

That said, the general plan itself is rather orthodox. We’ll start with the Hebrew Bible -- that is, what has traditionally been called the Old Testament by Christians. Once we’ve finished that, I plan to make an option of the Apocryphal or Deuterocanonical books -- I’ll both explain later what I mean by those and outline some arguments for why we should and should not include those books in our reading. If the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books are voted down, we’ll proceed directly to New Testament. After that, we’ll officially have ended our reading of the Bible, but depending on the success of the reading I may offer further options on the Aprocryphal books, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and/or the Nag Hammadi. Everything but the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament will be optional, though I’m interested in all of the extra-canonical books (depending on your tradition) and I doubt that I’ll mind continuing the discussion to include those.

All of this is, of course, subject to change, and while I’ve put some effort into making all of this easier for those who would like to participate, I’ll be open to suggestions and criticisms. Depending on whether we decide to tackle the minimum or more than the minimum, I would estimate the total reading time to be between 35 and 47 weeks, with possible extensions for the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi. That in itself will likely seem daunting to many, but bear in mind that no one is expecting you to commit to the discussion. If you’re interested, find a Bible and join in at your leisure. As I’ve noted before, the material is heterogenous, so those who feel inclined to take a pass on a given section will likely find it possible to pick back up on the readings at a later date. My only concern is that there be an active discussion as consistently as possible, and given the nature of the material, I don’t see any reason why there shouldn’t be.

Let me stress that this is not a lecture. Reading and discussing the entire Bible is a large task, and my purpose is to make that easier by providing a general plan and moderating discussion. I hope to serve as a bridge to a great deal of extra-textual information as well, but I do not pretend to be an authority on the Bible. The success of this discussion depends entirely on the contributions made by everyone who participates. Without participation, you can expect the reading to fall apart in rather short order.

Purpose and scope of the discussion
Your purpose for wanting to read the Bible is your own, and you’re welcome to join in regardless of that reason. What I want to spell out in brief here are the purposes that underlie the general plan of this reading and the scope that seems reasonable given our limitations. I want to encourage that everyone participating explore these viewpoints; they are not required as a tenant of discussion, though, and the discussion itself will no doubt benefit from a diversity of opinions and points of view.

My foremost assumption in planning this reading has been the relationship the Bible has as text with the four general traditions to which it is related. The first two traditions are obvious: Judaism and Christianity, though in exploring those relationships we’re bound to find those categories complicated by their many divisions, eg. orthodox, liberal, Catholic, protestant, and so on. The third we’ll only be able to touch upon: Islam. I hope at some future point to deal with the Koran in a similar manner; for the moment our access to Islam is real but limited. The fourth tradition is one that many might not think to include, but I think it’s an important one: that of Western civilization as a whole. Through its influence not only on Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but also on art, literature, politics, philosophy, science and ethics, the Bible has, for better or for worse, helped shape our civilization, both religious and secular, and I think it is well worth considering the role it has played.

Given the purpose of understanding the role the Bible has played in developing the various traditions related to it, the order I’ve charted for our reading is meant to provide for a fuller understanding of the unfolding of tradition. That is to say, I’ve endeavored to make it easier to recognize the impact the Bible has had on tradition both in its historical development and in its diversity. As I’ve mentioned above, the Bible is a collection of more or less heterogenous texts, and I have assumed the validity of source criticism in planning this reading. We may consider in passing the doctrines of the divine inspiration of the Bible, but no one will be required to assume them. Rather than viewing the heterogeny of the Bible as self-contradiction, I would say that it is more true to the material to view it as a polyphony clustered around several pivotal ideas (eg. the monotheistic God, the question of evil, etc.). This polyphony thus becomes one of the central points of interest -- and one of the central sources of beauty -- of the Bible, reflecting the diversity and complexity of the religious experience.

I have not assumed the desire to discredit any given religious tradition as one of the operative purposes behind this discussion. I have my own reasons for not doing so; nevertheless, I think that there are several good reasons that others should avoid that tendency as well. The simplest is that it’s hardly necessary, particularly in a forum with prominent atheistic and agnostic tendencies, to challenge belief. The Bible is not, by and large, an argument for theism, not an attempt at proof, and any attempt to dissect it as a theistic demonstration is doomed to tedium. We can hardly hope to sustain an extended discussion on those grounds. (Thomas Paine has illustrated as much, though unintentionally.) A bigger reason, however, is that such a viewpoint is likely to straightjacket the larger understanding that may be afforded by a discussion of the Bible. If we hope to understand the traditions related to the Bible, we’re better served by a discussion that considers the text in its proper context.

Nor, for that matter, have I assumed conversion as a purpose motivating this discussion. It will not be my intention to demonstrate to anyone the credibility or literal truth of any part of the Bible. My interpretations will be, in large part, informed by a long, studied interest in comparative religion. For that reason, I may be more inclined to look for the most valid interpretation of any give passage; it’s important to bear in mind that by “most valid”, I will almost invariably mean most valid relative to the traditions under scrutiny. The influence of that viewpoint will be most obvious in the order I’ve charted for the reading. As I’ve hinted above, to understand the Bible is to understand it in its complexity, diversity, profundity and depth; we should make some bid to recognize those qualities even it is not assumed that the Bible is true.

Our interest in all these matters will ultimately determine the scope of our discussion. That scope will enlarge or shrink depending on how much you bring to the discussion, be it scholarly, anecdotal or simple opinion. What I want to encourage most is that we avoid points of view which unnecessarily limit our scope.

Bibles
It is important to note that there are numerous versions of the Bible in print, and that the differences between versions are not superficial. If you’re planning on participating in the discussion, what you hope to gain by the reading may play some part in the Bible you choose to read from. I’ll attempt to spell out some basic considerations. In doing so, I’m drawing from J.W. Rogerson’s discussion of the topic in his book “An Introduction to the Bible”, a good place to start if you have some further interest in the subject. For our purposes, there will be at least two considerations in choosing a Bible.

The first consideration is that of canon. Canon may be viewed as the official determination of which books are authoritative in a given tradition; when a religious believer refers to the Bible, they are referring to the canon accepted by their religious tradition. Different churches treat different texts as canonical. As a result, the editions of the Bible published with a particular church in mind may contain more or fewer books than those intended for other churches. The Catholic church considers some books Deuterocanonical -- that is, of equal validity with other canonical books -- while most Protestant traditions consider the same books Apocryphal and exclude them from their versions of the Bible. Generally speaking, we may assume that our discussion will cover the books that all of the major Protestant, Catholic and Jewish traditions embrace equally, and which none exclude as Apocryphal. For that purpose, the Authorized -- or King James -- Version, as well as nearly any widely published Bible, will do. However, if you’re interested in reading the Apocryphal or Deuterocanonical books (we can discuss what those terms imply), you’ll want to be a little pickier. To my knowledge, the widest coverage is offered by the extended edition of the New Revised Standard Version. However, the Apocryphal books may be found online in e-text format, so that it may not be necessary to choose your Bible based solely on the basis of inclusion.

The other consideration is translation. It has been suggested by one person with whom I’ve discussed the reading, that the discussion would be best served by reading either in the original languages (care to take a stab at the Greek, Tara?) or by reading a direct translation, even one retaining the omitted punctuation of the Hebrew texts. Anyone willing to put that much effort into the reading is free to do so. I personally wouldn’t be able to keep up.

Assuming that most of us will not be reading the original, we’re left with a variety of translations, and a variety of problems which arise from differences in translation. For our purposes, we can concentrate on two basic problems. The first, and most difficult, is that of sources. There is no universally accepted source text for the Bible; rather, archaeological finds have uncovered numerous texts of varying completeness, some in Greek, some in Hebrew, some in Latin and some in Syriac. Because the modern translators who produce a given edition are driven by a variety of intentions (historical authenticity, doctrinal bias, academic interests) they may each choose to work from a different text. This means that while a great many of the passages found in each Bible should, in principle, be identical to one another, some versions will have passages that are either longer or shorter, or which vary in terminology, from the same passage in another version of the Bible. On this matter, I can offer only one really worthwhile piece of advice. Think about your purpose in reading the Bible: if there’s one tradition (eg. Judaism, Catholicism, some denomination or another in Protestantism, Greek Orthodox) that you’re particularly interested in, find out which translation that consider canonical and go with that. The reason is that the source text for that version was likely chosen in large part because it supported their doctrinal biases. If you’re not sure which version that tradition uses, look up a local branch in the phone book -- I’m sure they won’t mind telling you.

For those who aren’t interested in any particular religious tradition to the exclusion of others, I would suggest choosing a translation according to how readable you find its language. For those with an affinity for the traditions of English literature, you might try the King James, although other versions may be easier to read. The Good News Bible makes use of Noam Chomsky’s notion of “transformational grammar” with an aim towards conveying to modern readers the impact felt by the original readers -- though in doing so, its assumptions may direct it away from a more literal rendering of the text. The easiest way to tell which is going to be the best fit in terms of readability is simply to crack open a few different versions and compare.

I hope that I’ve pointed to a few of the complexities that face us in reading, and that the concerned among you will take a little time to track down more information using a search engine. If you already own a Bible, you may want to forego the research altogether -- that’s fine by me. For my part, I’ll be using the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) I bought for school ages ago. You’re welcome to choose the same text, but you’re by no means required. Translations have also been made of freestanding sections of the Bible, such as Stephen Mitchell’s translation of Job or Dan Rosenthal’s translation of the “J” sections of the Penteteuch, and I may sometimes draw from those for comparison.

Rather than attempt to nominate or simply assign one version as the required version for the discussion, I’ve opted to embrace the diversity. My hope is that any disagreement we find between versions will lead to fruitful discussion, not of which ought to be authoritative but of the ramifications the differences might have on the traditions to which they have given rise. And it may turn out that by exploring these variations we arrive at some complex understanding of the whole. Vive le difference!

* * * * *

Phew! That’s a good start. My next big post will outline the basic order in which I hope to tackle the books of the Bible. If things progress at a fair clip, I hope to start actually reading sometime next week. In the meantime, if you are interested in participating, please do three things:

1) Reply and let me know if you’re interested in participating,
2) Voice any concerns or opinions you have about our project, and
3) Find a Bible.

Thanks!

Edited by: MadArchitect at: 7/28/05 2:29 pm

MadArchitect · Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:59 am Post subject: Re: The Bible

No response yet, but I'll trudge right along, and we'll see what crops up.

What follows is the basic itinerary for the planned reading of the Hebrew Bible. It is, of course, subject to change and open to criticism. The estimated time for reading the entire Old Testament according to the following plan is 25 weeks. However, as I mentioned in my previous message, for the purposes of our discussion the Bible may be taken as a kind of library, or compendium, of Judaic and Christian literature. I see no particular reason why anyone wishing to participate shouldnÕt omit any of book for which they have no interest, nor why someone who hasn't participated before shouldn't pick up the discussion should we turn to a book for which they do have some interest. The plan below is designed to facilitate a progressive understanding of the Hebrew canon, but each major heading ought to be more or less comprehensible without too much familiarity with the books in other headings. Take the following descriptions as a basis for decided your interest, and please don't hesitate to contribute to the discussion.

The Hebrew Bible
Estimated reading time: 26 weeks

Job I chose to begin with this book for several reasons: 1) It's widely considered one of the highpoints of Biblical literature, and I wanted to start off with a band; 2) it's a literary work in a vein that's recognizable to modern sensibilities; 3) it introduces us to a number of the issues and difficulties with which we'll be dealing throughout our reading, including the difficulty involved in interpreting the notion of God. Estimated reading time: 1 week.

The Deuteronomic history (Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings) It's fairly unorthodox to put the Deuteronomic books before the Penteteuch, but I wanted to begin our excursion into the Biblical histories by setting the framework for the more mythical/literary view of the later writings. The Deuteronomic histories, though not as rigorously demonstrated as modern historical method would demand, ought to provide a basis for understanding the development of Isreal as a real cultural and political body. It is on this basis, I think, that we'll be made most able to address the traditions out of which the other books have grown, as well as assess the impact made by the changes of tradition each book represents. Estimated reading time: 5 weeks.

2 Kings and Esther 2 Kings completes our reading of the Deuteronomic history books. Because it is also a relatively short work, I've planned to combine it with a reading of Esther, a short novelistic writing notable for its strong heroine and its largely secular character. Esther should provide a much needed reprieve from the histories and offer us the opportunity to consider the ways in which secular thought could be incorporated into religious tradition. Estimated reading time: 1 week.

The Pentetuech, or Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy) Having established a portrait of the culture and society in which the Penteteuch books were likely written, I propose that we continue on to the works which depict the pre-history of Israel and the supposed birth of the Judaic religion. The Penteteuch, though traditionally attributed to Moses, is likely a composite work, and part of our purpose in situating it so late in our reading will be to consider it as a constitutive mythological history: that is, as a pre-history asserted in support of a particular view of Israel and Judaism, and of the relationship of the Chosen People to their God. Other topics of interest will likely include the part played by doctrines of divine inspiration in the interpretation of the Torah, style in historical writing, and (as with Esther) the impact literature can have on religious thought. Estimated reading time: 5 weeks.

Psalms, Song of Solomon Putting aside, once again, the historical writings, our excursion into the Book of Psalms will further extend our consideration of religious and secular artistic expression. Psalms is essentially a collection of song and poetry, and will hopefully serve to enrich our view of the blooming culture of ancient Israel. The Song of Solomon, also called the Song of Songs, is a collection of love poems also regarded as a high point of Biblical literature. It is brief enough to include in the final week of reading Psalms. Both may serve to indicate to us the heights said culture was to reach before the fall of the Temple, an event which will shadow the remainder of our reading of the Hebrew canon. Estimated reading time: 3 weeks

The Chronicler's History, plus supplementary material:
a. Ruth, 1 Chronicles One of three texts we'll be reading in supplement to the Chronicler's history, Ruth is another short novelistic writing, similar in content to Esther, and is placed here as part of the consideration of Israel's cultural mileau before our return to the historical writings. 1 Chronicles marks the beginning of our reading of the later history of Israel. Estimated reading time: 1 week
b. 2 Chronicles Continuing the history of the Hebrew monarchy. Because much of the historical information presented in the books of Chronicles will have, by this time, already been encounted in the Deuteronomic histories, part of our consideration will be that of the literary and ceremonial intent that lay behind rewriting history. Estimated reading time: 1 week
c. Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes Ezra and Nehemiah conclude the Chronicler's history with the events the follow the return from exile. Lamentations presents five poems on the subject of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Ecclesiastes is an example of wisdom literature, but one with a vein of heavy pessimism, which we ought to consider from both a historical and theological perspective. Estimated reading time 1 week

Prophetic and apocalyptic literature: With the prophets, we'll be encountering radical figures in extreme circumstances and addressing some complicated issues that are probably best collected under the provisional heading of social and theological criticism. The canonization of the Bible divides the books of the prophets into three major and twelve minor prophets, but for our purposes it may be better to address the prophets in more or less chronological order. For that reason, I've charted the following order, which is, as with everything else in the general plan I've presented, subject change and open to suggestion.
a. Early minor (Jonah, Daniel, Amos, Hosea) The familiar stories of Jonah and Daniel are probably fictional, but belong to the prophetic tradition; the latter ends with an example of apocalyptic literature which will no doubt make a recurrence in our discussion of the New Testament and the Christological interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures. Amos is generally regarded as the earliest prophet, with Hosea's career overlapping it in the roughly the last five years. Estimated reading time: 1 week.
b. The first major period (Isaiah, Micah, Nahum) The son of Amos, Isaiah is considered the first of the major prophets. The book of his reputed prophecies is one of the most influential in the Hebrew canon; quotations from Isaiah figure prominently in the New Testament. Micah will give us the chance to further explore the Judaic and prophetic notions of God, while Nahum presents a prophetic picture of the wrath of God. Estimated reading time: 2 weeks.
c. The second major period (Jeremiah, Zepheniah, Habukkuk) Jeremiah is the second major prophet, his career ending at the dawn of the Babylonian exile. Zephaniah presents the theological criticism of the state, and Habukkuk grapples with the difficulties of humanity's relationship to God, themes first brought to our attention in Job. Estimated reading time: 2 weeks
d. Ezekial The third major prophet, Ezekial presumaby served as a Priest in the Temple at Jerusalem before serving in Exile. Estimated reading time: 1 week.
e. Later minor (Obadiah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachai, Joel) Our final dealings with prophetic literature will concern relatively short Exilic and post-Exilic works, and will hopefully entail the development of an at least cursory image of Judaism in the centuries leading up to the Roman assimilation and the birth of that other Biblical tradition, Christianity. Estimated reading time: 1 week.

Proverbs The final selection in our reading of the Hebrew canon is classed along with Job and Ecclesiastes as wisdom literature. It consists of seven major collections of proverbs, pithy sayings or aphorisms, not terribly different in kind from those generally trafficked in folk wisdom and sometimes adopted in philosophical works like those of Neitzche, Pascal and others. My hope is that this will be a more leisurely read than many of the books we will have, by this point, considered, and that it will allow us some time to recoup while deciding our next step. Estimated reading time: 1 week

At this point we will have finished the Hebrew canon as it is embraced by most major Judaic and Christian branches. We may, at this point, continue on to the New Testament, or take the option of reading the Apocryphal, or Deuterocanonical, books. As we draw to the end of the general plan for the Hebrew canon, I'll present the general plan for dealing with either option and offer a vote, with the majority view decided the next step.

In the meantime, feel free to offer any comments, criticism or suggestions concerning the plan above. If there are no major objections, we'll plan to begin the first reading period starting this Friday, August 5th, with the Book of Job. I'll try to post some introductory material by this weekend. Enjoy!

Dissident Heart

I wish I had the time and energy to give MA's introductory posts the attention and care they deserve. Kudos for an exceptionally well structured project that, if followed accordingly, will surely serve the cause of intelligent and imagintative approaches to understanding the Bible specifically, and religion in general...as well as deppening an appreciation of the human mind and heart in its quest for what is sacred, holy and worthy of love.

With that, I'd like to offer a few supplementary resources I think will serve this project well:

The Bible Gateway is a truly astonishing tool for gathering biblical texts from nearly every translation and version in many languages. It is great at finding specific verses, cross-referencing, and placing verse and chapter in larger context. This could prove to be an essential tool in this project of assembling pieces of the text.

The New Testament Gateway is an extraordinary assortment of all-things New Testament available on the Internet. An excellent tool for textual, historical, theological, critical and interdisciplinary analysis by many of the leading scholars across denominations and traditions.

A two volume set of essays Reading from This Place: Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in the United States; and Reading from This Place: Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in Global Perspective By Fernando F. Segovia, Fernando F. Segovia (Editor), Mary Ann Tolbert (Editor)Fortress Press,December 1994, provides a challenging selection of global perspectives that highlight the power of social location, political ideology, economic class, gender roles, colonial status, and sexual orientation in shaping our understanding of the Bible. Here is an article by Mary Tolbert that spells out the overarching thesis of the two volumes and defends the usefulness of their approach. Reading the Bible from Your Place:
The Challenge of Multiple Perspectives

I hope these items don't distract from the rather daunting objectives laid out by MA, and I expect if they are given a chance, they will surely enrich the project he lays before us.

Edited by: Dissident Heart at: 8/1/05 4:18 pm

MadArchitect · Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:19 pm Post subject: Re: Some Tools for the Project

Thanks for the links and kind words, DH. I'll be checking them over soon. I hope others will feel inclined to provide links to other supplementary material.

Can we get an informal roll call on people who have some interest in reading along?

marti1900 · Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:44 pm Post subject: Re: Some Tools for the Project

I will try to read Job, but I am leaving for the United States the middle of Aug for a month, and don't expect to be able to do much serious reading what with the nine grandkids and all the hustle and bustle and activities that entails. But I will jump in again when I get back home the middle of September.

Marti in Mexico

MadArchitect · Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:02 pm Post subject: Re: Some Tools for the Project

We'll be glad to have you participate as much as you see fit, Marti. Have fun with the grandkids!

marti1900 · Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:13 pm Post subject: Some Thoughts on the Book of Job

Some thoughts on the Book of Job

There are layers and layers to this book. The first layer is the game that is being played by god and satan. Satan poses the premise that sure, anyone can love god when things are going great. But what about when their lives suck. Sure, Job loves you. He has everything, it's all cool. But would he still be the worshipper he is if his life were dreck?

This is a question that we ask ourselves in many disguises. Sure it's easy to love one's spouse or SO when everything is hunky-dory, but what about when things aren't so swell? One's family is close to the heart, but what if one of them (or lots of them) are horrible people or do horrible things? Do we still love them?

Another layer is the issue of suffering. What is suffering? Why does it exist? Does it serve a purpose? Do we have to suffer? Is there a payment to be made to relieve the suffering?

Another layer is the question that probably occurs first to the non-believer: what kind of loving god would do this stuff to one of his faithful? How can one continue to be a believer after reading this story? Why would one put one's faith in such a capricious god? Which brings us to Abraham, but that's another book.

This Book poses one of the great questions in the bible: Is it for nothing that we worship/love god? What's in it for me?

Marti in Mexico

Chris OConnor

I'll be participating, but I'm still reading that first post. ::204

I'm about 1/2 way through it now. But I'm not complaining. We really needed a format for this discussion and you've handled that superbly.

Chris

MadArchitect · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 1:21 pm Post subject: The Book of Job

Today begins the official reading period for “The Book of Job” – next Friday we’ll moving on to another book, but discussion is free to continue on both or either book at once. It may help you in this week's reading to know some of the context in which it the story takes place. Here is some optional introductory material for “The Book of Job”.

"Job" is generally placed by scholars of the Bible in the category of "Wisdom literature". Wisdom literature is "a distinctive intellectual tradition extended throughout the ancient Near east, beginning in the early third millennium and reaching into the Common Era." ("Mercer Dictionary of the Bible") Wisdom literature is similar in many ways to the philosophical tradition that grew up in Greece during much the same period, with an emphasis on addressing suffering and injustice. To some degree, the entire work takes the form of a debate between different views of wisdom, and it may be helpful to read the larger part of "Job" as a kind of philosophical sparring match, though in morbid circumstances.

"Job" is a work of fiction, and the protagonist is a fictional character, though there is some evidence that he is linked by name to an earlier folk hero. It is important to note that, as originally composed, it was likely not meant to be taken as either liturgical, legal or historical fact.

Knowing the structure of the story in advance may help you wade through some of the longer poetic monologues; I'll try not to give away too much of the plot. The story begins by setting the problem of human suffering in both personal and cosmological terms. Once the problem is set, the story focusses on the debate between Job and three of his friends on the subjects of suffering and justice, and on Job's demands that God present evidence for the justice of his plight. There is an interlude in which Job considers the nature of wisdom. After several exchanges, they are joined by Elihu, a younger man who accuses them all of impropriety. And finally, God answers Job's call, leading to the story's conclusion.

It's notable that the story is a hybrid of prose and verse -- the narration is in prose; the dialogues, in verse. There are notable differences in how all of the characters are presented in each form, and it may even be that the narration leads to conclusions that are different from -- or an elaboration of -- the moral made explicit in the speeches.

It should also be noted that "Job" is likely a late writing, compared to many of the books we will be reading. It's authorship is unknown. Most scholars date it as a post-Exilic text, which would mean the date of its composition came sometime after 586 BCE, when the Israelites witnessed the destruction of their temple and their exile into Babylonia. These events represent a major turning point in the history of ancient Israel and the development of Judaism -- we will certainly be discussing them at length throughout our discussion. The issues and complications that arise in "Job" are likely influenced by Babylonian Exile, and part of our later interest in the book will likely center on the example it serves in considering the changes and transformations to which religious thought is inevitably subject.

Here is a short glossary of the terms that should help you put them in their proper context when you encounter them in the text:

Job is, of course, the main character of the story. I include him here only to indicate that his name ('yob) mean "enemy" or "inveterate foe" in Hebrew. There is some play on the word that is lost in translation, but you may get some inkling of the original by thinking of Job whenever you encounter imagery or words suggesting conflict or antagonism.

Sons of God, translated in some editions as "angel" or "heavenly beings", reflects the development of angelology in later Judaism. They are, as in the New Testament, messengers, but they fulfill other functions as well.

Satan as he appears in "Job" is not to be confused with the more modern, Christian image of the devil. The Satan of "Job" is one of the aforementioned sons of God, and seems to fulfill a distinct function in God's dealings with humanity. The name means "accuser"; that, and his actions in the story, suggest that his purpose is not in opposition to God, but rather to accuse individuals before God.

Sheol, meaning "grave," "pit," or "abode of the dead," is not synonymous with the Greek or Christian visions of afterlife. It is the sole resting place of the dead, "a place of stillness, darkness, powerlessness, and inactivity" ("MDotB") where people are ultimately seperated from God. Job's speeches play a great deal on the gloom associated with Sheol, as well as on the idea of the seperateness of the dead from God.

Rahab is the name of a mythical sea monster, and its appearance here is likely in reference to an early creation myth in which Yahweh (the Hebrew name of God) imposes order by slaying Rahab as the symbol of primordeal chaos. Similar stories can be found in other forms of Middle Eastern mythology, and while the story has been replaced in the canonical Hebrew tradition, some echoes of the old myth may still be found in the Genesis creation story.

Behemoth and Leviathan are quasi-mythological beasts, sometimes identified with Rahab. It is unclear to me whether or not we are meant to identify Leviathan with Rahab in "Job", but it at least seems clear from the description that the references to Leviathan and Behemoth are meant to refer to two distinct creatures. Behemoth is generally associated with the hippopatamus and Leviathan with the crocodile, but the mythological versions are not to be treated as identical to the real animals.

Finally, I've placed "Job" at the beginning of our reading for several reasons. One is that it is an explicitly literary work, and I thought that we should start with something that is, in style and intent, fairly straightforward. Secondly, "Job" introduces a number of themes with which we are likely to occupy ourselves later on. And lastly, "Job" gives us some inkling of the complications that can arise with religion; it clues us in to the fact that the people responsible for the development of that religion were not blind to the difficulties and seeming contradictions; and perhaps most importantly, it seems to me to illustrate that genuine religious traditions are characterized by the struggle to understand.

Enjoy the book, and I'll be looking forward to the discussion.

MadArchitect · Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 2:43 pm Post subject: Re: The Book of Job

Let’s start off with a bang so more people will get involved. As an aide to discussion, I thought I'd suggest a few themes we might tackle. Feel free to chart your own course, though.

First, I wanted to say how startling the book "Job" is when you stop to think about it. It's almost a little worrisome when you're guiding discussion -- I didn't expect it to be quite like this going into the reading, and I'm trying to figure out exactly how to situate it in the whole of our plan.

Of course, "Job" presupposes the existence of God, so it is perhaps not as radical as some of you would like, but this particular God doesn't demand the sort of blind faith that we've come to expect of religion. In my supplementary reading for "Job" I've come across this passage which sums up the startling fact rather nicely: "...man is allowed to appear as the accuser of God, and in such a way that God himself not only permits but favors it and severly censures those who take Job to task and condemn him for it." (Leonhard Ragaz, "Die Bibel: Eine Deutung")

In "Job" we get a picture of a God for whom faith is best served by questioning dogma. Job is, in an often repeated phrase, "the faithful rebel." You're almost tempted to ask who let this slip into the Bible. And it does look like a great many of the religious believers who use the Bible as their text are content to ignore this fundamentally radical idea. At the very least, I'd say that this gives us a picture of a religious tradition that is not doctrinally opposed to growth, change, even correction. Now it's just a matter of impressing that point on the fanatics.

From there, we might ask what else we can derive about the character of God? What, in the context of "Job", is the meaning and nature of justice? What is sin? What is wisdom, and how do we achieve it? Is there a theological justification for suffering? Any one of these questions could serve as a starting point for our discussion.

(Incidentally, the quote above and much of the material that I'm likely to bring into discussion here come from a nifty little book I found at the library called "The Dimensions of Job: A Study and Selected Readings", edited by Nahum N. Glatzer, and originally published by Schocken Books in 1969. It compiles a number of essays and excerpts from scholars in a number of fields and traditions, and is well worth looking up if you want to read more about Job.)

I'll shut up now.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	ADVERTISE	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CHAT	CONTACT