Abigail's ramblings about

[Abigail]

I am reading the above titled book, by Jonathan Kirsch. It's an interesting read, I don't agree with all of the conclusions and I think the author is forgetful of some important biblical pieces of the biblical stories when he is drawing his conclusions. However, I also find some of it very interesting.

So, I thought I would ramble on here and share some of what strikes me.

First, Israel, literally transled, means "one who struggles with God". In a very real sense, that is the premise of the book so far (or at least seems to be to me). The struggle is very much on the human side, our understanding of who God is, our understanding of what God wants from us, our understanding of how to worship Him.

The author points out that often, God is portrayed as jealous, vengeful, someone to be feared. Yet Abraham and Moses both argue with God, and even persuade Him to change his mind. And Sarah is so bold as to not only laugh at Him, but lie to Him and his response is to respond simply by asking her why she laughed. The point is how varied the different beliefs and practices have always been. He writes "If the Bible is a work of history at all, then it is the history of how the fundamentalists of ancient Israel tried - and failed - to enforce a strict orthodoxy on the rest of the Israelites."

He then goes on to write about the various authors of the Bible, and the notion that there were "unknown" authors and editors who inserted bits and pieces into the text and those who removed sections.

One instance where he documents inserted text is in Genesis 36, the author states that the Edomite kings who are listed there actually lived and reigned long after the death of Moses.

Another example the author points out is in a prayer that is still recited in synagogues today, and comes from the book of Exodus. "Mee Khah-mohkha b'elim Adonai" or in English it is said as "Who is like You among the heavenly powers, Hashem" (or Adoni, depending on what sect you are with).

The word b'elim is translated as "heavenly powers", but the author says elim in the Hebrew literally means Gods. So, in other words, Moses was acknowedging that there were other God's, but that Adoni is superior to them all. A similar concept is found in Jeremiah chapters 2 and 5.

The author writes about King Josiah and how he was one of the very few who managed to enforce for a time, the strict legalism of Deuterotomy. He points out how even Moses broke one of the ten commandmants in making the brazen serpent, and how a number of people, including Rachel, kept idols with them. It was Josiah who had the brazen serpent destroyed, and all other idols. It was Josiah who decreed (despite the fact that it had been done otherwise for generations before him) that only in Jerusalem would offerings to God be accepted. The author also suggests that Josiah's motives for doing so, was to ensure that Jerusalem would not only be viewed as the royal capital, but also as the holiest place in all of Israel. Josiah is credited by some as having dramatically changed what it meant to be an Israelite by defining the faith of Israel via practice, in a way it had not been done before.

In one section the author concludes "Indeed, the effot to censor the Bible - an effort that begins within the pages of the Bible itself and continued long after the biblical canon was closed - has been a failure. Crucially, the works of both the Court Historian and the Chronicler are preserved, and we can see for ourselves much of what we are not supposed to see at all."

Any thoughts?

I will share more as I continue to read.

[Abigail]

HAHAHAHA and Sarah laughed! I am now into another section of the book, on goddess worship and women in the Bible.

The premise the author is trying to prove is that there were women who wrote certain sections of the Bible, though the credit is given to men. I am not sure if his premise is correct or not, nor am I sure whether or not it makes much difference to me. However, I have found two sections particularly amusing and thought I would share them.

One is the story of Rachel and the idol she took from her father. Laban finally catches up with her and starts searching her tent. She is sitting on a saddle and the idol is hidden underneath. When her father approaches her to search there, she warns him away because she is menstruating and is therefor (by Jewish custom) unclean. The author writes, "The joke, of course, is on Laban . . . . . . Laban sees his daughter as unclean and untouchabel during her period. Rachel knows it, counts on it, and subtly ridicules her father for it. . .. and thus does J [the purported female author of this section of scripture] make light of the sternest traditions of ancient Israel: she invites us to join her in laughing out loud at how men chase after idols but run away from menstruating women."

The other section is in regard to Tamar and Judah. You may recall that Tamar was a Canaanite woman who married one of Judah's sons. The son died without any children, so by Jewish law one of Judah's other sons was to impregnate her and raise up an heir. The son instead "spills his seed on the ground" and ultimately dies as a result. Judah does not wish to give her to his remaining son, for fear he too will die. Instead he claims his son is too young and tells Tamar to go back her her father's home until this son is old enough.

Under Jewish law, as a childless widow, Tamar has no place in the Jewish society. She also has no inheritence from her husband. And as a double whammy, she is a Canaaite woman to boot. Fearing that Judah will never send for her, she plays a harlot and becomes impregnated by Judah. When Judah finally finds out who the harlot was, he says "She is more righteous than I". Why? Because she claimed the right to which she was entitled by the laws and customs of her time. The author then points out that one of the twin sons born as a result of her union with Judah ends up being a direct ancestor of King David, who is (or will be, depending on what you believe) the direct ancestor of the Messiah.

And isn't that an interesting couple of contradictions. First, because the Jews were forbidden from marrying Canaanite women. But even moreso, because at least in modern Jewish tradition - if a Jew and a non-Jew have children together, the children are ONLY considered to be Jewish if the MOTHER is Jewish. If the father is Jewish and the mother is not, then the children are not Jewish unless they go through a converstion.

[Abigail]

Also on intermarriages it is pointed out that despite the law forbidding them:

Ruth who is not Jewish, marries Boaz and their child is also an ancestor of Daivd. Then there is David and Bathseba, who have Solomon. But most ironically of all, the very man who decreed that intermarriages were forbidden, Moses, is married to the daghter of a high priest of Midian - a pagan!

Very interesting stuff, I think. In a sense, I think this could relate back to the interfaith dialogue discussion.

[year2027]

God first

Beloved Abigail

God loves us my dear friend

Yes it is "Very interesting stuff,"

with gives me alot to think about

keep telling us about what you are seeing my friend

other people view can help us think outside the box

Is there really any group of mankind that are not kin to the house of Jews

Noah begin mankind again and all Jews are from the seed of Noah

thank you

with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy