Bible Topics

The OT summaries fell into place. I'll write a short intro in front of the books as I did for the NT. Then I'll jot down the various editings and dates in the ten or twelve line summary I have. Then I'll show the progressive growth of the writers in this notion of Son of Yahweh. Daniel ends the whole picture with the Son of Man - his title for the True Adam. This is the title Christ uses for himself all the way through. John prefers the term 'Son of God' or 'Son of Yahweh' because of its notion of the Chosen People or the Chosen One.

The OT is rich in human ideals constantly rooting themselves deeper. At the same time, the writers present the sad mess that results where these ideals are ignored or deserted. The Wisdom literature of the last two or three centuries B.C. is clearly the crown of the long story. Job tackles the major question of a morally good person who suffers much. How can we talk of a holy, kind and just God when good people suffer? The answer is still the same as it was then. Part of the answer lies in the failure of other people to measure up, to understand and use nature. The other part of the answer is that we simply can't get a full perspective on life until we die.

I put the finishing touches on the bible summary. The best part is the proper place for Paul. His personality was against him so the group in Jerusalem put him on the foreign missions. This kept him out of their hair for a good while. Luke was his saving angel. Luke was a physician - firm principles but kindness at all times. His Gospel and Acts are the outgrowth of his own personal thrill at the real meaning of life. I think he is responsible almost totally for the description of love in 1 Cor, for all of Romans and Ephesians. These were the result of his thinking and conclusions on the teachings of old and New Testament ideas.

The OT book that stares at me constantly is Proverbs. That is a collection of Wisdom from the ancient Egyptian, Semitic and Greek cultures all pulled together in the 4th to the 3rd centuries B.C. I can open the book to any page and get lost in a reverie of ancient wisdom as it fit the modern world.

You asked what I talked about last Sunday. The basic theme was the Fatherhood of God in the Brotherhood of Man. That started the whole session with real enthusiasm because they "brother" and "sister" each other constantly. Then I referred to the Our Father and "hallowed by thy name." We have the family name of the Father. It is our job to do nothing to disgrace the family name but to promote it at all times.

Then I discussed the true meaning of literal sense in each literary form. Finally, I was ready for the gospel according to John. I explained "kata" according to John, "Simeon" (sign), John's word instead of "miracle." Then I took the development of the words "Son of God" through the OT to Christ. In succession, I talked about "In the beginning" in Genesis and John, John Baptist - forerunner, cousin, friend, metanoia (change of heart) AMEN (faith) Lamb of God, Sin of the world, Woman, Mary, Holy Spirit from Is 11:1-2. Samaritan Woman, Good Shepherd (pastor) and breath of Life, Garden of Failure and Garden of Obedience.

Today is the feast of the Annunciation. The story is told in Luke and I think it is just that - a story/preface to Luke's Gospel. I'm sure it is Luke's literary development to his questions to Mary, "What did you think of your son when he was little?" Mary could look back like any mother and describe her child. As she listened to the gifted kids, Jesus and John, playing and talking, she could see that both of them were going to do big things. She recognized the talents of her child and the social conditions of the times and knew her son would do something about them.

I want to edit my ideas about Mary in Luke, Matthew and John and then show how the NT writers compared her to the OT women. Luke sees her as the new Hannah, the mother of Samuel. Mary's Song, the Magnificat, and Hannah's song are almost the same.

Matthew sets Mary before us as Queen Mother and presupposes we see her role in educating and guiding the new King. John develops her role as the new Eve at the side of the New Adam in his public life.

As I listened to the report on the scrap in Israel and the cries of innocence on the part of Netanyahu, I thought back to the book of Joshua. The Israelites had finally finished their years of wandering in the desert. They were on the east bank of the Jordan near the lake of Galilee. They were set to go over and take the land from the natives by physical force.

Three tribes looked at the land on the east side. It was far better farm land and grazing land. They decided to stay put even though there would be the physical separation from the majority. All hell broke loose. They said these people were shirking their duty to fight for the land. The answer was very prompt. They insisted their fighting men would be right with the others. They would merely settle their families and property and they would ask nothing of the Cis(west) Jordan side of the land.

All problems were settled and the plan went through. After a few years all major places were taken and the Trans-Jordan (East) tribes went home. However, their crops were far better, their flocks were beautiful and they could trade with the non-Israelites on that side. Then the leaders of the Cis (west)-Jordan insisted these people had to pay greater tithes.

So the Jordan-Israeli fight of today is nothing more than a continuation or rerun of the past.

I read over the Intro to the picture of "Who Christ Was and What he thought of Himself." We know from Luke's account which has Mary as its source that Jesus was a very bright boy. In fact, he had the teacher's union standing on its collective ear at his Bar Mitzvah. He and John B were close companions. Finally, they both decided it was time to move. Jesus was more scared as he worked along. He ran away several times and then decided to stand and face the threats to prove his sincerity.

The more I read over my development of Jesus in the New Testament, the more I realize how we have perverted the picture for almost 17 centuries. Jesus and John B. talked over these ideas throughout their lives in Nazareth. Already at age 12, Jesus spoke up in the Temple itself. Finally, John Baptist decided he had to act. He lived out in the desert as a hermit for a while. The people were curious and thought he might be the Messiah they were looking for. They flocked out to him.

He began on their lives first and demanded total and sincere conversion. Then he attacked the leaders, especially Herod and the Pharisees and Sadducees. Herod wanted to kill John but was afraid of the people's reaction.

Then Christ starts his work. He went down to John at the Jordan. First, Jesus picked up on Daniel, the last of the writings of the OT. He took the "Son of Man" title which in Hebrew would be "Son of Adam." He saw the implications right from the start as Matthew points out in the temptation scene. Jesus realized he had to pick up where Moses left off and form a people of God. As Daniel had said, "the Handwriting was on the wall" for all to read.

Jesus was scared but courageous right from the start. He knew he could never finish the work in one life time so he gathered a group of special emissaries and trained them. The more public he went, the more in danger he was. Finally, he quit running, proved his convictions by his death and left everything to his followers.

At no time did the teachings of the New Testament in the 1st Christians say there was only one God, only one church or only one religion. Jesus Christ presented what he saw as the fulfillment of the Jewish faith and the picture of the world as he saw it.

His emphasis was that God is a kindly, wise, holy, considerate Father. He wants people to be his children and form a family. The followers of Christ would do as they did in Rome — live their lives and win followers through admiration. There was no special church building or liturgical service. When they ate their evening meal, they always had the symbolic cup of bread and wine to signify sharing.

All the rest of the picture is the result of a structure, a hierarchy, a standing army, and a world to conquer. Now we have 17 centuries of error to remove - and that's what John XXIII saw.

Baptism was the official immersion of the child or adult into the community. Confirmation was the age at which the child assumed adult responsibility. Eucharist was the family get-together. Penance was making sure you apologized to anyone you offended or accepted the apology of others to you. Extreme Unction was the final good-bye to a member of the community who was going to his/her reward. Orders was the appointment of one or two older people (presbyteroi) to lead the local community. Marriage was the sign to the world that community was based in the home and family.

It is really a simple plan. The growth was not by condemning or destroying other beliefs and groups. The growth was to be by acceptance of people who saw and wanted to belong.

Each time I think of the so-called conflict between the Bible and Science I could tack the members of the Council of Trent on a post the way Luther nailed his 95 theses.

The more I think of the discoveries of science through the centuries, the more I can see God grinning with delight and saying, "I told you it was very good!"

One of the real anomalies of the opening line of Genesis is the fact that God is called simply "Elohim," or the generic word, "deity". This was being edited the first time in the reign of Solomon, the 10th century B.C. In spite of all the successive editings down to the first century B.C. the writers did not add the proper Jewish name "Yahweh." Yet, the second account of creation in Chapter Two, which is older, has "Yahweh-Elohim." 'Tis a puzzlement!

Almost everyone is interested in knowing something about his/her past. It is a national past time among all known peoples. They concocted fanciful heroes and tales and always had some kind of supreme or higher being who looked out for their welfare and had to be pleased and placated in varying ways and degrees.

One of these stories is the Bible Story which begins with a group of nomads who call themselves the Hebrews and Israel. The story begins with a group of founding fathers known as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph. They get their start in Ur of Chaldea and migrate westward into modern day Israel. They are enslaved in Egypt and come up with their Liberator and Lawgiver, Moses. They get to the land they want to settle, cross the Jordan River and settle in the small land of the Philistines. Joshua is the leader.

They are not a unified people but a series of independent tribes or clans fighting frequently with each other. Finally, a national unity is established under men called kings. The three who governed the whole group were Saul, David and Solomon. This period of Kingship lasts from about 1100 to 950 B.C. Saul was a military leader who degenerated into a psychopath filled with jealousy and envy. David was a military leader. Solomon was more of an intellectual. During his time the first written accounts of the Story of Israel develops.

To tie their national story with the whole universe, the origin of all things is traced to "The Deity" - "Elohim." The writers were not the least bit interested in "how" this origin took place. They were interested in "Why?" The whole of the universe was made to establish the "family" or "brotherhood" of mankind in the "Fatherhood of the deity."

People rebelled against the deity and another hero was raised up to save the universe from total destruction. This man was known as Noah. With these ideas as introduction, Abraham is presented.

By the time of Solomon, 950 B.C., there was a sense of national unity. With his death in 930 B.C. this national unity was totally disrupted into two separate national groups. The north (10 tribes) called themselves Israel. The South (2 tribes) called themselves Juda.

I'll continue with the Bible story. Israel in the North and Juda to the south were set up as separate camps in 929 B.C. The northern people had to come to Jerusalem if they wanted to fulfill their liturgical obligations. The Temple and its Liturgy were in Jerusalem. So for at least 3 weeks out of each year the faithful from the north came south.

Then, the central section began to intermarry with the native population and they were considered ethnically tainted. They were called the Samaritans and were on a social rung lower than any animal. Thus, the land was divided into three sections: Juda to the south, Galilee to the North and Samaria in between. The Galileans were accepted by the Judeans because they contributed to the financial upkeep of the Temple and the City of Jerusalem.

In 722, the Assyrians came from the East and demolished the North or Israel. They slaughtered most of the people and took the rest captive back to Assyria.

The Kingdom of Juda managed to stay afloat until 587 B.C. The neo-Babylonians swept in and defeated them and those not killed were deported to Babylon. That was the end of the Kingdom as such.

Cyrus, King of Persia (modern Iran) put the Babylonians down. In 538 B.C. he established a policy that all captives who wished could go back to their homelands. They would remain captives but they could work their lands for the good of Persia.

The first wave of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem. They had been born in captivity. They had heard all the stories of the glory of the Temple and the great city of Jerusalem. When they arrived home, they were aghast. The place was a shambles and other nomadic people had taken over.

At the urgings and promises of the leaders, the Temple was restored in 520-515 B.C. A few of the people lived truly holy lives. The rest adapted more and more the surrounding customs and actions. This remnant went farther and farther from their ideals until the Torah was a lot of empty words and the liturgical worship was an empty farce. A few isolated individuals and families persevered in the Jewish ideals.

There is one little ray of light in 167-164 B.C. Antiochus the Terrible was the oppressor. A small handful of zealous faithful fought for their Law, customs and worship. These were given the nickname of the "Hammer," The "maqqabah." In English, they are called the Maccabees.

Finally, the Greek civilization took full sway and the remnant of the people of Yahweh was isolated in society.

This is by no means the whole story. This is the historic backbone. Leaders rose up to guide and lead the people to the right track even though the majority did not listen.

These people were called the "nebiim" or "prophets." The term means a person who is a "moralist" telling his listeners how they should act. It also means a person who talks about the future in a very special sense. He or she looks at what is happening right now and predicts the dire outcome if the mores do not change.

The first of these moralist preachers were called "Shophetem" or "judges." Only a few of these were better than the common run of people. Then we meet Nathan.

The last and greatest and most influential of all the Judges was a man named Samuel. He tried every way possible to keep the presence of Yahweh and his plans, ideals, and laws before the people in their lives. He failed and the Kingdom began.

Nathan rose up as a moral guide, particularly for David, but was poorly accepted. Then the father or founder of the Prophets arose. His name was Elijah and his disciple was Elisha. In spite of their advice and warnings in word and action, the kingdom went steadily away from Yahweh and moral lives.

Then came the "writing" prophets whose words, threats, ideas and admonitions were put in manuscripts for better preservation and wider use. Four are called Major Prophets because their messages are many and long. Others are called Minor Prophets because we have fewer or shorter writings. Major prophets are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel and Daniel. Minor prophets are all the rest.

Isaiah lived in the late 8th century B.C. His primary concern was the "Holiness" of Yahweh that was supposed to be manifest in the lives of his people. His primary concern was the northern Kingdom because they were soon to be annihilated by outside enemies and Isaiah saw this as punishment from God.

About a century later, another prophet arose. We have no name for him but his teachings were attached to original Isaiah. His contribution is the 4 "Servant Songs" which Jesus and the first Christians saw as perfectly fulfilled by Jesus. Still another part is added later, the work of another teacher. He was of great importance to the Christians because John Baptist was forerunner of Jesus.

Then comes Jeremiah just before the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. He begged and pleaded with his contemporaries to repent and change. He was beaten, imprisoned and mistreated in every way. He foretells that a new and eternal Covenant will take the place of the abandoned Old Covenant. This covenant will be written on the hearts of people rather than on pieces of stone.

At almost the same time, another major figure, Ezechiel, rises up to guide the people in the Babylonian captivity. They are blaming everyone else, especially their ancestors, for their misery. Ezechiel stresses the notion of individual, personal responsibility. Finally, in the 2nd century B.C., arises a young teenager, named Daniel. He is best known for his depiction of the "Son of Man" or the "new Adam" who is to come. When Jesus begins his work, this is the title he used at all times. He stresses that he is correcting the mistake of the first Adam, disobedience, by his life and death of perfect obedience.

How much the contemporaries of the prophets understood of these messages, we do not know. In the light of the life of Jesus, we tend to put the meaning back in the time of the prophet.

The twelve minor prophets also have important messages. The prophetic movement ends about 400 B.C. with Malachy. Daniel is an apocalyptic teacher rather than a prophet.

Following the prophetic age, we enter what is called the "didactic" or "Wisdom" age. The teaching is the same but more highly developed and geared especially to counteract the shallow "wisdom" of the Greek period. The Wisdom literature carried right down to the arrival of the New Age or the New Covenant.

All the Jewish world was looking for a "Messiah," an "Anointed" of Yahweh. This person was to throw off the shackles of the pagan rulers and re-establish the "temporal" kingdom of the Jews. This kingdom would rule the world.

Many men rose up to claim this title but they were quickly killed and their influence destroyed by the pagan overlords.

Finally, two teenage boys, cousins of each other, appear on the scene. Their names are John and Jesus. Their mothers were cousins and very good friends. They visited a lot and so did the boys.

At age 30, John began his public career as itinerant preacher and prophet. He demanded a total change of heart and conversion of anyone who followed him. Six months into his public mission, Jesus walked up to be baptized by John. John wanted Jesus to take over. Jesus disagreed. He went back to Galilee and began to present his ideas. In short order he had a big following. He picked out 12 men and sent them to spread his ideas faster.

He summed up his whole "Good news" in true love - That is, service of others in their daily needs. This message was to change the whole world. The true Brotherhood of Man would show forth the full fatherhood of God. That is the total message. When it is a reality, the world will be 'complete.'

I am amazed at how perfect the plan of John Baptist and Jesus Christ is for today's problems. If we can restore true "community" as the Christians had it for the first 3 centuries, we have the answer to all social and individual problems. No problem is beyond an answer but it has to be sought together.

We have been in the habit of setting Mark's Gospel aside because it doesn't say a word about the early life of Jesus. Everything he has in his Gospel is found in one of the others. Actually, Mark is the story as it was told by Peter. He started where the "community" began with their first meeting on the Lake. All the concerns of Luke and Matthew about early days was a later curiosity. The Christians were to wield their power for change on the street level in their daily lives. There was no structure. That's why we can't find any hidden treasures. The closest we come to archeological digs are the catacombs and they were cemeteries. The only remarkable thing about them is the "tufa" stone.

They like to say St. Peter was buried beneath the altar in St. Peter's Basilica. No one has ever established this by any evidence.

The basic message of the entire Bible is to give us what the Judeo-Christian world has figured out or developed about God and its relationship to him. The writers and teachers of the OT did not spend a lot of time trying to figure out the nature of God. They stressed his holiness and concern for mankind and the whole universe.

The New Testament took on new emphasis. Not much is said about God or his nature but all the emphasis is on human harmony.

I have been thinking of the topic of Leadership in the Bible. (book Phil and Lois planned to write) This theme is the heart of the message in both Old and New Testament. In the OT, there would be many ideas in the study of Moses in all his moods.

Jesus clearly saw all the burdens and problems and tried every excuse he could muster to get out of the chore. Finally, Yahweh just says, "Get moving!" Moses shows fear, doubt, anger and the whole range of emotions in his years at the helm. There is the story of the 12 scouts and the ten who flatly refused to take the risks. Caleb and Joshua admitted the problems but wanted to move forward.

The judges show us a lot of failures with a couple who are great leaders. Deborah is one of the greatest. Samuel is outstanding in many ways and circumstances. Saul, David and Solomon are prime examples of what "not-to-be" as leaders. The prophets present pictures of leadership in the face of great odds.

There are lots of women who are outstanding in the OT. Proverbs 31:10-31 is a beautiful description of a leader among women in that 5th century B.C. Judith, Esther, Ruth are some more. The possibilities of this topic in OT alone are almost limitless. We would treat the sources simply as 'stories' handed down the Judaic culture.

Lois adds: Phil died in 2002 and I cannot complete this book alone.

As I thought about the Biblical notion of leadership, I realized we have lots of parables in the NT precisely on the topic. The word that is used in Greek is the equivalent of "kinging" because the suffix in Greek is the equivalent of the "ing" in English.

Now put the word "Leadership" in place of "kinging" and you have all the comparisons to develop the notion. We would say, "Leadership is like the grain of wheat. When the farmer sows it, some of the grain falls on the footpath and the birds gobble it up. Some of it falls among the weeds and they choke it out. Some of it falls on stones. It sprouts but soon dries up and dies. Some of it falls on good ground and yields 30, 60 or 100 percent."

Apply this on the footpath: people who are willing to be followers at all times. Among weeds: people who will lead if there is no difficulty. On stones: people who start well but fold in the face of difficulty. The good soil: leaders vary in ability, application and results. The principal notion of Leadership in OT & NT is the shepherd.

My head is really rambling with ideas on leadership as expressed in the Bible. The prophets are outstanding men who rose to the occasion each time they saw a need. Some were strong enough to have their say and thwart any physical reaction. Others suffered at the hands of those they corrected.

The prophets were "seers" in the sense that they read the effects of evil in the future generations unless it was corrected. They were "moralists" insofar as they pointed out clearly what morally good actions were at the time. Being a prophet was not an hereditary role. When Samuel was on the point of dying, the people said they would not accept his sons as advisors because they were some of the worst public offenders.

You mentioned John Baptist having a lot to do with the formation of Christ's outlook. That is true. They complemented each other.

Paul has been held up as a great leader for such a long time. He had a deep sense of drive and urgency. He was fearless in the face of opposition. However, he was too domineering, whiny and bitchy if things didn't go his way. Luke saved his butt most of the time.

Christ had two favorite aspects of leadership in his thinking. First and foremost, a leader has to be a shepherd - a person who knows each member of his flock individually and well, and is up front calling to them to follow him. Secondly, a leader is a "Kepha," a bed rock, on which the whole building can safely and firmly stand. The authority of Christian leadership is not top-down domination but a rock-bottom support that makes growth possible for everyone.

In the OT, everything that precedes Moses looks forward to his coming and work. Everything after Moses looks back to him and explains or adapts what he said. Moses is in the center of the story.

Then Christ says, "This is what you heard from Moses, Now I'm telling you." Christ repeats the basic plan of Moses and then lifts it to new heights and possibilities.

The oldest evidence of a written text in the OT is the Yahwist editing - shortly after the time of Solomon 900-850 B.C. There may have been some written parts of the OT before that time but we have no evidence. All the stories of Genesis would have been as oral tradition handed down from generation to generation and editing to suit circumstances as they were told.

This chronology is essential to any development of ideas from the OT. The NT is much easier because of manuscript evidence and a shorter time lapse, 100 years at most.

Each time I woke up during the night, I thought of Moses. He is the epitome of biblical leadership in the OT. So the whole message of Matthew's Gospel is the depiction of Christ as the New Moses.

The two great saviors and leaders of the OT, Joseph and Moses, get their upbringing, learning and leadership from the Egyptians. Joseph goes in as a teenager and becomes so Egyptian even in appearance that his brothers don't recognize him. Moses is taken to the court as a baby and becomes totally Egyptian except he remembers his background from what he learned from his mother.

Joseph was a savior. Moses was a Liberator, leader, lawgiver and counselor. Joseph is presented as a spoiled brat and is tossed in the well. Moses saw all the problems and looked for and found solutions. He lived in the desert, married a girl from a desert family, took care of the flock for several years and knew all about desert life.

He really hesitates to take on the liberation of his people and yet he feels an obligation. He gets very excited and then has a hard time speaking clearly. The more I think about this, the more I think of standing in front of the statue of Moses in Rome, carved by Michelangelo. Moses looks as if he is just ready to speak. It would be great if the statues of Moses, David, Peter and John suddenly came to life and appeared on the 6:00 news for several days.

I was able to get the basic picture of Moses as the central leader of the whole OT on the disks, yesterday. I am fascinated with all the insights this picture of Moses is pointing out in the OT for me.

Moses sent the 12 scouts ahead of the group to look over the land and people of the Philistines. The scouts came back and all agreed the land was indeed a prize to be coveted. However, ten of the scouts said they could not possibly conquer the people. Two of the scouts, Caleb and Joshua, agreed it would be real work but with the help of Yahweh they could take the land. Moses went with Caleb and Joshua. Then Moses realized he was not going to be in for the finish so he appointed Joshua to take his place. Moses looked across the Jordan and saw the land but he never entered it.

Ordinarily, such a man would soon become a memory as the history moved on. However, all the teachers and prophets from that time forward, 1250 B.C., updated, applied and lived by his teaching. Any time a plan succeeded in the OT, it was attributed to the wisdom of Moses. Solomon gave himself the title of wise man but he was clearly pompous after his first years in office.

Then Christ comes. He and the Baptist pick up the Old Moses theme. J.B. insists the people have to live the principle and ideals of Moses. Jesus goes a step beyond. He says Moses was right for his times but now they have to go forward.

I was reading the commentary I wrote on Gen 1-3. The more I think about the literary facts we have, the more I see the importance of stressing the actual time of writing. For centuries, theologians took it for granted that Moses lived in the 15th C B.C. He composed the first five books of the OT about 1140-1400 B.C.

Then we started to learn more about the Hebrew language and realized the oldest part of the OT could not have been written prior to Solomon in the 10th century B.C. Then we found evidence of words of Aramaic origin that were not in existence until the 2nd century B.C. Finally, we realized that the OT was edited over and over again. The final editing was in the time of Daniel in the 2nd century B.C.

I'm wondering if the whole patriarchal picture of Genesis is a series of stories that were made up to give a little group of "escaped slaves" a national background. The real hero of the entire OT story is an Egyptian noble who led this group of slaves out of captivity. His name is actually Egyptian for "son" and the Hebrew writers try to explain it from a Hebrew root.

The first actual history in the sense of factual data would be the small band of wanderers crossing the Jordan and striving to settle in an already inhabited land. They had their "General Custer" and he led them to conquer the local groups and take over the land.

The whole picture changes when John Baptist and Jesus Christ decide to give more depth and meaning to the "people of Yahweh."

I have the notion of Leadership in the Bible reduced to a simple phrase: The Fatherhood of God in the Brotherhood of Man! Biblical leadership is the establishment of a true family in unity, harmony, sharing, idealism and effort.

All ancient peoples had their folklore or stories of origin. They were always connected with some superior beings. They invented these beings according to their needs, and developed rituals, practices and superstitions to suit their purposes.

Out of this vast agglomeration of ancestral stories arose the story of Israel. It would probably never have continued except that these people settled in the land of the Philistines and took it over.

Then the Roman Empire came through with their Interstate system of highways. They wanted a land route from Rome to Africa and especially Egypt. So they overthrew the Israelites and carried their story back to Rome. Later on, the successors to Israel and the followers of a New Moses, the Christians, came to Rome. They were a real threat to the sense of Roman tyranny. They were to be erased but the process didn't work. Finally, Rome capitulated and the ideal of the Bible was on its way to fulfillment.

Then the structure of the church replaced the structure of the Caesars and we are still far from the Brotherhood of Mankind.