Archive for the ‘Uzziah’ Tag
Above: Judas, by Edward Okún
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING FIRST ISAIAH, PART XIII
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Isaiah 21:11-17
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
INTRODUCTION
Immediately following an oracle of the Fall of Babylon (Isaiah 21:1-10), we read two short oracles that complete Chapter 21.
DUMAH (EDOM)
Duman was an oasis in northern Arabia (Genesis 25:14; 1 Chronicles 1:30). Seir (Isaiah 21:11) was a place in Edom. Poetically, Dumah equaled Edom.
One may recall a condemnation of Edom in Amos 1:1-12.
The oracle in Isaiah 21:11-12 is superficially vague. “The night” is poetic language for suffering. “Morning” is poetic language for liberation. There is no encouraging news for Dumah from the watchman of Seir yet. Despite the brief respite from Assyrian oppression, the morning of liberation will not dawn yet.
Edom, the nation, had pursued his “brother” (Israel) with the sword. Edom, the nation, was metaphorically the brother of the Israelite people (Numbers 20:14; Deuteronomy 2:4; Deuteronomy 23:7; Obadiah 10, 12). King David had added Edom to the (united) Kingdom of Israel (2 Samuel 8:13f; 1 Kings 11:15-17). Edom, part of the (southern) Kingdom of Judah after the division of the (united) Kingdom of Israel, threw off Judean control during the reign (851-853 B.C.E.) of King Jehoram (Joram) (2 Kings 8:16-24; 2 Chronicles 21:4-20). Yet Judah reconquered Edom during the reign (798-769 B.C.E.) of King Amaziah of Judah (2 Kings 14:1-22; 2 Chronicles 25:1-28) and the reign (785-733 B.C.E.) of King Azariah/Uzziah of Judah (2 Kings 15:1-7; 2 Chronicles 26:1-23), contemporary with the time of the prophets Hosea, Amos, and Micah. Edomites persisted in their anger; they raged in wrath without end.
Circa 715 B.C.E., Edom had rebelled against the Assyrian Empire during a time when that empire was temporarily in decline and Egypt’s new masters (from “Ethiopia”–really Cush/Nubia)–encouraged regional peoples, vassals of Assyria, to rebel. Ultimately and sadly, Edom was no match for the Assyrian Empire.
KEDAR AND THE DEDANITES
Kedar was a northern Arabian tribe known for their military prowess. Yet Assyrian King Sennacherib (r. 705-681 B.C.E.) conquered that tribe in 689 B.C.E.
The Dedanites were a northern Arabian tribe conquered by an unnamed power, presumably the Assyrian Empire. The residents of the oasis city of Tema were to greet the fugitives from Assyrian conquest “with bread.”
CONCLUSION
This material fits thematically with material I covered in the previous post in this series. The warning to Judah, militarily weak, was not to seek a military solution, which was futile. Judah needed to commit to social justice, consistent with the Law of Moses, the prophetic voice tells us. That voice also tells us that saving Judah depended not on the state, but on covenant community founded on a just social and economic order. We read that military solutions did not resolve the problems, even those of renowned warriors, vis-à-vis more powerful neighbors.
The Law of Moses teaches mutuality. This timeless principle informs many culturally-specific laws that, superficially, have no bearing on us in 2021. Mutuality, in the context of complete dependence on God, teaches that all people are responsible to and for each other, and depend on each other. The pursuit of the common good builds up all people and helps them become the best possible versions of themselves. Selfishness, cruelty, indifference, and insensitivity tear down community and harm the whole.
Early in President Ronald Reagan’s first term (1981-1985), staffers at the headquarters of the Church of the Brethren (one of the Historic Peace Churches) peacefully protested the Administration’s budget priorities–less for social programs, more for the military. These staffers pooled the money they received from tax cuts, purchased thirty pieces of silver, and mailed that silver (with a letter) to the White House. Some people were paying attention to the moral lessons in the Hebrew prophets and making an allusion to the betrayal of Jesus and Christian principles.
Sadly, these Hebrew prophetic warnings had something in common with such symbolic protests: they did not change the minds of authorities they addressed.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 2, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT BLANDINA AND HER COMPANIONS, THE MARTYRS OF LYONS, 177
THE FEAST OF ANDERS CHRISTENSEN ARREBO, “THE FATHER OF DANISH POETRY”
THE FEAST OF CHRISTOPH HOMBURG, GERMAN LUTHERAN HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF MARGARET ELIZABETH SANGSTER, HYMN WRITER, NOVELIST, AND DEVOTIONAL WRITER
THE FEAST OF SAINT STEPHEN OF SWEDEN, ROMAN CATHOLIC MISSIONARY, BISHOP, AND MARTYR, CIRCA 1075
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Map of the Assyrian Empire
Image Scanned from an Old Bible
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING FIRST ISAIAH, PART XII
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Isaiah 14:28-20:6; 23:1-18; 30:1-26; 31:1-9
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
INTRODUCTION
Some of this material may have originated with Isaiah ben Amoz, but other material (if not all of it) came from a later time. The First Isaiah (Chapters 1-23, 28-33) part of the Book of Isaiah came to exist in its final form of the Babylonian Exile. The editing of the older material and the addition of old material created a multi-layered collection of texts.
I acknowledge this historical and literary reality without reservation. I also focus on meanings. Contexts–especially historical ones–are crucial for establishing a text’s original meaning. One needs to do this before interpreting a text for today as effectively as possible. Unfortunately, determining original historical context is not always possible in First Isaiah. Still, I do the best I can.
If prophetic denunciations of Tyre/Philistia, Moab, and Aram/Damascus (Isaiah 14:28-17:14) seem familiar to you, O reader, you may be thinking of Amos 1:3-5; 1:9-10; and 2:1-3.
PHILISTIA
Isaiah 14:28 establishes a temporal marker:
In the year that King Ahaz died….
As I have written in previous posts in this series of posts about Hebrew prophetic books, establishing a coherent and consistent chronology on the Gregorian Calendar and the B.C./B.C.E.-A.D./C.E. scale for the period from King Azariah/Uzziah of Judah and King Hezekiah of Judah is notoriously difficult. If one consults three study Bibles, one may find three different sets of years for the reign of the same monarch. Although study Bibles disagree about when King Ahaz began to reign, they agree that he died in or about 715 B.C.E.
Circa 715 B.C.E., Philistine cities, Assyrian vassals, were trying to forge a regional united front against the Assyrian Empire. That empire had already swallowed up Aram and the (northern) Kingdom of Israel in 720 and 722 .C.E., respectively. The Kingdom of Judah, under King Hezekiah, did not join this alliance. Circa 715 B.C.E., the Assyrian Empire was experiencing a period of temporary decline.
Do not rejoice, Philistia, not one of you,
that the rod which struck you is broken;….
–Isaiah 14:29a, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
The rod was not broken, after all. The Assyrian Empire had a resurgence of power, and the anti-Assyrian rebellion failed.
Anyway, the snake in Isaiah 29:b is a call back to the seraphim (poisonous snakes) from Numbers 21:1-9 and Deuteronomy 8:15, and alluded to in Isaiah 6:1-13.
Philistia’s hopes of throwing off the Assyrian yoke were in vain.
PHOENICIA (TYRE AND SIDON)
The Phoenicians (who deserve much credit for the alphabet in which I write this post) were seagoing merchants. In fact, in the Bible, the association between Phoenicians and merchants was so strong that, in some texts, “Phoenicians” may refer to merchants, not ethnic-cultural Phoenicians. Anyway, many Phoenician merchants were fabulously wealthy.
Isaiah 23:1-18 may be either a prophecy or a text written after the failed Phoenician rebellion against the Assyrian Empire in 701 B.C.E. The text is, in any case, a mock lament. The text criticizes Phoenicians for relying on their wealth and being arrogant, not relying on YHWH. We read the Tyre, supposedly inviolable, fell. We may legitimately consider this as a warning that Jerusalem, also supposedly inviolable, could fall, too.
It did, in 586. B.C.E.
MOAB
The temporal origin of Isaiah 15:1-16:13 is uncertain. It may date to a time after Isaiah ben Amoz and refer to mourning after Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian military activity. A similar text, a dirge for events circa 650 B.C.E., exists in Jeremiah 48. There are also thematic connections with Numbers 21:27-30.
Moab, to the east of the Dead Sea, was where Jordan is today. Moab was a traditional enemy of the Jewish people. The (united) Kingdom of Israel controlled Moab. The (northern) Kingdom of Israel fought off Moabite resistance to its control until the reign (851-842 B.C.E.) of King Joram (Jehoram) of Israel. Then Moab regained its independence. Circa 735 B.C.E., Moab became a vassal state of the Assyrian Empire. In the middle of the seventh century B.C.E., Moab, as an autonomous state, ceased to exist. Moab traded Assyrian domination for Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian domination in 609 B.C.E. The last Moabite king’s reign ended circa 600 B.C.E. (Jeremiah 27:3).
Isaiah 16 encourages the Kings of Judah, part-Moabite (Ruth 1-4), to welcome Moabite refugees.
Isaiah 16 also includes some references that careful, attentive readers of the early prophets (Hosea, Amos, Micah, and First Isaiah) should find familiar. Verse 7 refers to raisin cakes offered to false gods (Hosea 3:1). The royal government of Judah had a divine mandate to act justly, consistent with the Law of Moses (verses 1-5). We read another condemnation of collective and official “haughtiness, pride, and arrogance” before God (verse 6). And the remnant of Moab will be “very small and weak,” we read in verse 14. The Moabite remnant contrasts with the Judean remnant.
E. D. Grohman wrote:
Archaeological exploration has shown that Moab was largely depopulated from ca. the beginning of the sixth century, and in many sites from ca. the eighth century. From the sixth century on, nomads wandered through the land until political and economic facts made sedentary life possible again in the last centuries B.C.
—The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: An Illustrated Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, K-Q (1962), 418
ARAM/DAMASCUS
Aram (where Syria is today) was the main rival to the Assyrian Empire during the prophetic careers of Hosea, Amos, and Micah, and during the beginning of the prophetic career of First Isaiah. After the Syro-Ephraimite War (734-732 B.C.E.), both the Kingdom of Aram and the (northern) Kingdom of Israel lost territory to the Assyrian Empire and became vassal states of that empire. The Assyrian Empire conquered Israel in 722 B.C.E. and Aram in 720 B.C.E.
Truly, you have forgotten the God who saves you,
the Rock, your refuge, you have not remembered.
–Isaiah 17:10a, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
I will return to that theme before the end of this post.
ETHIOPIA AND EGYPT–REALLY CUSH/NUBIA
Modern place names do not always correspond to ancient place names. The references to Ethiopia in Isaiah 18:1-7 and 20:1-6 are to Cush (where the Sudan is today). On maps of the Roman Empire, the label is Nubia.
A Cushite/Nubian dynasty (the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty of Egypt) controlled Egypt at the time, so references to “Ethiopia” included Egypt. That dynasty had invited the Kingdom of Judah to join its coalition against the Assyrian Empire circa 715 B.C.E. Egypt/Cush/Nubia had replaced Aram as the main rival to the Assyrian Empire. Judah, under King Hezekiah, did join this alliance, much to divine disapproval (Isaiah 30:1-5; 31:1-9). Judean participation in this alliance was apparently an example of rebellion against God (Isaiah 28:14-22; 29:15-26; 30:6-7). God was prepared to act against the Assyrian Empire, but not yet (Isaiah 18:1-7).
Isaiah 19 refers to the Cushite/Nubian conquest of Egypt and asserts divine sovereignty over Egypt:
The idols of Egypt tremble before him,
the hearts of the Egyptians melt within them.
Verse 1b, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
The theological-geopolitical agenda in the Egyptian/Cushite/Nubian material was to rely only on God, not on powerful neighbors that did not have Judah’s best interests at heart. Trusting in God was the only way to maintain independence. Empires rose and fell, but God would never fall. And God was waiting to be gracious to Judah (Isaiah 30:18f).
For this said the Lord GOD,
the Holy One of Israel:
By waiting and by calm you shall be saved,
in quiet and trust shall be your strength.
But this you did not will.
–Isaiah 30:15, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
CONCLUSION
These passages reflect a particular geopolitical and historical set of circumstances. As with the Law of Moses, one ought to be careful not to mistake examples bound by circumstances for timeless principles do exist.
If one expects me to extrapolate these readings into a condemnation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O.) or the United Nations (U.N.), for example, I will disappoint such a person. I live in the United States of America, not equivalent to any ancient kingdom, empire, or city-state. I do not accept American Exceptionalism either, so I may disappoint another group of readers. The same rules and moral standards that apply to other nation-states in 2021 also apply to the United States of America.
One timeless principle germane in this post is the imperative of trusting in God more than in people. This applies both collectively and individually. God is forever; people have relatively short lifespans. Nation-states come and go. Administrations come and go, also. Even the most capable and benevolent leaders are imperfect. They can still function as instruments of God, of course. May they do so. And may they know that they are “like grass.”
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 1, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT JUSTIN MARTYR, CHRISTIAN APOLOGIST AND MARTYR, 166/167
THE FEAST OF SAINT PAMPHILUS OF CAESAREA, BIBLE SCHOLAR AND TRANSLATOR; AND HIS COMPANIONS, MARTYRS, 309
THE FEAST OF SAMUEL STENNETT, ENGLISH SEVENTH-DAY BAPTIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER; AND JOHN HOWARD, ENGLISH HUMANITARIAN
THE FEAST OF SAINT SIMEON OF SYRACUSE, ROMAN CATHOLIC MONK
THE FEAST OF WILLIAM ROBINSON, MARMADUKE STEPHENSON, AND MARY DYER, BRITISH QUAKER MARTYRS IN BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, 1659 AND 1660
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Isaiah’s Vision
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING FIRST ISAIAH, PART VI
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Isaiah 6:1-13
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
King Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah died no later than 742 B.C.E. and no earlier than 733 B.C.E., depending on which scholar’s chronology one accepts.
The scene in this familiar portion of scripture is the Temple in Jerusalem. Certain details are notable; some are important. “Feet” is a euphemism for genitals in 6:2. That is interesting, but is it important? At the time of Isaiah ben Amoz, seraphim were not yet a class of angels in Hebrew angelology. No, they were serpentine creatures. A bronze image of a serpent–perhaps the one Moses had made–stood in Jerusalem. It did so until King Hezekiah ordered its destruction (2 Kings 18:4). “Seraphim” is the plural form of “seraph” (“to burn”). This term calls back to the “fiery” serpents who bit Israelites in the wilderness (Numbers 21:1-9; Deuteronomy 8:15). “Seraphim” means “the burning ones.” That detail matters.
Above: The Brazen Serpent, by James Tissot
Image in the Public Domain
(Numbers 21:1-9; Deuteronomy 8:15)
The terrified reaction of Isaiah ben Amoz makes sense in this context. The Hebrew word for “doomed” (Isaiah 6:5) can also mean “struck silent.” Notice the emphasis on Isaiah’s lips (6:7) and ponder “struck silent,” O reader. On the other hand, there was a popular belief that seeing God would lead to one’s death (Genesis 32:31; Exodus 33:20; Judges 13:22).
Isaiah 6:1-13 bears evidence of editing after the fact. Verse 13 seems to come out of nowhere, for example. Acknowledging this is being intellectually honest. I favor intellectual honesty. Yet another aspect of this chapter interests me more.
And [God] replied: Go and say to this people:
Listen carefully, but do not understand!
Look intently, but do not perceive!
Make the heart of this people sluggish,
dull their ears and close their eyes;
Lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears,
and their heart understand,
and they turn and be healed.
–Isaiah 6:9-10, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
More than one interpretation of the mission of Isaiah ben Amoz exists.
- One interpretation holds that his mission was not to call the people to repentance, and therefore, to stave off divine judgment. No, the prophet’s mission was to inform the people of their fate. Yet God will preserve a remnant, we read. Divine judgment and mercy remain in balance.
- An alternative interpretation holds that God predicted that people would not respond favorably to Isaiah’s message. Sometimes the wording in certain passages of scripture may describe the result as the intention.
So far in this long blogging project through the Hebrew prophetic books, I have gone through the Books of Hosea, Amos, and Micah, each with layers of writing and editing. So far, I have read God call upon recalcitrant people to repent and go into “no more mercy” mode.
The hard reading of Isaiah 6:9-10 may be the accurate one. As the heading of a germane note in The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014) reads:
Repentance is no longer an option.
–779
Isaiah 6:13, added later, softens the blow.
The purification of the lips of Isaiah ben Amoz (6:5-7) is symmetrical to the purification of the people. And there is hope for renewal, even in a burned stump.
Yet a lack of symmetry exists, too. Isaiah ben Amoz knew he was unworthy before God. Isaiah did walk humbly/modestly/completely with God (Micah 6:8). The people, however, were either oblivious or indifferent to God. They had trampled the covenant, grounded in the Law of Moses. Their prosperity (not shared with the poor) was about to fade, and the kingdom was about to go into decline.
One of the recurring themes in the early prophets is, in a few words:
You have made your bed. Lie down in it.
That is an uncomfortable message to ponder. It is a message the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL) shies away from by assigning only verses 1-8 on Trinity Sunday, Year B. It is a message the RCL provides the option for omitting by making verses 9-13 optional on the Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year C.
Yet consider a motif from the Book of Amos, O reader:
Thus says the LORD:
For three crimes of ____, and now four–
I will not take it back–
Because they….
–Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2:1, 4, 6, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
Divine patience is not infinite. Neither is divine judgment. Divine judgment and mercy exist in balance. I do not pretend to know where judgment gives way to mercy, and mercy to judgment.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 30, 2021 COMMON ERA
TRINITY SUNDAY, YEAR B
THE FEAST OF SAINT JOAN OF ARC, ROMAN CATHOLIC VISIONARY AND MARTYR, 1430
THE FEAST OF APOLO KIVEBULAYA, APOSTLE TO THE PYGMIES
THE FEAST OF JOACHIM NEANDER, GERMAN REFORMED MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF JOSEPHINE BUTLER, ENGLISH FEMINIST AND SOCIAL REFORMER
THE FEAST OF SAINTS LUKE KIRBY, THOMAS COTTAM, WILLIAM FILBY, AND LAURENCE RICHARDSON, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND MARTYRS, 1582
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Isaiah
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING FIRST ISAIAH, PART I
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Isaiah 1:1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Book of Isaiah contains the works of multiple authors writing over a span of centuries, from circa 742/733 B.C.E. to after 537 B.C.E. The traditional division of the Book of Isaiah (First Isaiah = chapters 1-39, Second Isaiah = chapters 40-55, and Third Isaiah = chapters 56-66) is overly simplistic. I follow the division from The New Interpreter’s Study Bible (2003):
- First Isaiah = chapters 1-23, 28-33;
- Second Isaiah = chapters 34-35, 40-55;
- Third Isaiah = chapters 24-27, 56-66; and
- A historical appendix verbatim from 2 Kings 18:13-20:19, except for King Hezekiah’s prayer of thanksgiving (Isaiah 38:9-20) = chapters 36-39.
I wrote about Isaiah 36-39 relatively recently, when blogging through the Second Book of Kings.
Isaiah ben Amoz (First Isaiah) was a resident of Jerusalem. He, an aristocrat, may have been a priest serving at the Temple. Isaiah’s name meant “the Lord is salvation.” First Isaiah did not compose all of Isaiah 1-23, 28-33. Multiple authors contributed to chapters 1-12 alone, for example.
The superscription names four Kings of Judah:
- Azariah/Uzziah (r. 785-733 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 15:1-7; 2 Chronicles 26:1-23);
- Jotham (r. 759-743 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 15:32-38; 2 Chronicles 27:1-9);
- Ahaz (r. 743/735-727/715 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 16:1-20; 2 Chronicles 28:1-27); and
- Hezekiah (r. 727/715-698/687 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 18:1-20:21; 2 Chronicles 29:1-32:33; Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 48:17-22 and 49:4).
Placing dates from the period of Uzziah through Hezekiah on the Gregorian Calendar and the B.C./B.C.E.-A.D./C.E. scale is notoriously difficult. If one consults five commentaries and study Bibles, one may find as many estimates of any given important date, such as the year in which King Uzziah died and Isaiah ben Amoz received his prophetic commission from God (Isaiah 6:1). I prefer to cite dates from The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014), as much as possible. When I consult study Bibles and commentaries, I find a range of years (742-733 B.C.E.) for the death of King Uzziah.
The royal chronology included at least one co-regency, that of Azariah/Uzziah and Jotham. The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014), in the back, holds that the reigns of Azariah/Uzziah and Ahaz may have overlapped. Other study Bibles I consult indicate that these two reigns did not overlap.
Anyway, Isaiah ben Amoz (First Isaiah) prophesied during perilous times. The Assyrian Empire loomed in the distance at the beginning of this prophetic career. Also at the beginning, tensions with the Kingdom of Aram and the (northern) Kingdom of Israel were prominent. After Assyria conquered Aram then Israel, that empire posed a greater threat to Judah. Meanwhile, on the domestic front, economic injustice was increasing. First Isaiah was a contemporary of Hosea, Amos, and Micah, who prophesied regarding those problems, too.
The Books of Hosea, Amos, Micah, and Isaiah have existed in their current forms since after the Babylonian Exile. This reality has presented many interpretive difficulties for themselves for years.
So be it. The subsequent editing of texts to address then-current conditions provides a useful model for interpretation. Despite the historical-critical methodological difficulties inherent in the final versions of these books–First Isaiah, in this case–they continue to address societies and nation-states in the present day. I acknowledge the historical reality without any fear of offending God as I ask, in the words of a spiritual mentor of mine from the 1990s:
What is really going on here?
Any historical hiccups which may exist will not stand in the way of answering that question.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 28, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF JOHN H. W. STUCKENBERG, GERMAN-AMERICAN LUTHERAN MINISTER AND ACADEMIC
THE FEAST OF SAINT BERNARD OF MENTHON, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND ARCHDEACON OF AOSTA
THE FEAST OF EDWIN POND PARKER, U.S. CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF JEREMIAS DENCKE, SILESIAN-AMERICAN MORAVIAN COMPOSER AND ORGANIST; AND SIMON PETER AND JOHANN FRIEDRICH PETER, GERMAN-AMERICAN COMPOSERS, EDUCATORS, MUSICIANS, AND MINISTERS
THE FEAST OF ROBERT MCAFEE BROWN, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER, THEOLOGIAN, ACTIVIST, AND ECUMENIST
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Map of the Assyrian Empire and Its Neighbors
Image Scanned from an Old Bible
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING MICAH, PART I
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Micah 1:1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The prophet was an individual who said No to his society, condemning its habits and assumptions, its complacency, waywardness, and syncretism. He was often compelled to proclaim the very opposite of what his heart expected. His fundamental objective was to reconcile man and God. Why do the two need reconciliation? Perhaps it is due to man’s false sense of sovereignty, to his abuse of freedom, to his aggressive, sprawling pride, resenting God’s involvement in history.
–Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel, The Prophets, Vol. 1 (1962), xiii
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The superscription of the Book of Micah identifies the prophet as Micah, from Moresheth, a village southwest of Jerusalem. “Micah” is abbreviated from “Micaiah,” literally, “Who is like Yah[weh]?” The superscription also specifies the prophet’s mission (to prophecy regarding the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah) and timeframe (during the reigns of Kings Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah of Judah).
With a few exceptions (such as in the First Book of the Maccabees, which dated events according to the Hellenistic calendar), when authors of the Old Testament dated events, the usually used relative dating, such as “in the third year of king _____.” Converting these ancient dates to fit onto the Gregorian calendar and the B.C./B.C.E.-A.D./C.E. scale has long proven challenging and with inconsistent results. Perhaps you, O reader, have noticed that when you have consulted two different study Bibles for when a certain King of Israel or King of Judah reigned, you found two different answers.
For the record, as much as possible, I take dates from The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014). It tells me that the four listed kings reigned accordingly:
- Azariah, a.k.a. Uzziah (785-733 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 15:1-7 and 2 Chronicles 26:1-23;
- Jotham (759-743 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 15:32-38 and 2 Chronicles 27:1-9;
- Ahaz (743/735-727/715 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 16:1-20; 2 Chronicles 28:1-27; and Isaiah 7:1-8:15; and
- Hezekiah (727/715-698/687 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 18:1-20:21; 2 Chronicles 29:1-32:33; Isaiah 36:1-39:8; and Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 48:17-22 and 49:4.
Jotham and Azariah/Uzziah had a co-regency. Did Ahaz and Azariah/Uzziah also have a co-regency? Trying to answer that question accurately is difficult, given that relative dating for the same monarchs is not always consistent, due to factual contradictions in sources.
Scripture does mention “Micah the Morashite” outside of the Book of Micah. Jeremiah 26:17-19, in the context of Jeremiah’s trial and death sentence, quotes some Jewish elders recalling Micah as having prophesied during the reign of King Hezekiah and not having received the death penalty. Jeremiah 26:18 quotes Micah 3:12.
The Book of Micah, like the Books of Hosea and Amos before it, has layers of authorship and editing between the original version and the final version, from after the Babylonian Exile. This reality does not trouble me in the Books of Hosea and Amos. Neither does it disturb me in the Book of Micah.
The timeframe of the prophetic career of Micah, as established in 1:1, was very difficult.
- The Assyrian Empire menaced the (northern) Kingdom of Israel and the (southern) Kingdom of Judah.
- The Kingdoms of Israel and Aram had formed an anti-Assyrian alliance. King Ahaz of Judah refused to join that alliance. Therefore, during the Syro-Ephraimite War (734-732 B.C.E.), Israel and Aram waged war on Judah and sought to replace Ahaz with a monarch who would join that alliance. Ahaz allied himself with the Assyrian Empire, not God. In 732 B.C.E., the Assyrian Empire seized territory from Aram and Israel and reduced those kingdoms to vassalage.
- The Assyrian Empire conquered the (northern) Kingdom of Israel in 722 B.C.E.
- The Assyrian Empire conquered the Kingdom of Aram in 720 B.C.E.
- In 701, during the reign of King Hezekiah, Assyrian King Sennacherib (r. 705-681 B.C.E.) invaded Judah.
- On the domestic front, wealthy landowners were forcing peasant farmers into debt and seizing their land, in violation of the common good and the Law of Moses. Corruption, injustice, and oppression of Judeans by Judeans was endemic.
The superscription (1:1) refers to “Samaria and Jerusalem,” the capitals of the (northern) Kingdom of Israel and the (southern) Kingdom of Judah, respectively. I mention this because the use of language matters. If, for example, I write, “x” and have one meaning in mind yet you, O reader, read “x” and have another definition in mind, I have not communicated with you, and you have missed the point.
- The Book of Micah, in its final form, generally uses “Israel” in the generic sense–the people of the covenant, not the subjects of any Jewish kingdom. This explains why, in Micah, Israel continues to exist after the Fall of Samaria (722 B.C.E.).
- “Jacob” refers to Judah. The use of “Jacob” recalls the infamous trickster (Genesis 25:19-34; 27:1-35:37; 37:1-36; 42:29-43:14; 46:1-47:12; 47:28-48:22). “Jacob,” of course, is also the original name of Israel, after whom the people of Israel took their name. The use of “Jacob” to refer to Judah indicates the importance of divine promises to the Patriarchs and foreshadows restoration to a state of grace after punishment for sins.
The Book of Micah holds divine judgment and mercy in balance. Much of the prophecy, in its final, edited form, is doom and gloom.
Yet faith in God does not conclude on a note of despair. Hope is the last word, then as now. But the hope which prophetic religion exalts is born of faith in God and in his love of man.
–Harold A. Bosley, in The Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 6 (1956), 901
Another detail interests me. Most English translations begin:
The word of the LORD that came to Micah….”
Focus on “came to,” O reader. The Hebrew text literally reads:
The word of the LORD that was Micah….
This leads me back to Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel:
The prophet is a person, not a microphone. He is endowed with a mission, with the power of a word not his own that accounts for his greatness–but also with temperament, concern, character, and individuality. As there was no resisting the impact of divine inspiration, so at times there was no resisting the vortex of his own temperament. The word of God reverberated in the voice of man.
The prophet’s task is to convey a divine view, yet as a person he is a point of view. He speaks from the perspective of God as perceived from the perspective of his own situation. We must seek to understand not only the views he expounded but also the attitudes he embodied: his own position, feeling response–not only what he said but also what he lived; the private, the intimate dimension of the word, the subjective side of the message.
–The Prophets, Vol. 1 (1962), viii
The inspiration of scripture included a human element. The authors and prophets were not secretaries of the Holy Spirit, taking dictation, as in “Put a comma there.” No, the people thanks to whom we have the Bible put themselves into the book. They were the message. They were people, not microphones.
What does the Book of Micah have to proclaim to the world of 2021? Let us find out.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 24, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF NICOLAUS SELNECKER, GERMAN LUTHERAN MINISTER, THEOLOGIAN, AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF JACKSON KEMPER, EPISCOPAL MISSIONARY BISHOP
THE FEAST OF EDITH MARY MELLISH (A.K.A. MOTHER EDITH), FOUNDRESS OF THE COMMUNITY OF THE SACRED NAME
THE FEAST OF SAINT MARIA GARGANI, FOUNDRESS OF THE SISTERS APOSTLES OF THE SACRED HEART
THE FEAST OF MARY MADELEVA WOLFF, U.S. ROMAN CATHOLIC NUN, POET, SCHOLAR, AND PRESIDENT OF SAINT MARY’S COLLEGE, NOTRE DAME, INDIANA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Map of the Assyrian Empire and Its Neighbors
Image Scanned from an Old Bible
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING AMOS, PART II
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Amos 1:3-2:3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Introduction
As I read the Book of Amos, I ask myself how much of the final version is original to the text from the prophet. I know that the final version of the Book of Amos dates to the 400s B.C.E., three centuries after the time of the prophet. Nevertheless, that question, germane for some matters of interpretation, is irrelevant for other matters of interpretation. The message(s) of the Book of Amos for people, cultures, societies, and institutions in 2021 C.E. are what they are, regardless of which layer of composition to which a particular passage belongs.
Amos 1:3-2:16 consists of prophetic oracles of judgment against nations. I choose to write about the oracles against Judah and Israel in the next post. In this post, I focus on divine judgment against Aram, Philistia, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and Moab.
Notice, O reader, a motif:
For three crimes of _____, and now four–
I will not take it back–….
–Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2:1, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
This motif indicates the end of divine patience after the third crime. Divine patience is not infinite. Divine judgment and mercy exist in balance.
Amos 1:3-2:3 condemns neighboring nations for behavior that is anti-human or against nature. These Gentiles, not being under the Law of Moses, had no covenant with God to keep. They were still accountable according to certain standards, though.
Aram (1:3-5)
Aram was where Syria is today. Aram was the main rival of the Assyrian Empire during the time of the prophets Amos, Hosea, Micah, and (First) Isaiah. Aram was also a frequent foe of the (northern) Kingdom of Israel.
Aram had “threshed Gilead with sledges of iron,” a reference to a military campaign (2 Kings 13:3-7). King Hazael came to power circa 842 B.C.E. and reigned until circa 806 B.C.E. (2 Kings 8:7-15). He founded a dynasty. Hazael’s immediate successor was his son, King Ben-hadad II (2 Kings 13:3). Hadad was a storm god, and “Ben” meant “son of.”
“Aven” meant “evil,” so the Valley of Aven was the “Valley of Evil.” Beth-eden was an Aramaic city-state between the Euphrates and Balikh Rivers. According to Amos 1:5, God would depose the King of Beth-eden and exile the Arameans. During the Syro-Ephraimite War (734-732 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 15:27-31; 2 Kings 16:1-19; 2 Chronicles 28:1-26; Isaiah 7:1-8:23), King Pekah of Israel (r. 735-732 B.C.E.) and King Rezin of Aram (r. 750-732 B.C.E.), having formed an anti-Assyrian alliance, fought the (southern) Kingdom of Judah and besieged Jerusalem because King Ahaz (r. 743/735-727/715 B.C.E.) refused to join that coalition. King Ahaz of Judah turned not to God, but to the Assyrian Empire. That empire conquered part of Aram and reduced Israel to vassalage in 732 B.C.E. The Assyrian Empire ended Aram’s existence as an independent kingdom in 720 B.C.E. That empire relocated Arameans throughout the Assyrian Empire, including in Samaria (2 Kings 17:24, 30).
Philistia (1:6-8
Philistia was on the Mediterranean coast and east of the (southern) Kingdom of Judah. Philistia was where the Gaza Strip is today. Philistines were the people otherwise known as Phoenicians.
Philistia had “exiled an entire population,” probably from Israel or Judah. This raid, perhaps during the reign (817-800 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 13:1-25) of King Jehoahaz of Israel, violated Exodus 21:16, not that the covenant applied to the Philistines.
Tyre (1:9-10)
Tyre, on the Mediterranean coast, was the chief Phoenician city in the middle 700s B.C.E. It was a wealthy commercial capital of a trading network.
Tyre had violated a treaty with an unnamed partner and handed an entire population over to slave markets in Edom.
Edom (1:11-12)
Edom was south of the Dead Sea, in what is now the southern regions of Israel and Jordan. Edom was the nation, by tradition, descended from Esau, a.k.a. Edom (Genesis 25:25-28:9; 32:3-33:16; 35:1-43; 36:1-43). Jacob/Israel had made their peace (Genesis 33), but their descendants had continued the conflict.
Edom, the nation, had pursued his “brother” (Israel) with the sword. Edom, the nation, was metaphorically the brother of the Israelite people (Numbers 20:14; Deuteronomy 2:4; Deuteronomy 23:7; Obadiah 10, 12). King David had added Edom to the (united) Kingdom of Israel (2 Samuel 8:13f; 1 Kings 11:15-17). Edom, part of the (southern) Kingdom of Judah after the division of the (united) Kingdom of Israel, threw off Judean control during the reign (851-853 B.C.E.) of King Jehoram (Joram) (2 Kings 8:16-24; 2 Chronicles 21:4-20). Yet Judah reconquered Edom during the reign (798-769 B.C.E.) of King Amaziah of Judah (2 Kings 14:1-22; 2 Chronicles 25:1-28) and the reign (785-733 B.C.E.) of King Azariah/Uzziah of Judah (2 Kings 15:1-7; 2 Chronicles 26:1-23), contemporary with the time of the prophets Hosea, Amos, and Micah. Edomites persisted in their anger; they raged in wrath without end.
Ammon (1:13-15)
Ammon was to the west of the River Jordan and north of the Dead Sea, in modern-day Jordan. Ammon had been part of the (united) Kingdom of Israel under Kings David and Solomon. The Ammonites had broken away circa 928 B.C.E., when the (united) Kingdom of Israel split into the (northern) Kingdom of Israel and the (southern) Kingdom of Judah.
Ammon had “ripped open pregnant women in Gilead, in order to extend their territory” (Amos 1:13). Ammon had fought a border war with Israel, probably during the 800s B.C.E. In the course of that conflict, Ammonite soldiers had ripped open pregnant women, a tactic not unheard of, sadly.
Ammon became a vassal state (742-630 B.C.E.) of the Assyrian Empire then a province thereof. With the Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian conquest of the Assyrian Empire, Ammon became a rebellious province of the Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian Empire. The rebellion failed, and mass deportations ensued.
Moab (2:1-3)
Moab was west of the Dead Sea, in modern-day Jordan. Moab had been a vassal state of the (united) Kingdom of Israel under Kings David and Solomon then under the kings of the (northern) Kingdom of Israel. King Mesha of Moab had successfully rebelled against vassalage during the reign (851-842 B.C.E) of King Jehoram (Joram) of Israel (1 Kings 3:1-27) and the reign (870-846 B.C.E.) of King Jehoshaphat of Judah (1 Kings 22:1-51; 2 Kings 3:1-27; 2 Chronicles 17:1-20:37). Moab was also the homeland of Ruth.
Moab had “burned to ashes the bones of Edom’s king.” This was an extreme disrespect usually reserved criminals (Genesis 38:24; Leviticus 20:14; Leviticus 21:9), not that Moabites were subject to the Law of Moses. This act, which had no effect on either the (northern) Kingdom of Israel or the (southern) Kingdom of Judah, was still a crime against God.
Moab came under Assyrian domination (c. 735 B.C.E.), became an Assyrian province (711 B.C.E.), and finally ceased to be a state (circa 600 B.C.E.). (For more about the decline and fall of Moab, read Isaiah 15-16 and Jeremiah 48.)
Conclusion
A spiritual mentor of mine liked to read some portion of the Bible then ask:
What is really going on here?
God, who is sovereign over all the nations, does not tolerate injustice. The Book of Amos beats the drum repeatedly. God cares deeply about how people, cultures, societies, and institutions treat people.
In this post, I have focused on neighbors of the (northern) Kingdom of Israel and the (southern) Kingdom of Judah. Many of the prophet’s original audience probably delighted to hear these proclamations of divine judgment against these foreign nations.
Then Amos stopped preaching and started meddling, so to speak.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 20, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT ALCUIN OF YORK, ABBOT OF TOURS
THE FEAST OF SAINTS COLUMBA OF RIETI AND OSANNA ANDREASI, DOMINICAN MYSTICS
THE FEAST OF JOHN ELIOT, “THE APOSTLE TO THE INDIANS”
THE FEAST OF SAINT MARIÁ ANGÉLICA LATHROP, FOUNDRESS OF THE DOMINICAN SISTERS OF HAWTHORNE
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Map of the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel during the Reigns of Kings Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah and Jeroboam II of Israel
Image Scanned from an Old Bible
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING AMOS, PART I
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Amos 1:1-2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The superscription (1:1) provides information useful in dating the original version of the Book of Amos. Jeroboam II (r. 788-747 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 14:23-29) was the King of Israel. Azariah/Uzziah (r. 785-733 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 15:1-17; 2 Chronicles 26:1-23). In a seismically-active region, the “big one” of circa 770 or 760 or 750 B.C.E. was apparently a memorable natural disaster. (Ironing out wrinkles in the chronology of the era from Uzziah to Hezekiah has long been difficult, as many Biblical commentaries have noted. For example, reputable sources I have consulted have provided different years, ranging from 742 to 733 B.C.E., for the death of King Uzziah.) Centuries later, after the Babylonian Exile, Second Zechariah recalled that cataclysm in the context of earth-shaking events predicted to precede the Day of the Lord–in Christian terms, the establishment of the fully-realized Kingdom of God:
And the valley in the Hills shall be stopped up, for the Valley of the Hills shall reach only to Azal; it shall be stopped up as a result of the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah.–And the LORD my God, with all the holy beings, will come to you.
–Zechariah 14:5, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985)
The original version of the Book of Amos, then, dates to circa 772 or 762 or 752 B.C.E.
The final version of the Book of Amos, however, dates to the period after the Babylonian Exile. The prophecies of Hosea, Amos, Micah, and First Isaiah, in their final forms, all do. So do the final versions of much of the rest of the Hebrew Bible, from Genesis to the two Books of Kings. The final version of the Book of Amos indicates a pro-Judean bias, evident first in the listing of Kings of Judah before King Jeroboam II of Israel.
“Amos,” the shorter version of “Amasiah,” derives from the Hebrew verb for “to carry” and means “borne by God.”
Amos was a Judean who prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel. He was, by profession, a breeder of sheep and cattle, as well as a tender of sycamore figs (1:1, 7:14). The prophet was wealthy. In 2 Kings 3:4, King Mesha of Moab was also a sheep breeder. Amos hailed from the village of Tekoa, about eight kilometers, or five miles, south of Bethlehem, and within distant sight of Jerusalem (2 Samuel 14:2; Jeremiah 6:1). King Rehoboam of Judah (r. 928-911 B.C.E.; 1 Kings 12:1-33; 1 Kings 15:21-31; 2 Chronicles 10:1-12:16; Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 47:23) had ordered the fortification of Tekoa (2 Chronicles 11:6). Although Amos prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel, “Israel” (Amos 1:1) was a vague reference.
Since the prophetic office as manifested in Amos was a function of Yahweh’s lordship over his people, the political boundary that had been set up between Judah and Israel was utterly irrelevant. Amos was concerned with Israel in their identity as the people of the Lord; the sphere of his activity was the realm of the old tribal league, all Israel under Yahweh, and not the state cult with its orientation to the current king and his kingdom.
–James Luther Mays, Amos: A Commentary (1969), 19
I wonder if the vagueness of “Israel” in Amos 1:1 is original or if it is a product of subsequent amendment and editing. The later editing and amendment do present questions about how to interpret the edited and amended texts. Anyhow, I recognize that the message of God, via Amos of Tekoa, received and transmitted faithfully in a particular geographical and temporal context, remains relevant. That message remains germane because human nature is a constant force, often negatively so.
The reference to the cataclysmic earthquake (Amos 1:) may do more than help to date the composition of the first version of the book. One may, for example, detect references to that earthquake in Amos 2:13, 3;14f, 6:11, and 9:1. One may reasonably speculate that the Book of Amos, in its final form, at least, may understand the earthquake of circa 770 or 760 or 750 B.C.E. as divine punishment for rampant, collective, persistent, disregard for the moral demands of the Law of Moses. This presentation of natural disasters as the wrath of God exists also in Joel 1 and 2 (in reference to a plague of locusts) and in Exodus 7-11 (in reference to the plagues on Egypt). This perspective disturbs me. I recall certain conservative evangelists describing Hurricane Katrina (2005) as the wrath of God on New Orleans, Louisiana, allegedly in retribution for sexual moral laxity. I wish that more people would be more careful regarding what they claim about the divine character. I also know that earthquakes occur because of plate tectonics, swarms of locusts go where they will, and laws of nature dictate where hurricanes make landfall.
Amos seems to have prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel briefly, perhaps for only one festival and certainly for less than a year, at Bethel, a cultic site. Then officialdom saw to it that he returned to Tekoa, his livestock and sycamore figs, and the (southern) Kingdom of Judah.
[Amos] proclaimed:
The LORD roars from Zion,
Shouts aloud from Jerusalem;
And the pastures of the shepherds shall languish,
And the summit of Carmel shall wither.
–Amos 2:2, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985)
The theological understanding in Amos 2:2 holds that God was resident in Zion. The reference to Mount Carmel, on the Mediterranean coast and in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel makes plain that the message was, immediately, at least, for the Northern Kingdom. Looking at a map, one can see the geographical setting. For the divine voice, shouted in Jerusalem, to make the summit of Mount Carmel writhe, poetically, God really is a force with which to reckon.
God is near, but he is also far–immeasurably exalted, inexpressively different. He is the king who does not die.
–R. B. Y. Scott, The Relevance of the Prophets, 2nd. ed. (1968), 121
How we mere mortals think, speak, and write about God depends largely on our theological and social contexts–how well we understand science, how we define moral parameters, and how wide or narrow our theological imagination may be. How we mere mortals think, speak, and write about God must also include much poetry, even prose poetry. If we are theologically, spiritually, and intellectually honest, we will acknowledge this. How we mere mortals think, speak, and write about God may or may not age well and/or translate well to other cultures.
Despite certain major differences from the pre-scientific worldview of the eighth-century B.C.E. prophet Amos and the world of 2021 B.C.E., the social, economic, and political context of the Book of Amos bears an unfortunate similarity to the world of 2021. Economic inequality is increasing. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the numbers of poor people while a relative few already extremely wealthy people have become richer. God still cares deeply about how people treat each other. God continues to condemn institutionalized inequality. Many conventionally pious people–religious leaders, especially–are complicit in maintaining this inequality.
Amos of Tekoa continues to speak the words of God to the world of 2021.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 19, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF JACQUES ELLUL, FRENCH REFORMED THEOLOGIAN AND SOCIOLOGIST
THE FEAST OF SAINT CELESTINE V, BISHOP OF ROME
THE FEAST OF SAINT DUNSTAN OF CANTERBURY, ABBOT OF GLASTONBURY AND ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
THE FEAST OF SAINT IVO OF KERMARTIN, ROMAN CATHOLIC ATTORNEY, PRIEST, AND ADVOCATE FOR THE POOR
THE FEAST OF GEORG GOTTFRIED MULLER, GERMAN-AMERICAN MORAVIAN MINISTER AND COMPOSER
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: A Map of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah
Scanned from an Old Bible
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING HOSEA, PART I
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hosea 1:1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This post begins an ambitious program of Bible study and blogging. I, having recently blogged my way through Daniel, Jonah, and Baruch at this weblog, turn to the other books of the Old Testament classified as prophetic. In the first stage, I am reading and blogging about Hosea, Amos, Micah, and First Isaiah, all of them contemporaries prior to the Babylonian Exile.
The prophet Hosea (“rescue”) ben Beeri lived and prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel. According to Hosea 1:1, Hosea prophesied during the reigns of the following monarchs:
- Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah (r. 785-733 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 15:1-7 and 2 Chronicles 26;
- Jotham of Judah (r. 759-743 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 15:32-38 and 2 Chronicles 27:1-9;
- Ahaz of Judah (r. 743/735-727-715 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 16:1-20, 2 Chronicles 28:1-27, and Isaiah 7:1-8:15;
- Hezekiah of Judah (r. 727/715-698/687 B.C.E.); see 2 Kings 18:1-20:21, 2 Chronicles 29:1-32:33, Isaiah 38:1-39:8, and Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 48:17-22 and 49:14; and
- Jeroboam II of Israel (r. 788-747 B.C.E.), see 2 Kings 14:23-29.
The list of kings (with dates taken from The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition, 2014) does not include any Israelite monarchs who succeeded Jeroboam II through the Fall of Samaria (722 B.C.E.) and were contemporary with King Ahaz of Judah and perhaps King Hezekiah of Judah. Also, this list prioritizes the Kings of Judah. If one is intellectually honest (as I try to be), the chronological problem is obvious: Ahaz and Hezekiah do not belong on the list of kings in Hosea 1:1. The Book of Hosea contains layers of composition and editing. Alteration of the original text seems to have begun perhaps as early as prior to the Babylonian Exile, in the (southern) Kingdom of Judah, and continued (probably) as late as the post-Exilic period. The chronological discrepancy in Hosea 1:1 is a minor matter. If I were a fundamentalist, it would trouble me, and I would attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable. Karen Armstrong tells us:
…fundamentalism is antihistorical….
—A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (1993), xx
The NIV Study Bible (1985) pretends that there is no chronological discrepancy in Hosea 1:1. But I do not affirm either Biblical literalism or inerrancy, so I acknowledge and ponder the evidence of alteration of the original text of the Book of Hosea. Besides, salvation does not require willful ignorance or a frontal lobotomy. Besides, giving short shrift to one’s intellect in the name of piety dishonors the image of God in oneself.
The germane note in The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014) argues for the editing of the original text of the Book of Hosea during the final, declining period of the (southern) Kingdom of Judah:
From the Israelite perspective, the book is anchored in the last period of strength of the Northern Kingdom; from the Judahite perspective, it is anchored in a period in which Israel moves from a political position of strength to the beginning of its demise in the days of Hezekiah. This double perspective is no mistake, but a rhetorical clue for the reading of the book.
–1132
Gale A. Yee wrote:
The priority of Judean kings suggests a Judean editing. The phraseology and structure that this verse shares with other prophetic superscriptions indicates that it was part of a joint redaction of the prophetic books. This editing probably occurred during or after the Babylonian exile, when the latter prophets can be dated. Moreover, the phraseology is similar to the editing of 1 and 2 Kings, suggesting a deuteronomistic redaction. The superscription emphasizes that while the revelation was addressed to a particular prophet at a particular historical time, the book in its later, edited state articulates the revealed message of God. As God’s word through Hosea spoke to its original audience and to its later Judean audience, it continues to address us today.
—The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 7 (1996), 217
The (united) Kingdom of Israel had divided in 928 B.C.E., early in the reign of King Rehoboam, son of King Solomon. The Davidic Dynasty, which had ruled the (united) Kingdom of Judah since 1005 B.C.E., governed the (southern) Kingdom of Judah, including the tribes of Judah and Simeon, until the Fall of Jerusalem (587 B.C.E.). In contrast, dynasties rose and fell in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel. King Jeroboam II (reigned 788-747) belonged to the House of Jehu, which had come to power in a bloody revolution in 842 B.C.E. Jeroboam II presided over a prosperous and militarily strong realm (2 Kings 14:23-29). Yet, just a quarter-century after his death, the former (northern) Kingdom of Israel fell to the Assyrian Empire. Those twenty-five years were politically tumultuous.
- King Zechariah succeeded his father, Jeroboam II, in 747 B.C.E., and reigned for about six months (2 Kings 15:8-12)
- King Shallum ended the House of Jehu, as well as the life and reign of King Zechariah via assassination in 747 B.C.E. Shallum reigned for about a month (2 Kings 15:13-16).
- King Menahem (r. 747-737 B.C.E.) came to power by having King Shallum assassinated (2 Kings 15:17-22).
- King Pekahiah (r. 737-735 B.C.E.), succeeded his father, King Menahem (2 Kings 15:23-26).
- King Pekah (r. 735-732 B.C.E.) came to power by having King Pekahiah assassinated (2 Kings 15:27-31).
- King Hoshea (r. 732-722 B.C.E.) came to power by having King Pekah assassinated. Assyrian King Sargon II (r. 722-705) finished what Shalmaneser V (r. 727-722) had started; Sargon II terminated Hoshea’s reign and the existence of the (northern) Kingdom of Israel (2 Kings 17:1-23).
A note in The New Interpreter’s Study Bible (2003) suggests:
Because Hosea condemned the house of Jehu, it may be that he fled Israel prior to the revolt [of 747 B.C.E.], continuing to speak from Judah.
That is possible.
God, speaking through Hosea, repeatedly warned the people of the (northern) Kingdom of Israel of the terrors they were about to experience and urged them to restore their covenant relationship with God. They did not renew that covenant relationship, to their detriment. Perhaps subsequent editors of the original text of the Book of Hosea amplified these themes, with the benefit of hindsight. But these editors did not invent them.
Repurposing and revising texts was sufficiently commonplace in Biblical times that finding evidence of it had ceased to surprise me. For example, some of the Psalms originated at one place and in one period yet went through stages of revision, to fit different contexts.
Dr. Yee’s final point provides my jumping-off point for my conclusion for this post:
…[God’s word] continues to address us today.
Here, “God’s word” refers to what God has said and says. God’s word is as current today as it was last year, a decade ago, a century ago, a thousand years ago, and in antiquity. God’s word, although ancient, remains fresh. Are we paying attention?
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 12, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT GERMANUS I CONSTANTINOPLE, PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE; AND DEFENDER OF ICONS
THE FEAST OF SAINT GREGORY OF OSTIA, ROMAN CATHOLIC ABBOT, CARDINAL, AND LEGATE; AND SAINT DOMINIC OF THE CAUSEWAY, ROMAN CATHOLIC HERMIT
THE FEAST OF PAUL MAZAKUTE, FIRST SIOUX EPISCOPAL PRIEST
THE FEAST OF ROGER SCHÜTZ, FOUNDER OF THE TAIZÉ COMMUNITY
THE FEAST OF SYLVESTER II, BISHOP OF ROME
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Hosea
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Collect:
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning:
Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them,
that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of life,
which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns
with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), page 236
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Assigned Readings:
Hosea 1:1-11 (Protestant and Anglican)/Hosea 1:1-2:2 (Jewish, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox)
Psalm 25
Colossians 1:1-14
John 12:20-36
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The word of the LORD that came to Hosea son of Beeri in the days of Uzziah, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah and in the days of Jeroboam son of Joash king of Israel.
–Hosea 1:1, Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible (2019)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The reading from Hosea provides a timeframe. Dates of reigns are approximate, on the B.C.E.-C.E. scale, due to the use of relative dating in antiquity. Furthermore, if one consults three sources, one may find three different sets of dates for the reigns of the listed monarchs. With that caveat, I cite The Jewish Study Bible to tell you, O reader, the following regnal spans:
- Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah: 785-733 B.C.E.
- Jotham of Judah: 759-743 B.C.E.
- Ahaz of Judah: 743-735-727/715 B.C.E.
- Hezekiah of Judah: 727/715-698-687 B.C.E.
- Jeroboam II of Israel: 788-747 B.C.E.
- Fall of Samaria: 722 B.C.E.
The chronological problem is obvious: Kings Ahaz and Hezekiah of Judah do not belong in Hosea 1:1. However, one may know that the decline of the northern Kingdom of Israel followed the death of King Jeroboam II, just as the decline of the southern Kingdom of Judah began during the reign of King Hezekiah. The beginning of a kingdom’s decline informs the reading of Hosea, set in the northern Kingdom of Israel. One may reasonably conclude that the lessons of this book were also for subjects in the Kingdom of Judah.
Divine judgment is a prominent theme in this reading from Hosea. Divine forgiveness will come up in Chapter 2. For now, however, the emphasis is on judgment. In that context, one reads that idolatry is a form of spiritual adultery and prostitution.
All the LORD’s paths are mercy and forgiveness,
for those who keep his covenant and commands.
–Psalm 25:10, The Revised New Jerusalem Bible (2019)
++++++++++++
Whoever serves me, must follow me,
and my servant will be with me wherever I am.
–John 12:26a, The New Jerusalem Bible (1985)
The invitation in Lent is to walk out of the darkness and into the light. The invitation is not to let the darkness overtake one. The invitation is to follow Jesus in the shadow of the cross.
The most enticing form of idolatry may not involve statues or anything else tangible. No, the most enticing form of idolatry may be the temptation to think of God as being manageable. God is not manageable. God is not domesticated. And God is not a vending machine. God judges. God shows mercy. God forgives the sins of the penitent. And God deserves more love than anyone and anything else in our lives.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JANUARY 6, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF THE EPIPHANY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adapted from this post:
https://lenteaster.wordpress.com/2021/01/06/devotion-for-the-first-sunday-in-lent-year-d-humes/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Icon of Amos
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning:
Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them,
that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of life,
which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns
with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), page 236
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Amos 3:1-8 or Proverbs 1:1-19
Psalm 115:1-11
1 Timothy 1:1-2, 12-17
John 1:35-42
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Humes lectionary provides two options for the First Reading. I will write about both of them.
Amos 3:1-8 includes a variation on the old saying that great responsibility accompanies great privilege. Grace is free, not cheap. One can never purchase it, but accepting it entails taking on duties. To tie Proverbs 1:1-19 into that principle, one has a duty to show love for God by doing love to one’s fellow human beings. Elsewhere in Amos, we read of greedy, exploitative people, as we do in Proverbs 1:8-19.
These men lie in wait for their own blood,
they set a trap for their own lives.
This is the fate of everyone greedy of loot:
unlawful gain takes away the life of him who acquires it.
–Proverbs 1:18-19, The New American Bible (1991)
Whatever we do to others, we do also to ourselves.
The audience in Amos 3 is collective; it is the people of Israel. To be precise, it is the people of Israel during the reigns of King Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah (785-733 B.C.E.) and King Jeroboam II of Israel (788-747 B.C.E.). The Deuteronomic theology of the Book of Amos teaches that actions have consequences. Obey the Law of Moses, please God, and reap the benefits. Alternatively, disobey the Law of Moses, displease God, and reap the negative consequences. Many of those commandments pertain to social justice, especially economic justice.
Our Western culture, with its pervasive individualism, easily overlooks collective responsibility. Politically, the Right Wing emphasizes individual responsibility. Meanwhile, the Left Wing stresses collective responsibility. Both sides err in so far as they give short shrift to or ignore either type of responsibility. Just as divine judgment and mercy exist in balance, so do individual and collective responsibility. Mutuality holds them in balance.
Psalm 115 condemns idolatry. The real idols are ideas, not objects. A statue of a god, for example, can be a work of art to display in a museum. Idolatry is about misplaced, disordered love, to go Augustinian on you, O reader. In the case of the greedy people in Proverbs 1, their idol was attachment to wealth.
The reading from 1 Timothy 1 reminds us that God embraces repentance. Remorse is an emotion that enables repentance, a series of actions.
Regardless of who wrote or dictated the First Letter to Timothy (probably not St. Paul the Apostle), St. Paul seemed unlikely to have become what he became in God. Saul of Tarsus certainly did not expect it. And, to turn to John 1:35-42, calling St. Simon “Peter,” or “Rock,” may have seemed ironic at first. But Jesus recognized potential in him. St. Simon Peter eventually grew into that potential. St. Paul the Apostle grew into his potential, as well.
If we are to grew into our potential individually, we need the help of God and other people. St. Paul had Ananias. St. Simon Peter had Jesus. Who do you have, O reader?
Likewise, if we are to grow into our potential collectively, we need the help of God and other groups of people. We live in a web of mutuality. We know this, do we not? Globalization, at least, should have taught us that the communities and nation-states can affect the fates of our communities and nation-states.
Will we work for the common good? Or will we persist in delusions of amoral rugged individualism and isolationism?
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
DECEMBER 28, 2020 COMMON ERA
THE FOURTH DAY OF CHRISTMAS
THE FEAST OF SAINT JOHN THE EVANGELIST (TRANSFERRED)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adapted from this post:
https://adventchristmasepiphany.wordpress.com/2020/12/28/devotion-for-the-second-sunday-after-the-epiphany-year-d-humes/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BLOGA THEOLOGICA 
You must be logged in to post a comment.