There is so much here in your commentary that is liberating me from the many things I’ve studied in commentaries before. You offer refreshing interpretation that will surely help my preaching this Sunday. Thank you.
I love this so much thank you, your writing makes me breathe better again. You have captured the heart of our error in turning Christianity into a transaction rather than an ever ongoing act of covenant love. Wonderful.
So beautiful and inspiring. I thought about the book "Jack" of M Robinson. Jack is quite a loser but finds a women who loves him...She sees the values in him that he has lost. Like Frodo identifies the long lost Smeagol in Gollum. I know we become in relationship and that we can actually change in relationship. Since Jesus loves mankind and reveals Gods love for all of us. My hope is that God will succeed where Frodo failed. Because of God's Love there is actually hope for us all. Even Jack and Gollum.
thank you for your insights, it is what I truly love about people like you that can say, oh this word actually has this meaning. It changes everything and makes for a more powerful teaching, in my opinion. I am slowly learning that so much of the good stuff in the Bible is obscued and given meanings that aren't really there. This is how the institutional church has lost people.
I have one bone to pick. You use Israel to name a place but that place did not exist until 1948. I wish you and all people like you would not do that because it leads to thinking the current Israel always physically belonged to the Jews. Originally all Jews were Arab but now people think Arabs are a religion and it is not Jewish or Christian. I support Palestine and the people of Palestine some who have been Christian for many generations but are being persecuted in Israel today. To call the land Israel historically contributes to the conflict present today. Call the geography by an accurate historic name, any of them but do not call it Israel - that was a people but not a country at the time of Jesus.
Thank you for this. I really appreciate both the affirmation and the pushback. I agree with your larger concern: words matter, especially when biblical language gets mapped too easily onto modern nation-states.
You are right that the modern State of Israel did not exist until 1948, so when speaking about the time of Jesus it is usually more historically precise to say Galilee, Judea, Jerusalem, or the Roman Empire rather than “Israel” as though it meant the modern country.
That said, “Israel” was also an ancient biblical name for a people, a theological identity, And at times a kingdom.
But I receive the heart of what you are saying. I do not want Christian language to erase Palestinians, whose history in the land is also ancient.
I went back to find where I had used Israel in the sense you described but couldn’t find it. Please let me know where you ran into that and I will gladly look at it. Always willing to amend. As I say, all of my work in the Studio is unfinished and in process. Again thanks for pointing this out.
"Hosea’s critique is that the relationship comes first. The rituals were never meant to create it. They were meant to remind people of it.”
I see it rather as a tension that will never go away. Frankly, the rituals are easier than the relationships, and that appeals to a lot of people who need authority to lean on, who feel they need to be criticized and disciplined and most of all, judged all the time.
I would see it in high school students who demanded that I say negative things about their writing - stories or essays - instead of just telling them what’s working.
My daughter has an MFA in sculpture; I saw how her program works. She was judged by critiques, and she critiques her own students. It’s a bit Maoist, IMHO. They sit around and tell her what doesn’t work. She swears it’s good to go through that kind of critique, when it’s done by skilled artists and skilled peers.
But what I saw in my classes was a lot of what I called “interpersonal politics.” Students across the class trying to form relationships with others by saying they liked their work, or making themselves feel relevant by telling a student what they didn’t like about her work. I would point out that’s not what I was asking for. I merely asked them to point to what was working, what seemed to be strong - not to become an authority figure.
I’m on the side of relationship, but based not on how well you all follow the rituals and rules or how well you apply the things you’ve been taught. I think Christ also behaves in ways that show he was not playing interpersonal politics.
But the authoritarian impulse has the “virtues” of being clear, precise, exact, and judgmental. That is, easy to judge. It provides clear criteria for goodness.
Making the point clear isn’t easy. What are my criteria? I could tell you, but I set them aside when engaging in critique. “No criterion for goodness survives first contact” might be the way I am involved in people’s lives…coining a phrase from the arena of military operations: no plan survives first contact with the enemy.
I also think of the story told by an Auschwitz survivor - I can’t think of his name. He had frostbite and had to see the camp doctor. There was an SS man at the door turning people away. Everybody in line with him had a plan, a story to tell that they were sure would get them treatment. They asked him what he was going to say, and he said he didn’t have a plan. He was going to speak to the guard and see what happened.
The others were sent away, and he just told the guard that he couldn’t work with frostbitten fingers. The guard tugged at the flesh and when he couldn’t tear it off, he let the man in to see the doctor. He got treatment, and he survived Auschwitz.
Jesus dealt with authoritarians in similar ways, one on one, without performance, without performative criteria.
But that tension is always going to be there. The majority of people are more comfortable with authority.
There is so much here in your commentary that is liberating me from the many things I’ve studied in commentaries before. You offer refreshing interpretation that will surely help my preaching this Sunday. Thank you.
Thank you. So glad it’s helpful.
I love this so much thank you, your writing makes me breathe better again. You have captured the heart of our error in turning Christianity into a transaction rather than an ever ongoing act of covenant love. Wonderful.
You've clarified something I've intuited for many years but couldn't put my finger on. Thank you!
So beautiful and inspiring. I thought about the book "Jack" of M Robinson. Jack is quite a loser but finds a women who loves him...She sees the values in him that he has lost. Like Frodo identifies the long lost Smeagol in Gollum. I know we become in relationship and that we can actually change in relationship. Since Jesus loves mankind and reveals Gods love for all of us. My hope is that God will succeed where Frodo failed. Because of God's Love there is actually hope for us all. Even Jack and Gollum.
thank you for your insights, it is what I truly love about people like you that can say, oh this word actually has this meaning. It changes everything and makes for a more powerful teaching, in my opinion. I am slowly learning that so much of the good stuff in the Bible is obscued and given meanings that aren't really there. This is how the institutional church has lost people.
I have one bone to pick. You use Israel to name a place but that place did not exist until 1948. I wish you and all people like you would not do that because it leads to thinking the current Israel always physically belonged to the Jews. Originally all Jews were Arab but now people think Arabs are a religion and it is not Jewish or Christian. I support Palestine and the people of Palestine some who have been Christian for many generations but are being persecuted in Israel today. To call the land Israel historically contributes to the conflict present today. Call the geography by an accurate historic name, any of them but do not call it Israel - that was a people but not a country at the time of Jesus.
Thank you for this. I really appreciate both the affirmation and the pushback. I agree with your larger concern: words matter, especially when biblical language gets mapped too easily onto modern nation-states.
You are right that the modern State of Israel did not exist until 1948, so when speaking about the time of Jesus it is usually more historically precise to say Galilee, Judea, Jerusalem, or the Roman Empire rather than “Israel” as though it meant the modern country.
That said, “Israel” was also an ancient biblical name for a people, a theological identity, And at times a kingdom.
But I receive the heart of what you are saying. I do not want Christian language to erase Palestinians, whose history in the land is also ancient.
I went back to find where I had used Israel in the sense you described but couldn’t find it. Please let me know where you ran into that and I will gladly look at it. Always willing to amend. As I say, all of my work in the Studio is unfinished and in process. Again thanks for pointing this out.
"Hosea’s critique is that the relationship comes first. The rituals were never meant to create it. They were meant to remind people of it.”
I see it rather as a tension that will never go away. Frankly, the rituals are easier than the relationships, and that appeals to a lot of people who need authority to lean on, who feel they need to be criticized and disciplined and most of all, judged all the time.
I would see it in high school students who demanded that I say negative things about their writing - stories or essays - instead of just telling them what’s working.
My daughter has an MFA in sculpture; I saw how her program works. She was judged by critiques, and she critiques her own students. It’s a bit Maoist, IMHO. They sit around and tell her what doesn’t work. She swears it’s good to go through that kind of critique, when it’s done by skilled artists and skilled peers.
But what I saw in my classes was a lot of what I called “interpersonal politics.” Students across the class trying to form relationships with others by saying they liked their work, or making themselves feel relevant by telling a student what they didn’t like about her work. I would point out that’s not what I was asking for. I merely asked them to point to what was working, what seemed to be strong - not to become an authority figure.
I’m on the side of relationship, but based not on how well you all follow the rituals and rules or how well you apply the things you’ve been taught. I think Christ also behaves in ways that show he was not playing interpersonal politics.
But the authoritarian impulse has the “virtues” of being clear, precise, exact, and judgmental. That is, easy to judge. It provides clear criteria for goodness.
Making the point clear isn’t easy. What are my criteria? I could tell you, but I set them aside when engaging in critique. “No criterion for goodness survives first contact” might be the way I am involved in people’s lives…coining a phrase from the arena of military operations: no plan survives first contact with the enemy.
I also think of the story told by an Auschwitz survivor - I can’t think of his name. He had frostbite and had to see the camp doctor. There was an SS man at the door turning people away. Everybody in line with him had a plan, a story to tell that they were sure would get them treatment. They asked him what he was going to say, and he said he didn’t have a plan. He was going to speak to the guard and see what happened.
The others were sent away, and he just told the guard that he couldn’t work with frostbitten fingers. The guard tugged at the flesh and when he couldn’t tear it off, he let the man in to see the doctor. He got treatment, and he survived Auschwitz.
Jesus dealt with authoritarians in similar ways, one on one, without performance, without performative criteria.
But that tension is always going to be there. The majority of people are more comfortable with authority.