Category: One Year Skeptic

Reference links:

Old Testament

A large part of today’s reading is about idols. The author talks about the stupidity and arrogance of those who worship idols saying,

The person who made the idol never stops to reflect, “Why, it’s just a block of wood!
I burned half of it for heat
and used it to bake my bread and roast my meat.
How can the rest of it be a god?
Should I bow down to worship a piece of wood?”

As I have probably said before, by doing this, the author shows a basic misunderstanding of idols and their purpose. In pretty much every case I have heard of, people did not believe that the idols themselves were gods. They believed that the idols were representations of their gods. Representations with power, but, none the less, representations and not the gods themselves. Other than the fact that the idols were meant to be an image of the god they represented, this is really no different than the ark or even the whole temple or the cross for Christians. These too are treated in such as way that could be considered worship of the object itself by those outside of the community of worship.

One sentiment from today’s reading that I feel is not applied widely enough:

Yet he cannot bring himself to ask,
“Is this idol that I’m holding in my hand a lie?”

We should all bring ourselves to wonder if that which we hold dear is nothing more than a lie. This is a question that people are generally afraid to ask (and, I would propose, the religious are often most afraid to ask). And if I didn’t have a policy of not talking about current events, I might wonder how many present day Christians treat the Bible as an idol…

New Testament

Given that this letter does largely rehash ideas we have seen before, I cannot help but focus on all of the ways it does not sound like Paul’s voice. The discussion of Paul’s authority lacks his usual defensiveness. The statements are vague and general (as compared to vague and specific, which seemed to be more common).

I am trying to decide whether or not I like this author’s writing style. On the one hand, he leans towards longer, more complex sentences. On the other hand, so do I, so I am somewhat use to that rhythm. =)

Psalms and Proverbs

Nothing of particular note.

Reference links:

Old Testament

It’s hard to blog about poetry. Either I can talk about the gist, which amounts to just a few key ideas or I can analyze verses in detail, but then there are altogether too many choices. I suppose you could also analyze the general poetic structure and what not, but that is harder when (a) you’re reading a translation and (b) you were never really good at analyzing poetry in the first place…

Today I’ll go with the choose-some-interesting-verses approach. From my point of view, the most interesting section of today’s reading is this:

“Present the case for your idols,”
says the Lord.
“Let them show what they can do,”
says the King of Israel.
“Let them try to tell us what happened long ago
so that we may consider the evidence.
Or let them tell us what the future holds,
so we can know what’s going to happen.
Yes, tell us what will occur in the days ahead.
Then we will know you are gods.
In fact, do anything—good or bad!
Do something that will amaze and frighten us.
But no! You are less than nothing and can do nothing at all.
Those who choose you pollute themselves.

Here we read God, as portrayed by Second Isaiah, putting up a challenge that he cannot (or, I suppose if you’re a traditional believer, chooses not) to meet in modern times. Challenge God today to “tell us what the future holds” or to “do anything—good or bad!” “something that will amaze and frighten us” and we will see nothing. Nothing unambiguously God caused. Nothing amazing. Nothing

Instead, the modern Christian tells us to look inside our heart to see the “obvious” message in the world around us. They hold God to a lower standard than idols to be held to.

New Testament

Most important things first, this bit has a footnote:

You used to live in sin, just like the rest of the world, obeying the devil—the commander of the powers in the unseen world.

According to the footnote, the more literal translation of the first bit could be:

obeying the commander of the power of the air.

The second version is way more entertaining.

Side thought, how do people who insist on reading the Bible word-for-word literally deal with the fact that they are reading a translation? And the fact that translations have differed considerably over time? I’m guessing they deal with it by not really thinking about it.

Paul’s admirer continues to summarize Paul’s theology as he sees it. Today’s points are God’s grace allows believers to be saved from the punishments deserved by those in a sinful world and the community of the Lord should be unified.

Psalms and Proverbs

Wow! Long proverbs reading today. The reading amounts to a short poem on the dangers of alcohol. He talks about the terrible effects of too much drink, but then he also says,

Don’t gaze at the wine, seeing how red it is,
how it sparkles in the cup, how smoothly it goes down.

Reference links:

Old Testament

We finish up the part of Isaiah associated with the prophet Isaiah (and it’s just more recap of 2 Kings). We then start the part attributed to an unknown author dubbed “Second Isaiah”. According to Harris in Understanding the Bible:

In Isaiah 40-55, a new voice is heard, proclaiming to Judean exiles in Babylon that the time of punishment is past and that a new era is dawning, heralded by the conquests of Cyrus of Persia, who will defeat Babylon to become the Near East’s new master. Presenting Cyrus as Yahweh’s anointed king, the anonymous prophet known as Second Isaiah (or Deutero-Isaiah) prepares his fellow exiles for a radically changed world in which their God will lead them in a new exodus to their homeland. The first prophet to declare explicitly that Yahweh is the only God, Second Isaiah states that the covenant people’s historical role is henceforth that of Yahweh’s servant, God’s vehicle for brining divine “light” to Gentile nations.

It seems like this is going to be a good bit more cheery than the dire prophecies of the historical Isaiah. It also seems like we will start discovering more of the content that makes this book so important to Christians (at least, I have been told that Isaiah’s important to Christians, and there are only a few small segments of what we have read so far which seem to justify that importance, so I hope it will become more obvious).

Harris also answers a question that I had when we started reading all of the duplicate information from 2 Kings. According to Harris, it is believed that the editors who composed the joint work inserted the passages from 2 Kings to ease the transition between the prophecies of the historical Isaiah and those of Second Isaiah. Isaiah’s prophecy to Hezekiah that Judah will fall to Babylon provides a bridge between the two sections.

Even right off the bat, in today’s reading, we can see that the God of Second Isaiah was a much more universal, a much more cosmic God. The God of Second Isaiah sounds much more like the God of modern Christians than nearly anything else in the Old Testament thus far.

In Isaiah 40:12-31, we can see how much the Jewish vision of God has changed. With their emphasis on the vastness of God’s power and wisdom, these verses sound almost like they could belong in Job. However, instead of taking that as proof that God cannot care about humanity, like Job does, Second Isaiah seems to take God’s vastness as proof that he is aware of the suffering of the exiled Jewish people.

New Testament

Today we read our first epistle that is widely believed to not actually have been written by Paul. I read today’s reading before reading the background, and I had forgotten whether or not this letter is considered genuine. Even so, I thought that it seemed suspiciously polished. More like someone writing an essay distilling Paul’s thoughts than the more raw, meandering words of Paul himself.

Let’s see what Harris has to say:

Scholars believe that Ephesians is a tribute to Pauline thought penned by a later disciple who modifies and updates Paul’s ideas to address concerns of his own day. The writer argues that the unity of Christ and the cosmos must be reflected in the unity of the church, whose members engage in spiritual warfare with supernatural evil.

“Spiritual warfare with supernatural evil”? We’ll see whether or not this ends up being as wacky and entertaining as it sounds.

Expanding on the authorship debate, Harris presents the following reasons for why scholars doubt the letter’s authenticity (note that these points are quotations from Harris slightly modified for a list format):

• vocabulary: contains over ninety words not found elsewhere in Paul’s writings
• literary style: written in extremely long, convoluted sentences, in contrast to Paul’s typical direct, forceful statements; the quietly devotional tone and smoothly organized sequence of thoughts differ from the apostle’s usual welter of ideas and impassioned language
• theology: the absence of such typically Pauline doctrines as justification by faith and the nearness of Christ’s return
• References to “Apostles and prophets” as the church’s foundation imply that these figures belong to the past, not the authors generatio
• The Gentiles’ equality in Christian fellowship is no longer a controversial issue but an accomplished fact
• Judaizing interlopers no longer question Paul’s stand on circumcision
• When Paul uses the term church, he always refers to an individual congregation. In contrast, Ephesians’ author speaks of the church collectively, a universal institution encompassing all communities of faith.

The accumulated evidence convinces most scholars that Ephesians is a deutero-Pauline document, a secondary work composed in Paul’s name by an admirer thoroughly steeped in the apostle’s though and general theology.  … Some scholars propose that Ephesians was written as a kind of “cover letter,” or essay, to accompany an early collection of Paul’s letters. [booyah! I so said it was like an essay before reading this]

Given that this letter was probably not written by Paul, what is it’s value? Based on the summary, Ephesians does seem to be a fairly reliable study of Paul’s views. As such, it gives valuable insight into how Paul was perceived by those who came after him. Which of his views were considered most important? Which no longer seemed relevant? The Christian church has been evolving since it’s very inception, and this provides valuable insight into that evolution.

So which of Paul’s ideas are important to the author of Ephesians? The author of Ephesians seems to emphasize the blessing of being united with God through Jesus. He also emphasizes the idea that the followers of Jesus were chosen for that role. He also seems to want to make clear Jesus’ divine status and authority.

Psalms and Proverbs

Prostitutes continue to be bad. Actually, it really tells you something about the times the author(s) of proverbs lives in when you realize that they are always referring back to prostitutes, thieves, drunkards, and gluttons for their examples of disreputable behavior. We have such a greater variety these days.

Reference links:

Old Testament

All of today’s reading is again almost word for word identical to 2 Kings. The main differences comes near the end of the reading. You may have noticed that today’s reading is kind of garbled, as if something had gotten mixed up somewhere. Isaiah tells Hezekiah he will recover from his sickness and then immediately tells Hezekiah what sign will show this to be the case. After that, at the end of today’s reading, Hezekiah asks Isaiah what sign he could look for. Peeking ahead, it looks like there is no follow-up to this statement. The version in 2 Kings is certainly more coherent. A scholar could probably use that to conclude something about the relationship between the texts.

Today’s reading also contains Hezekiah’s poem of praise following his healing. I do not think this appeared in the account in 2 Kings.

New Testament

We finish Galatians today. One thing I can say for Paul is that if you agree with his basic premise, he can be pretty persuasive. He cannot make an argument, but he can make a point. Today, when he briefly made a statement that did not refer to God or Jesus, I was even inspired by it:

Pay careful attention to your own work, for then you will get the satisfaction of a job well done, and you won’t need to compare yourself to anyone else. For we are each responsible for our own conduct.

After spending a lot of time the last few days thinking about how to best present my work to others (performance review season), this verse is a nice reminder about the principles I really like to bring to my work.

Paul closes with some words written in his very own (apparently large) handwriting. He makes one last appeal to the Galatians to resist the teachings of those who want to force circumcision and to emphasize why it is not needed.

Psalms and Proverbs

Nothing of particular note.

Reference links:

Old Testament

One thing that seems unique about Isaiah’s visions (so far in our OT readings) is the directness of God’s rule. It seems like in most of what we have read, God’s interventions have been temporary and/or indirect. In Isaiah’s vision, God will rule directly over the people. For example,

Your eyes will see the king in all his splendor,
and you will see a land that stretches into the distance.

and

There the Lord will display his glory,
the splendor of our God.

After those visions, we get an account of when the Assyrians attacked Judah. As far as I can remember, it is nearly word-to-word identical to the earlier account in Kings.

Reference links:

Old Testament

Today I am struck most by the overall structure of Isaiah, especially in today’s reading. Isaiah alternates between visions of destruction (for Jerusalem, Egypt, Assyria, complacent women, etc.) and visions of the Lord’s reconciliation with his people. Those cycles contrast relying on human strength and God’s strength implying, obviously, that the former brings destruction and the later prosperity.

In the midst of all that we read this,

The moon will be as bright as the sun, and the sun will be seven times brighter—like the light of seven days in one!

For the record, I think that would very bad.

New Testament

Paul says: Circumcision cannot make one right with God. Only faith can. Why in the world are the Galatians believing these lies? They certainly don’t match up with what Paul teaches (despite rumors they may have heard otherwise).

Paul also makes a reference to yeast that spreads through the whole batch of dough. Both the kingdom of heaven and the teachings of the Pharisees were compared to yeast in the gospels. I wonder whether Paul got the yeast imagery from the traditions about Jesus he was familiar with or if yeast was just a common analogy at the time. Since the letters of Paul were written before the gospels, if yeast were not a common analogy, we would have reason to suspect that yeast imagery was part of the early tradition surrounding Jesus.

Psalms and Proverbs

Today’s proverb is about respecting your parents.

Reference links:

Old Testament

No unifying thread today. Just a bunch of one line thoughts.

I wonder if this is where the phrase, “You’ve made your bed, so now you have to lie in it” came from:

The bed you have made is too short to lie on.
The blankets are too narrow to cover you.

Apparently it’s God who gives farmers knowledge about farming. Funny. I thought it was trial and error that developed farming techniques.

I wonder if Paul was inspired to talk about clay vessels by this verse:

How foolish can you be?
He is the Potter, and he is certainly greater than you, the clay!
Should the created thing say of the one who made it,
“He didn’t make me”?
Does a jar ever say,
“The potter who made me is stupid”?

Note however that Isaiah, unlike Paul, does not imply that the potter can use the created vessel however he wishes.

Also, various blessings and curses. Making alliances with Egypt is bad.

New Testament

Paul continues to talk about why the law existed in the first place if it is so useless now. Apparently, it was a temporary guardian. So because the law was like a guardian, the people who accept Jesus are like children of God. Or something like that.

Paul then mentioned his great concern for the former gentiles in the church. After that we get a typically Pauline bit of exegesis. Paul, as usual, stretches our credulity when he tries to use examples from the Hebrew scriptures to illustrate his point.

Today he does this by comparing people to Abraham’s two children: Isaac, the son of his wife and Ishmael, the son of his concubine. Paul states that

The first woman, Hagar, represents Mount Sinai where people received the law that enslaved them.

Right… so Hagar represents Mount Sinai and the law and, symbolically, the Jews who still follow the law. Despite the fact that by Jewish tradition it is Sarah, mother of Isaac, who is the ancestor of the Jews. In short, Paul is just taking a story about a slave woman and a free woman and tearing it away from the original context to make his point.

And people complain when atheists quote from the Bible without, they claim, providing the proper context.

Psalms and Proverbs

Don’t hang out with drunkards and gluttons.

Reference links:

Old Testament

The first part of today’s reading consists mostly of a prayer/psalm of praise for God and the judgment he will bring (both good and bad). This text further emphasizes the theme of justice for the downtrodden. Overall, this part of the reading definitely has a number of lines that I can see being brought into modern prayers.

Today’s reading also contains what I believe is a fairly well known verse that expresses a sentiment that seems to hark back to the deuteronomic vision of history (the good will prosper and the wicked suffer):

But for those who are righteous,
the way is not steep and rough.
You are a God who does what is right,
and you smooth out the path ahead of them.

As we are well aware by now, this sentiment is in direct contrast with the idea developed elsewhere, especially in Job and the New Testament, that the righteous do sometimes have a “steep and rough” path to tread. I would say that the New Testament authors, especially Paul, sometimes even go so far as to imply that being on the steep and rough path is a sign of righteousness.

After that, we switch back to Isaiah’s standard gloom and doom. The message here is that the Lord’s anger will serve to purify the Israelites and Jerusalem. Through suffering, their sin will be purged. Both this and the preceding section help me see why many Christians seem so fond of Isaiah. I had been quite confused on this point when Isaiah was mostly going on about the downfall of long gone kingdoms.

Speaking of which, the reading ends with some gloom and doom against Samaria. It does have this highly amusing bit:

What sorrow awaits the proud city of Samaria—
the glorious crown of the drunks of Israel.

Reference links:

Old Testament

After an an extended prophecy against Jerusalem, we read a prophecy that is, oddly enough, against a specific individual. Isaiah says that Shebna, the palace administrator, will lose his position to Eliakim son of Hilkiah. Both Shebna and Eliakim were mentioned back in the books of Kings. There, Eliakim is the palace administrator and Shebna the court secretary.

This means that, for once, we may have a prophecy that was actually fulfilled (although making predictions about the current political climate can hardly be called prophecy). However, the Lord’s hurling away of Shebna seems to have been merely a demotion from palace administrator to court secretary which does not seem as dramatic as Isaiah makes it sound.

This is followed by a long prophecy against Tyre and a prophecy about the destruction of the earth. When the earth is destroyed, God will hand out punishment and rule on Mount Zion.

Now, I know we haven’t gotten to Daniel or Revelations yet, but from what little I know of them, this mini-apocalypse of Isaiah seems much more tame. Which is to say, there is nothing which causes me to suspect the author was writing this while on drugs. 

Side musings: Given that most of Isaiah’s prophecies did not come true, why were they included in the Bible? Maybe those choosing the canon thought they would still come true. Maybe they thought some of them had come true. Maybe they interpreted the prophecies symbolically.

But maybe something else is going on. Maybe Isaiah was included because of the twist he gave to the story of Israel. Isaiah, in addition to emphasizing the idea of God’s justice, also emphasized the idea of God’s universality. This was something that had been largely absent from the other writings that were contemporary with Isaiah in subject or composition. Isaiah’s vision of a God who punishes all nations, not just the Israelites, was probably a welcome take on the past for those living in a world where the idea of Yahweh as the most powerful tribal God no longer cut it.

Maybe what’s important about Isaiah isn’t its relationship to actual historical events, it is it’s relationship to the evolving Jewish understanding of their God.

New Testament

Paul recounts some of his common themes: the inadequacy of the law for making one right with law, crucifixion of the self, reception of the Holy Spirit through faith, the adoption of believers as children of Abraham.

Psalms and Proverbs

Nothing of particular note.

Reference links:

Old Testament

Isaiah predicts more doom and gloom. Today mostly about Egypt and Ethiopia and Babylon, plus some ambiguous messages about other places.

The most exciting part of today’s reading is the bit where Isaiah wanders around naked to make a point:

In the year when King Sargon of Assyria sent his commander in chief to capture the Philistine city of Ashdod, the Lord told Isaiah son of Amoz, “Take off the burlap you have been wearing, and remove your sandals.” Isaiah did as he was told and walked around naked and barefoot.

Then the Lord said, “My servant Isaiah has been walking around naked and barefoot for the last three years. This is a sign—a symbol of the terrible troubles I will bring upon Egypt and Ethiopia. For the king of Assyria will take away the Egyptians and Ethiopians as prisoners. He will make them walk naked and barefoot, both young and old, their buttocks bared, to the shame of Egypt.

New Testament

Paul’s version of his relationship with the folks in Jerusalem is distinctly different from that of Acts. In particular, Paul describes himself as only having briefly interacted with the leadership in Jerusalem until after he has been preaching for 14 years. Acts, on the other hand, made a big deal of how Paul, right after his conversion, met the apostles and then went around with them.

Acts also makes it sound like Barnabas already had an established reputation with the Jerusalem church while Paul implies that Barnabas was accepted by the apostles in Jerusalem later. While some of these discrepancies could be explained by different perspectives, it is hard to accept these two accounts as consistent.

Paul emphasizes his vision of Christianity’s independence from Jewish law. Not only was following Jewish law unnecessary for those who had come to believe in Christ it was, in some circumstances, hypocritical. To me, Paul’s discussion of the Jewish law in today’s reading just serves to emphasize the diversity of early Christianity. In particular,

But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong. When he first arrived, he ate with the Gentile Christians, who were not circumcised. But afterward, when some friends of James came, Peter wouldn’t eat with the Gentiles anymore. He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. As a result, other Jewish Christians followed Peter’s hypocrisy, and even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.

Paul paints this incident as an example of clear hypocrisy and giving in to fear on Peter’s, but the fact that so many prominent people followed this alternate view point makes me think the case was not as cut and dry as Paul wants his readers to think. When modern folks talk about getting back to the true roots of Christianity, they should realize that even the early Christians had a diverse set of beliefs.

Psalms and Proverbs

A proverb praising discipline of children, particularly of the physical sort.