Tonight I took my Genesis-Ruth (Hebrew) test. This is my first of the three Old Testament classes I'll take this year. The "(Hebrew)" is to signify that I'm taking it with an understanding of the original language.
The final was interesting. 6 short answer essay questions and 3 long essay questions. One of the long essays was quite interesting to me.
The teacher opened the first day of the semester arguing (correctly) that it is unfortunate that so many people paint the picture of the Old Testament God as one of wrath, anger and war, and the New Testament God as one of grace, peace and love. He argued that this dichotomy as unfair to the Scripture (which I agree with).
So, the last essay question of the test was simply this.
Show how each book from Genesis to Ruth shows God as a gracious, working to reverse the effects of the fall and reconcile all people to himself. Use specific examples from those texts themselves to support your arguments.
Being that this test was closed book, and no Bible was allowed, the using texts parts became interesting for me.
Ultimately, I just wondered what influences have placed this dichotomy of the two separate Gods of the OT and NT upon our culture and if anyone has anything to chime in on the topic.
As for me, I'm just happy to have the test completed and mailed away.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Interesting question and topic. I would agree that to the "general populace" (read laymen or even less knowledgeable), the description of the differences between the old and new testaments is pretty common. So common that, too many, the old testament has less relevance, or even rejection, since the descriptions of an angry, punishing God so contradict the descriptions of a loving God in the New Testament. I'm guilty of those "assumptions" as well as are so many, to the point that the Old Testament seems like a history text, and not something to be studied as much as the New Testament.
Was this a Hebrew exegesis class?
I would be curious to see what exactly you described as a "gracious" act?
Lets be honest, God was interactive and proactive in the OT and negative acts were the result of His participation. In my perspective I see a God who needed to intervene. In some ways, this was God's way of controlling the situation. If you were not obedient, you better watch out. Today I still wish God operated the way He did in the OT, which probably means I would be dead.
I understand where your professor is going with this "gracious" God idea, but I do not think it is necessary. In the Torah especially, there is a progression of the God character being developed in relation to His creation. Essentially, the Torah is a narrative of God. The Torah has an introduction, rising action, conflict, climax, and resolution. At times in the Torah I just do not IMMEDIATELY see a gracious God and that is okay. From Genesis 1 to the Psalms we see His creation completely killing itself. The creation is moving farther and farther away from perfection to imperfection.
My point: Yes God is gracious. HOWEVER there are many accounts that describes a God who destroys. But this does not mean God is not gracious if He is immediately doing His wrath. If God is punishing in the present, typically God has purpose for the future.
Sorry. Last point. I just do not think we should overcompensate who God is in the OT. If God is killing, He is killing. In some miracle way, we should not develop a methodology to somehow articulate a gracious God. It is like trying to compliment a fat kid, that he/she is skinny. No...really Timmy you are skinny.
Instead of highlighting the gracious acts of God, I think we need to highlight the entire OT account as a whole and let that demonstrate a God who is gracious. If we are trying to find gracious acts of God in the OT, it is like we are kind of embarrassed of the "other" acts of God. Well God did this here, but lets center our attention on what God did here. Lets just let God be who He is in the text's He has given us.
Anyways.....great discussion, great topic, and great thought provoking ideas.
Jeremy,
Per your words:
"Instead of highlighting the gracious acts of God, I think we need to highlight the entire OT account as a whole and let that demonstrate a God who is gracious."
I wonder how anyone can come to the conclusion that God is a gracious God IF they cannot point to any instances in which God proves he is such. If God is gracious than it should be expected that he acts in grace, and therefore that we can point to those occurances.
If God is gracious and people are not seeing proof of this in the scriptures (and perhaps rightly so because the filter we read through today is much different than thousands of years ago), then I see it as absolutely necessary to highlight, or point out, those instances.
I am tracking with you. I am 100% in agreement with pointing to the gracious acts of God. Although I am suggesting we not only communicate these gracious acts. We also communicate the non-gracious acts.
God instructed in the Ten Commandments: Thou shall not kill.
Well, God kills 70,000 innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1 Chronicles 21). God also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites can live there. He orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the stealing of all of value (Deuteronomy 3). He orders another attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses” (Joshua 6). In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When they wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, kidnap her and forcibly rape her and make her your wife! Many accounts in the Old Testament has God killing somebody. In 2 Kings 10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers of a different god in their very own church! In total God kills just about 400,000 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered.
These accounts recorded in the OT scriptures are scared and holy too. So in a sense we need to be not only aware, but living in a tension of what God has done in the OT. Yes God is gracious, but God had some heavy negative participation within the OT account that we as His followers need to theologically, rationally, and logically account for.
I do not know.....something to think about. Cheers! Gosh isn't theology so much fun???
Jer,
Gotcha. Understand what you're saying completely....I only want to add this:
My only point was that it actually is necessary to to highlight God's graciousness because it is not as easily seen or is often misunderstood.
Of course, it is sacred, the good and the bad. I agree, people need to learn about the ebb and flow of the entire OT, and the entire character of who God is. But, I cannot learn the whole without looking at the parts. God's grace is one of those parts. So, I think it is absolutely legitimate and necessary that the professor would chose to prepare future teachers of the scripture with a discussion on God's grace in the OT (as well as a discussion on his wrath).
Muy Bueno. It is clear as mud. I just wrongly interpreted the question as the professor only wanting to focus on the gracious acts to cover up the non gracious acts. Far too many times I have seen a teacher focus on only the grace of God. Then, a few years later the student leaves youth group feeling hijacked and deceived because he or she did not realize that this gracious God destroy thousands and thousands of people.
Now, I understand the professors intentionality. He was basically wanting his students to learn how to extrapolate a gracious truth in the midst of the destruction.
Got it. Thanks for taking the time to re-communicate the intentionality.
I'm glad to see that my wife could clarify for me without even having the discussion with me :)
It is true, this professor was not saying that we should only find the God of the OT as a God of grace. He was not trying to avoid the aspects of God's anger, wrath and judgment. He simply wanted to counter the view that contrasts the God of grace found in the NT with the God of anger often perceived of the OT.
We were not expected to weight acts against each other, but were expected to be able to find God's grace in each of the books mentioned. Some of these may have been reading the grace into the acts, but were not meant to be done in a way that grace trumped the acts themselves.
Got ya! Totally makes sense. I was really reading into the question.
Wow, Jeremy, that argument would have been so much more fun had it been face to face. I miss you guys. Especially your wife...she's the best!
Post a Comment