Targuman Rotating Header Image

Bible

In Pennsylvania it’s the year of the Bible

I guess I have been a little more absorbed in Penn State matters than I realized, because somehow I missed this little tidbit. On January 24 our General Assembly unanimously passed House Resolution 535 declaring this year the “Year of the Bible” in PA. Needless to say, atheists reacted. This evening I received the letter from our bishop, Nathan Baxter, which brought this and the atheist’s billboard to my attention. I think his letter to be worth repeating. This is the billboard to which +Nathan refers:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
Recently the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed Resolution 535 proclaiming 2012 the “Year of the Bible”. In some circles of our community this has been very controversial.  One of the most active protests has been made by American Atheists and Pennsylvania Non-Believers. Among their points of contention is that the Bible is the primary source of validation for all the major social ills of our history. To dramatize this point they hired a billboard dominated by a depiction of a very negroid featured black man wearing a large neck manacle, with the Biblical text “slaves obey your masters” in smaller print. The billboard was in a predominantly African-American community in Harrisburg. This caused another type of protest by citizens of that community and the city (my op-ed, while not printed by the newspaper, is available here).

 

A representative from the American Atheists was interviewed shortly thereafter on local Public Television, and his anger with Christianity and the Bible was palpable.  While his interpretation of the scripture texts was without regard for or knowledge of context, I was amazed that his literal knowledge of scripture seemed equal to persons who have been nurtured in a fundamentalist tradition. His vitriolic reaction to callers who differed with him, sometimes devolving into personal attacks, caused the host to question his behavior.  As the conversation continued it was revealed that he had indeed grown up in a very fundamentalist, literal Christian tradition and in an unguarded moment intimated something of the hurt to him and his family.

 

I have no question that the best of our democracy, the inspiration for our rich artistic and cultural life, and also the historic movements to correct social and political injustices (which were often based upon misuse of scripture), have all been directly rooted in the Bible and Jewish and Christian Faiths.  The Founding Fathers, even those who were Deists or non-practicing Christians, clearly found the Holy Scriptures a base of inspiration for their work.  Like Jefferson regarding slavery, they also often found themselves conflicted between their political values and the Judeo-Christian values they sought to exploit in the political and economic compromises made to establish the Constitution. Besides the historic record of the Bible and our particular religious history as the inspiration for our democracy, there are independent sources such as Alexis de Tocqueville, the young French researcher who visited and wrote about the phenomenon of American Democracy. I doubt that there would be the strength of our democracy without the religious heritage which so greatly influenced our ideals, including a call to respect the religious faith (or non-faith) of others.

 

Having said the above, there is no question that the misuse of religion, particularly Christianity, has deeply hurt and even destroyed many.  As I listened to the angry, bitter representative of American Atheists, my heart hurt for the pain he felt, the betrayal he clearly experienced and his estrangement from the God with whom he continues to invest his life’s energy to deny and debase. But his anger, and that of many, is more rightly directed to us…the Christian Community.  Whether progressive or conservative, fundamentalist, evangelical or mainline—whatever our doctrine or tradition, in our efforts to “Love God with all our heart mind and strength” (cf. Mark 12.30) we too often have not Loved or shown a Godly respect for our neighbor.  I believe the most difficult promise we make in the Baptismal Covenant is “…respecting the dignity of every human being.”  This is especially true within our denominations and congregational communities.  When we differ on theological or political views how do we treat one another in our differing?  When persons are struggling with conflicts of Faith and their personal experience or need, do they sense from us our judgment or grace? Do we know how to speak truth with Love, knowing that Love is the only truth—for it instructs all other truths? Jesus’ chief command for the Christian community is found in John 15: “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another…by this shall the world know you are my disciples because you have love one for another.”  Love (or the Greek word “agape”) does not mean agreement with one another or even warm affection for one another. It does mean seeing the other as someone loved by God; and that truth informs and shapes the character of life, even our conflicts, in Christian community.  Without it we destroy one another, the integrity of the Church, and create spiritually wounded souls who, in their pain and anger, may never be reconciled again to the God of Love— until, I pray, they come to the nearer presence of God, who takes away not only the sins of the world but also the sins inflicted by the Church.

+Nathan

 

Was the Northern Kingdom Deviant? | Biblical Archaeology Review

BAR has just published a nice little piece by my former grad assistant Jonathan Greer. Do go and give it a read! (Jim will appreciate the presence of the word “deviant” in the title.)

Dr. JG

Looking sharp, JG!

Archaeologically speaking, very little is known of the ancient Israelite cult as it was practiced by the kings and priests of Biblical Israel. While evidence for “folk religion” e.g., the ubiquitous pillar figurines is well known, evidence of royal or elite religion is harder to come by. One reason for this is that the center of official Israelite religion, at least according to the Bible, was Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, a site that cannot be excavated in the current political climate.

The Jerusalem Temple was not ancient Israel’s only royal sanctuary, however. According to the Bible 1 Kings 12, the infamous Jeroboam, first king of the northern kingdom of Israel, established a sanctuary at Dan intended to rival the Temple in Jerusalem. Over the past four decades, archaeologists working at Tel Dan, especially the late Avraham Biran,a have uncovered a treasure trove of cultic material from the site’s so-called “sacred precinct.”

via Archaeological Views: Cultic Practices at Tel Dan—Was the Northern Kingdom Deviant? | Biblical Archaeology Review | Bible History Articles.

 

International SBL in Amsterdam

I am in late in posting the news, but my paper has been accepted for the International SBL conference this summer in Amsterdam. No one will be surprised to know that my paper is on Targum Ruth.

The title character of the book of Ruth has been viewed historically as everything from the paragon of a proselyte to a marginal figure who is ultimately nothing more than a pawn used by Naomi and, more lasciviously, by Boaz to attain their own ends. The Targum of Ruth works within the limits of its genre, rendering the text into Aramaic while subtly transforming the character of Ruth through the addition of bits of information and dialogue.

This paper will examine how the Targumist  has transformed the character of Ruth, providing her with a lineage of her own, a dramatic confirmation of conversion, and making her a rabbinic exemplar.

 

Arise, shine!

Cross at Sunrise

Isa. 60:1 Arise, shine; for your light has come,

and the glory of the LORD has risen upon you.

2 For darkness shall cover the earth,

and thick darkness the peoples;

but the LORD will arise upon you,

and his glory will appear over you.

 

“God is not in this classroom”

This is a paper presented at the 2006 SBL. I am negligent in preparing it for a volume on teaching the Bible in a secular context. I thought I would repost it here now in hopes that a few more folks might offer their thoughts and comments that I may incorporate into the final product. There is a wide range of experience out there and I think this would be a much stronger work with your contributions.

“God is Not in this Classroom” or Reading the Bible in a Secular Context

Sight

Description: Teaching biblical literature in a secular Liberal Arts environment requires allowing the texts to speak for themselves, so that students might hear what the texts have to say (which may not necessarily be what we want to hear). This is easier said than done since we must attempt to leave religious convictions, traditions, and specific agendas behind. At the same time, we must also recognize that we will not always be able to avoid our own historical context and bias. In light of these challenges and through my eight years experience as a Christian teaching courses in a Jewish Studies program at a secular university I have developed methods (and discarded others) for teaching the Hebrew Bible that include reading the texts critically as literary and historical sources while salting the course with Jewish, Christian, Islamic, and other interpretations. The goal is to use the potential handicaps of preconceived ideas and convictions as gateways into the material. God may well be in the classroom and miracles may well occur, but the students know that they have to determine that for themselves.

When I originally proposed this paper, as you can see from the description I intended to share with you how I sprinkled my courses on the Hebrew Bible with readings of various readings of the text. Next semester I will be teaching Genesis, for example, and in that course we will being by reading the biblical text itself and then read Bonhoeffer’s little work on creation. When we get to Noah we will read the Genesis Apocryphon and when we get to the story of Tamar we will look at a feminist reading of the text (and make oblique references to The Red Tent). But I think this approach is fairly self-evident, that by showing students multiple readings of the same or similar text they will begin to see the challenges and promise of reading a text that is so ancient and yet still so relevant to so many. I also realized, as I surveyed the field and looked at the other proposals for today, that this is an approach that many have found useful and I did not want to burden you with my rendition of this theme.

It seems that the sort of strategies most often employed in teaching the Bible in a secular liberal arts context involve teaching the Bible as something, e.g., “The Bible as Literature,” “The Bible as History.” Or we might provide “readings” of the Bible, such as a feminist, liberationist, modern, etc. Please note, this is not a criticism per se, these are legitimate and useful strategies and that I regularly employ, yet each of these methods is an attempt to read the biblical text as something other than it is.

(more…)