The Dreamcatcher

Chapters 40-41:

These passages could be called "The Dreamcatcher" as we see Joseph sharing God's meaning for dreams: first the Pharoah's cupbearer and his baker; then for the Pharoah himself. The Pharoah was so impressed by this man of God that he made him second-in-command for all of Egypt.
Joseph implemented a plan to save food from the seven good years to the nation (Egypt) would be able to survive the following seven years of famine. Our small groups discussed how faith and God's Spirit can guide us through turmoil and challenges.
For next time, continuing reading beyond chapter 41, to the conclusion of the story of Joseph. We will study the culmination of events leading to his reunion with his family, and the revealing of God's greater plan.

The Story of Joseph

These are notes from Old Testament class, Sunday, November 25, 2007

We examined the early life of Joseph, noting his tattle-tailing on his brothers, his royal coat, and his dreams about his superiority over his brothers and his parents which caused great jealousy and hatred towards him. The brothers plotted to kill him but Reuben, the eldest, persuaded them to put Joseph in a pit instead. Reuben planned to rescue his brother and return him to his father, but his brothers sold Joseph into slavery. Several questions were discussed in small groups, including "In what ways is the soul of humanity it a pit?"

Please continue reading the story of Joseph in Genesis for further discussion next week.

Harrell

Twins, Part II

This wonderful painting depicts a very human drama in Genesis 27. Young Jacob, disguised in goat skins, trembles at the breast of his father as he engages in an act of deceit. Rebekah lurks outside the tent -- is she praying to God, or hoping her scheme will succeed? Isaac wears uncertainty on his face. He does not trust his touch, nor his ears, nor his eyes. But when Jacob leans close for a kiss, Isaac smells the outdoors on his clothing -- garb belonging to brother Esau, whom Jacob is impersonating. Finally convinced, Isaac gives his blessing.

The blessing differs from the birthright. The birthright has to do with wealth. Jacob has already taken advantage of Esau's hunger to get this, the greater and better portion of his father's estate. The blessing he seeks will give him a kind of endorsement as the head of the family; it is a conferring of the mantle of leadership. In taking this Jacob supplants Esau a second, and more painful, time. Now, not only his substance, but his place, are taken by his brother. That this is the more serious of the two dealings can be seen both in Isaac's violent trembling in learning of his error, and in Esau's palpable despair.

Read through chapter 33 for an account of the brother's lives after these events. We wondered if Jacob got what he expected. Certainly he himself experienced injustice in the household of his uncle Laban. After years of toil he is a successful man, with many children and much wealth; but the cost of attaining it has been a lot of frustration and fear. In the mean time Esau has moved on and is, himself, becoming a powerful and successful man.

In the midst of all this "life", full of human failing, passion, and redemption, God appears twice to Jacob. The first, early in his life, affirms God's covenant promise made to Jacob's grandfather. Later, as Jacob prepares to meet his brother, Jacob wrestles with an angel, is injured, and is given a new name and a new identity, "Israel". When Jacob and Esau finally meet again, they embrace as true brothers. Time has probably not healed the wounds, but perhaps the fulness of life and the greater will of God have 'supplanted' human failing.

How did God work through Isaac and Esau's weakness; in Rebekah's scheming; in Jacob's helpless passions and fear-driven life? The New Testament provides a perspective for us, if our lives feel like theirs: "All things work together for good for those who love God and are called according to his purpose." (Romans 8:28)

For this week's class on November 25, please read Genesis 37-41, the first part of the tale of Joseph.

Twins

This week we began a two-week unit on Esau and Jacob. Read Genesis chapters 25-36 for an account of these twin brothers.

The tale of these twins is evocative. There is much plausible family dynamic and disfunction -- this feels very human and very real. We chose an inductive approach to this episode by asking a couple of questions: 1) Did you ever do anything shortsighted? If so, what was it, what were the consequences to you, and what did you learn? 2) Have you ever been taken advantage of by anyone -- or yourself taken advantage of another? If so, how, what were the consequences to you, and what did you learn?

Esau and Jacob would be recognized today as fraternal twins, since they are so different in appearance and temperment. Much is made of Esau's red hair, preference for red food, and even his passionate disposition. He is the kind of person who would quickly garner a nickname like 'Red'. He is also called 'Edom' which means 'red' and is a reference to the nation ascribed to his lineage -- a country known by it's prominant red rock and landscape. Jacob emerges from the womb holding on to Esau's heel, so he is given a name which means 'supplanter'. He seems born to trip others.

Esau's birthright was his as the first born. This means he should receive the greater and better portion of his father's estate. Why would he trade this for a bowl of stew? I related how famished I felt after a couple of days backpacking in poor weather. Wet, worn out, stressed by storms and cranky moose, nothing sounded so good to me as a steaming pot of lentil stew. If you've ever been in a state of trembling, starving exhaustion you might not care about anything but feeling fed, either. But Jacob certainly did take advantage of his brother; a kinder person would have just fed him, eh?

For next week finish reading through chapter 36. This covers the incident wherein Jacob, with his mother's help, steals Esau's blessing, as well, and all that comes of this. We will ponder what happens in each brother's life, try to see how God worked through this very human circumstance, and reflect on the story's meaning for ourselves.

Thanks for a great class & hope to see you Sunday morning, 10:00 a.m. in the sanctuary.

PDTA

Abraham and Isaac

These are notes from our class of Sunday, November 4.

We had a brief discussion on Abraham as a prophet and noted that this concept of prophet was a Northern Kingdom position, where the prophet not the priest was accredited representative of the Lord.

We discussed the exile of Hagar and Ishmael and the treaty with Abimilech. Related issues included the role of women and the justification of slavery.

The heart of the lesson was the Abraham/Isaac sacrifice story. We discussed two aspects of the story:

1. God moves in mysterious ways and sometimes we cannot initially understand them. Ultimately God's will is found to be consistent with the purest emotions planted in the human soul.
2. Message is that only an all-out religion is supremely real. Sooner or later each of us will be challenged with a situation where one must decide whether he/she is willing to pay the utmost price for what conscience compells one to do. Small group discussions focused on this issue.

Notes by Harrell Guard

Sodom and Gomorrah Revisited

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is worth a fresh look. What did the story mean in it's own context, and to Jesus? Here would be a good place to begin:


“Go . . . to the lost sheep of Israel. As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff: for the worker is worth his keep. Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.”

Jesus, Matthew 10:6-15

Jesus interpreted the story in the context of an ethic and duty of providing hospitality to strangers, especially those bearing a message from God. In Genesis 18-19, we see a clear contrast between Abraham's and Lot's behavior, and that of the people of the condemned cities. Abraham rushed out to meet and welcome the stranger guests, pleading with them, in good form, to take rest, comfort, and food within his tent. In that welcoming place he and his wife, Sarai, received good news from God that they would, after all, become parents, and God's promise would be fulfilled. Lot likewise welcomed the guests, though in a setting where his protection of them was paramount. Both Abraham and Lot fulfilled their duty as hosts, and pleased God. Jesus, likewise, is prepared to be pleased with people who receive his messengers, and displeased in the extreme toward those who, because of their hard hearts, reject them and God's good news.

Jesus also held up this expectation of providing hospitality in Matthew 25 -- "I was a stranger, and you welcomed me." Such who do so are ushered into the joy of their master; those who refused such hospitality are condemned.

It is clear that ideas of sex are very different in Genesis 19. The men of the city wanted to rape the guests of Lot, not because they were homosexual, but to demonstrate their contempt. In is fact a brutal reality that men in some cultures would employ their sexual capabilities as a weapon of humiliation, forcing, in effect, a man to take the part of a mere woman.

Yes, a mere woman. I think we miss this disconnect from Biblical culture: women were property. This is clear in the ten commandments, where men are ordered not to covet anything belonging to their neighbor -- such things as beasts of burden, and wives. This explains why Lot felt it better to offer his girls to the men than to release his guests from his protection. Girls and women simply did not have the same human value as men, and could be seen as dispensable. In our time Lot's behavior would be considered abusive; certainly when he fathers his own grandchildren at the end of Genesis 19 he would be found guilty, or should be, in our time and culture.

So here is another example, I think, of a severe mistake we can make if we automatically, without reflection, view an ancient story through the lense of our own culture. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah, made to be the perfect proof text against homosexuality, isn't about homosexuality. It is about God's expectation that we, too, will welcome strangers in our midst, treat them with respect, and be open to what God may say to us.


Perhaps Hebrews 13:2 provides a better application for us: “Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it.”

The Tower of Babel

Here are class notes from Sunday, October 21:

We studied the new rules (Noah's law) following the flood:

1) "Golden Age", when man and beast lived in harmony, was over.
2) Meat was now available for food BUT blood was NOT.
3) A divine prohibition against taking human life

SUMMARY: It is OK for animals to be killed for food (no blood) BUT human life is sacred.

We also examined the covenant God made with his world: "No more elimination of all life by flood" which was unconditional: no requirement is laid on mankind. The sing of the covenant was the rain BOW (weapon) put in the clouds.

The last days of Noah as a farmer and vinegrower was symbolic since his name means "one who settles down". In his drunken stupor he was belittled by his youngest son. Ham was cursed for his sin with his children being made slaves.

We also examined Noah's descendants and noted that the various nations (tribes) were the later inhabitants of the Fertile Crescent area, with Nimrod (Ham's descendant) being the probable founder of Babel. Each had their own language.

The Babel Tower story is a retelling of the dispersion (probably from a priestly viewpoint) that affirms God's role in the scattering.

-- Harrell

Noah and the Flood

The following notes are from Harrell's presentation and class discussion on Sunday, October 14.

The time from Seth's birth to that of Noah was noted with the explanation that much of the Old Testament is a documentation of the Jewish heritage.

A brief discussion of the "sons of gods" marrying the "daughters of men" noting possible interpretations: Angels (sons of gods), the Greek view (gods themselves) as recorded in the Homeric Epics. It was suggested that this reference had no relation to the Noah story other than the resulting sins faced retribution, unlike the Greek version whre the gods simply returned to their Olympus.

The Gilgamesh Epic (Sumerian version -- much older than the Biblical version) tells a similar story to Noah and the ark. The flood was probably not world-wide (not enough available water) but was confined to Tigris/Euphrates Valley (which was THE!! world to that civilization.) The question of how many species of animals were loaded on the ark is limited in terms of space, for the animals and for the food and water and the time it would have taken to load very large numbers. The actual species were probably those in their culture (plus "clean" animals: three pairs for breeding and one for sacrifice).

Some thoughts for consideration: 1. What are our "giants" which create fear in our hearts? 2. If the ark is a symbol of God's grace (salvation for the remnant), how big does our "ark" need to be (reaching out to those in need)?

Part II: In the Garden -- The Problem of Sin

Last week we studied Genesis chapters 3 and 4.

We studied an early painting depicting salvation history from the time of Adam and Eve to the beginning of the organized church. That painting appears below, in the last entry “In the Garden”.

The painting represents the essential experience of human beings and explains why we live in a state of separation from God and happiness. The serpent is depicted as a strange half-man/half-snake with horns, lurking in the tree of knowledge of good and evil. He definitely looks crafty, creepy, and evil even to my modern eye.

It is interesting to be aware that the serpent has been represented in different visual ways by various people. Interpreting the word rendered “crafty” in the beginning of Genesis chapter 3 as “beautiful” prompted some artists to visualize this entity as an angelic being. Others might picture the serpent more like a dragon. It is not clear, in context, that the serpent is the devil, or Satan, though this has been inferred by many.

Why this evil thing is in the garden raises theological questions, as a class member pointed out. If God is sovereign, why is there an evil entity in paradise? One would think God must be responsible. But then, if God is responsible, why are people accountable? We’ll certainly work on this apparent incongruency in the future.

We used Steig’s poem referring to the “crunch” Adam would love as an ironic reference to the grave consequences of the first couple’s and the serpent’s disobedience to God. The “crunch” for the serpent was to be consigned to life crawling on his belly, in the dust. This accounts for the existence and, somewhat, of the perceived meaning of snakes, which are often offensive to women (and a little creepy to certain pastors, too). Do you think these reptiles deserve their bad reputation?

The “crunch” for Eve gives meaning for the pain women experience in childbirth. We know in ancient times that having children was an even riskier business than now. Yet then as now human beings have a deep, primal urge to have children, despite the risk and pain. This account of how people continue to live and behave seems on the mark. Wouldn’t it be great if having kids didn’t hurt so much? And what is it in us that allows us to forget all that and jump back in if we’ve experienced that pain? How does this relate to how we understand God’s love for us -- children who cause our Creator pain?

Adam gets sent to work. ‘Nuff said. Ouch.

Both Adam and Eve are walking, forlornly, toward a grim-reaper figure (death) who sits at the mouth of a cave leading to a very hot place. In this the painter pretty clearly illustrates a belief that sin leads to death and eternal suffering. This is definitely a later Christian interpretation of death and it’s consequences and goes beyond the Genesis story. We did not get into concepts of hell this time, but probably will get back to this at some point.

At the same time, the painting depicts Adam and Eve stumbling away from Eden, while an angel with a flaming sword prods their backsides. I noted how this angel looks an awful lot like another one painted to represent the serpent. It’s also kind of interesting, from an archetypal point of view, that, but for the wings, the angel rather resembles a Jedi knight with a light sabre. I hadn’t thought of a relationship between our conceptions of angels and the heroes of Star Wars before, but there might be something implicit there. Speaking of Obi Wan Kenobi, who died at the hands of evil Darth Vader and came back . . .

The upper left corner of the painting shows the crucifixion of Christ, with two thieves on either side. We see this scene as through a window, and it is placed up in the branches of the tree of knowledge. I think the painter wanted to illustrate God’s eternal plan and provision -- as in Adam all would die, so in Christ all would live (Romans). One of our class members mentioned the possibility that Adam and Eve, dressed in skins of animals, first experienced the grace of innocent shed blood. The painter might appreciate that additional interpretation within his “picture” of salvation.

Finally, the small additional scene in the upper right of the painting reveals the painter’s understanding of what needs to be done in light of everything else pictured. It is a scene of the baptism of a baby. No doubt this painter believed that the consequence of Adam and Eve’s disobedience is the problem of original sin, that God’s provision for salvation is the sacrifice of Christ, and so babies born in original sin must, as soon as possible, receive the grace of Christ through baptism. This is not our doctrine in the United Methodist Church, as noted previously. What would you have painted up in that corner, as representing what we must now do, in light of Christ’s sacrifice?

I think this painting presents some very interesting images, and some interesting views about what the story of Adam and Eve means. I see this artwork, also, as an example of what we all do: see the meaning of Biblical texts through our own personal, culturally conditioned “lenses”.

A study of these chapters would not be complete until we ask our personal questions:

1. What does this story tell YOU about God?
2. What does this story tell You about YOU?
3. What does this story tell you about your relationship with God?

Harrell Guard will be your teacher this week, Sunday, October 14. Read Genesis chapters 6-9, the saga of Noah and the flood.

In the Garden: the Problem of Sin

This week's lesson focused on Genesis chapter 3 and the disobedience of Adam and Eve.
We discussed various views of sin: 1) deviation from what is good 2) defiance toward God (rebelliousness) 3) the sinner's inner state (intentional badness) 4) ethical aspects (to be evil or wicked) 5) the terrible results of sin (trouble and sorrow) 6) sin as denoting guilt.

The serious of sin is separation from God. Oneness with God ws conceived as the sole source of well-being, and that apart from God people are lost sinners, unable to save themselves or find true happiness.

We reviewed the doctrine of original sin from St. Paul to St. Augustine to John Calvin. St. Paul, in Romans, gave a theological basis for sin in his observation that sin came to all people through one man, Adam, and righteousness is offered to all people through one man, Jesus Christ. St. Augustine instilled the idea of "original sin" in traditional beliefs, which teaches that even babies are born with the fatal infliction of sin and will go to hell if not baptized. Many people still believe this, though the doctrine is greatly challenged especially in Protestantism. However, John Calvin, a Swedish theologian and one of the founding personalities of what became the Presbyterian church, had strong opinions on this and insisted, upon threat of torture and death, that people agree with him.

We divided into small discussion groups and focused on three questions: 1) What is your definition of sin? 2) What do you believe about Adam's sin staining your soul at birth? 3) If there is "original sin", what does that mean for unbaptized babies?

The United Methodist Church views sin as a problem of will. Wesley described our weakness as will as a "bent toward sinning". Children are seen as born in grace and innocent of wrongdoing -- though in growing up will need to deal with this "bent" in themselves. The United Methodist Church practices baptism of infants as an affirmation of their place in God's family, the Church. When Jesus declared, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God" he was speaking of very small children (paidia) whom we would consider infants, wobblers, and toddlers.

For next week, please read Genesis, chapter 4. We will continue our discussion of sin in the context of the meaning of Genesis 3 and 4. Thanks for another great class & see you here or at St. Paul's UMC, 1730 St. Clair, at 10:00 Sunday October 7.

Harrell and Dan

Class Notes from September 23

As we've studied two creation stories in Genesis chapters 1 and 2, we identified several common themes: God created cosmos (order) out of chaos, implying the universe has both design and meaning; human beings are created by God and given the responsibility of "tending" the earth; God has imposed limits on human life: God is God, and we are not!

Some obvious differences between the two stories are: order of created things -- for instance, in the first story people are created last, and in the second, people are created prior to the making of the garden; setting -- the first is global, the second is specific to what we now know as the Fertile Crescent; time reference -- the first stages creation in six days, with a seventh for rest, implying the Sabbath is a necessary component of God's order of life for people, while the second does not refer to this. Also, a little observation will note that God is referred to differently in each story -- in the first, "God", in the second, "The Lord God", or Yahweh and Elohim, respectively, indicating different ancient sources and conceptions of God.

We spent some time in small discussion groups with three questions about creation story 1: What does the story tell you about God? What does the story tell you about you? What does the story tell you about your relationship with God? Some input from the groups included the observation that we can know God even though we cannot fully understand God; and that God is "Sovereign", a great word and a concept worth further contemplation.

Next week's assignment is to read on through Genesis, chapter 3. We will take on the rest of creation story 2, which leads us to ponder the question of sin. Again, if we can read this in two separate versions that will be a plus. Harrell will lead our discussion this Sunday, September 30.

Thanks for your participation, whether you are with us in person or checking in on line!

Four Concepts for Reference

Here are four interesting concepts to keep in mind as we study Scripture:

1. FACT and TRUTH. The idea is that fact does not necessarily convey meaning. Since the enlightenment "modern" folks tend to equate fact with truth . . . that is, something cannot be true unless it is factual. Yet there is also a way of knowing "truth", or meaning, through story, such as Jesus' parables, which are not factual accounts. The equation of fact and truth is a fairly recent idea in Western culture. A lot of folks are recognizing that this idea, much taken for granted, can present us with some problems in taking the Bible stories for themselves.

2. SCIENTIFIC and MYTHIC is another comparison getting at this idea. Before the Enlightenment, just a couple hundred years ago, folks "knew" truth through what is referred to as "mythos". The word "myth" is somewhat contaminated by modern, logical thinking, so that we might think a "myth", since it isn't factual, cannot be "true". Myths, in the wider timeline of our history, provide stories and frameworks for understanding the meaning of life. A "mythos" is a framework for interpreting reality, often with a central story. What, for example, is the central story for the Jewish people? I would think it is the Exodus story. What is the central story for Christians? Orthodox Christianity would probably hold up the story of Jesus Christ as that which gives meaning to everything -- the eternal Creator incarnate in human flesh, and his sacrifice and resurrection. Of course most modern Christians would also find it essential to hold that our particular mythology is also factual, or it has no meaning. Post-modern seekers would question that requirement, or perhaps not worry about it so much as we have become accustomed to doing. Now we know that science deals with fact. Can science prove God's existence and intent? I think many modern Christians believe it is only a matter of time before we can empirically demonstrate the factual reality of our beliefs. Perhaps so, but I think we still need "mythos" as a way of knowing and giving meaning, especially in light of the amazing revelations given to us through scientific study.

3. COSMOLOGY and CULTURE are concepts vital to understanding Bible stories in their contexts.
Cosmology refers to a person's understanding of the "cosmos" -- that is, how the universe is organized. Cosmos infers order of some kind. For example, the creation stories depict God making a cosmos out of chaos. The physical description of the cosmos in the creation stories reflects a common ancient perspective, which, thanks to telescopes and space probes, we know is completely innaccurate. Yet that description, not factual, depicts profound meaning: that God is creator, we are created, and we have a responsibility to tend the "cosmos" God has given to us a stewards.

Culture can be described as the ocean of meaning we swim in . . . it helps to understand there are other oceans. Like my boy's pet fish in it's tank, I have spent my life floating in a world with a particular language and references that orient me in life. When I take the fish out to clean his bowl, he is, for a while, disoriented. If I put him in a different bowl, he will need to adjust. There are many human cultures; also many represented in the Scriptures. If I would read Scripture well, I need to develop the capacity to at least be aware that I'm looking through the glass of my own culture into another world.

4. HOW and WHY are different questions. Putting all of the above together can imply that the creation stories, for instance, cannot be accurate scientific accounts of the creation of the physical universe -- how it came to be. But if they are stories told to convey an understanding of the meaning of the cosmos, then we have a lot of gold to mine if we seek to answer the "why" questions -- such as why is there a world, why are we in it, why do we sin, etc.

PDTA

Tree of Life

Here is an exerpt from an article from Harper's Dictionary of the Bible, a great resource, on "Tree of Life", by way of critical review:

" . . . a symbolic plant whose fruit was supposed to confer immortality on persons eating it. 1) It grew in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9, 3:22, 24), but Adam and Eve partook only of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and thus failed to become immortal . . . All ancient civilized nations wondered why man should be mortal and explained how man lost his chance of achieving immortality. The food of the gods, insuring their immortality, was "soma" in India, "haoma" in Iran, and "ambrosia" in Greece. In the Babylonian epic of Gligamesh, Gligamesh, after obtaining the plant of immortality, lost it when it was stolen by a snake; likewise the myth of Adapa (similar to Adam's failure to attain immortality) is a story of such a failure . . . The tree of life or the sacred tree is a well-known motif in ancient art. It appears often on Assyrian bas-reliefs andmuch earlier it occurs in Near-Eastern and Cretan art as a tree surrounded by two goats eating from its branches. Persian artists represent it as a holy symbol. For the early Church Fathers it is the Cross, whose fruit is the Christ, the source of immortality.*

I find it very interesting that the "tree of life" is common sacred symbol in many cultures. Against the backdrop of a common ancient understanding, someone hearing or reading the story of Adam and Eve would probably have a feeling of what was at stake in that story, having to do with both the aspiration to be more than mortal and the consequences of reaching too far. To me the story of the tower of Babel has a similar dynamic, except in that story God (also self-referred in the plural) actively put a stop to the aspirations of people trying to become like God. All this, in my thinking, reinforces a basic point in the creation stories: that God is God, and we are not -- the created must accept limits in relating to the Creator in order for all of creation to maintain it's designed order. I think this is not just about living forever, but about who is in charge . . . who is Lord of creation, and who is assigned a role in it.

--PDTA

*Harper's Bible Dictionary, Harper & Row Publishers, c. 1952, 1954, 1956, 1959, 1961, 1973 (and many later editions!)

Class notes from September 16

Harrell Guard led us in a presentation of facts and historical frameworks for our study of Creation stories.

After noting that Genesis is a book of beginnings: the creation, a new beginning (Noah), a new people (Hebrews), and a consciousness of their (Hebrew) unique relationship with God, historical facts relative to Genesis were presented: many versions were circulating with no authorized (canonized*) version until almost 900 A.D., and authorship was multiple in nature. We also examined various view points of inspiration.** We considered questions about how the two creation stories are different -- such as order of events, and different names for God. Cultural influences would account for some differences. We noted other Biblical examples recording more than one version of the same story, such as the birth of Jesus in the Gospels. The major focus of both versions of the creation story was the key message of the lesson: the relationship of human beings to God. Next week will focus on what each creation story tells us about our relationship with God, and place in creation.

*"Canon" comes from an ancient word referring to a measuring reed; hence means a standard of measurement, in this case standards applied to the inclusion of particular ancient texts in what eventually has come to be the modern Bible. We noted the Canon of Scripture is different for Protestants and Catholics, as the latter include the Apocriphal writings as sacred text.
** Modern Christians have different understandings of "inspiration", lit. "Breathed into" or, in context, "God breathed", referring to how the Holy Spirit is involved in the creation of Scripture. Three different understandings are: 1. Every individual word is inspired, implying that God wrote the Bible more or less directly; 2. The Spirit spoke through individuals who wrote the books; thus the writers, not the particular words, are inspired; 3. The Spirit worked through communities of faithful, thus the books are products of "body life" of people of faith.

Poem of the Week

A must purchase for Old Testament readers is Jeanne and William Steig's whimsical but profound "The Old Testament Made Easy". Dust cover comment is: "The author and illustrator of "Consider the Lemming" team up again, this time for a fresh, irreverent look at stories from the Old Testament. Cain and Abel, Noah, Jezebel, Solomon, David, Jehovah Himself -- the whole Sunday-school cast of villains and heroes, rascals and romantics comes to life in Jeanne Steig's wild and witty verse. William Steig's pictures have never been more exuberant -- the perfect complement to his wife's mischievous text."

Perhaps this sample, pertaining to our creation story study, will entice you borrow my copy, or purchase your own!

And God Said, "Let Us Make Man"

"All this in just six days!" God cried.

I am supremely satisfied.

Those dainty finned and creeping things.

The ones with hooves, the ones with wings!

This world's divine. Just one thing more --

Two legged, furless omnivore.

Free will, at least to some degree.

The creature quite resembles me.

It only wants a breath of life;

And then, of course, it wants a wife.

No sooner asked, my boy, than done!

They will afford me hours of fun.

See how they blink, and stretch, and grin.

Now let the comedy begin!"

c. 1990 by Jeanne Steig, all rights reserved

Hello Old Testament Class!

This blog will be a reference site for an Old Testament Bible Study taught by Mr. Harrell Guard and Rev. Dan Thompson-Aue at St. Paul's United Methodist Church, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Check in for discussion notes, study tips, and conversation related to questions and material from our study, "The Old Testament Made Easy". If you are not able to join us in person, please feel free to read this blog and offer comments. At the outset comments will not be screened but if anyone gets unruly or inappropriate I'll put a filter on ya!

Our first class met Sunday, September 9. We missed Harrell, who had an illness and had to miss the fun! We're looking for the Prof to return next week.

The focus of our study will be primary characters and stories of the Old Testament. We hope to become more familiar with these great stories, get better at reading and understanding the Bible on our own, grow in faith and make and deepen friendships.

First assignment: Read Genesis chapters 1 and 2. These are two distinct creation stories, each with a different point. Study these in two different translations or paraphrases, with an eye to comparing and contrasting. Keep in mind this thought: these stories were not intended to be scientific explanations of "how" the world came to be, rather mythic stories conveying the "why" of human existence. How does God speak to you about "you"?