Jeremiah

Book Written:  ?

Time Period/Setting: Roughly the years of King Josiah's rule in Judah beginning in 640 BC and extending through the reigns of Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah whose reign, ending in 587 BC, marked the final destruction of the temple and the second deportation of the Hebrews to Babylon under Nebucheddnezzar.

Title:  Self explanatory, the book is named after the prophet Jeremiah whose name in Hebrew means 'Yahweh exalts.'

Baker describes this book as covering a dark and tumultuous period of Israel's history.  The kingdom is always fighting off adversaries-- three of them,  Egypt, Assyria and Babylon-- while simultaneously defying the Lord with the worship of pagan gods, false idols and shady prophets. There's plenty of history in the book and HC gives copious notes explaining Jeremiah's oracles, laments and prophesies against the appropriate historical backdrop.  I questioned earlier why the Babylonians deported the Hebrews rather than killing them off.  That question is answered here with many notes on who was deported, who was left behind (Jeremiah elected to remain in Judah) and why.

There's a powerful sense throughout the book that the Lord is thoroughly disgusted with the sinfulness and disobedience of his people, that their punishment --destruction of their homeland and deportation to live under a foreign king--will be harsh and sure.   Interestingly, it is the Lord himself who takes credit for the Babylonian takeover and later the Lord who commands Cyrus to finally send the Hebrews back to Jerusalem.  It's not just happenstance that events unfolded as they did. Despite what the faithless Israelites think (or the Assyrians or Babylonians-- or us for that matter), there is a reason for their suffering and exile.   God is master over everything. 

The "new covenant" in Ch 31 is noted by HC as being a conversion of heart rather than a new law.

Baker describes Jeremiah as the "most personal and most self-revealing" of the prophets.  Perhaps, if Baker says so, but I found Job and Moses equally if not more so. HC describes Jeremiah's sixth lament or complaint (Ch 20) as the 'most blasphemous in the Bible.'  Garrison paints a picture of Jeremiah as dynamic, "intoxicated" by God's glory and "attuned" to God's voice. He describes the book as fast-paced, especially Ch 36-39.  Garrison notes that prophets are not recluses who sit in caves and meditate, Jeremiah least of all.  He explains that prophets like Jeremiah arise in a time when organized religion is corrupted by lazy priests and prophets.  At such times "God raises up some amateur through whom the covenant is revived."

Maybe a second reading at a later time will give me a more, shall we say, mature insight into this prophet.

Isaiah

Isaiah contains oracles or prophecies given over a span of time and by different authors.  There are three sections to the book.  The book was perhaps not completed until 200 BC.  Isaiah is one of the four 8th century BC prophets along with Amos, Hosea and Micah.

Chapters 1-39 correspond to the reigns in Judah of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah so roughly 780s B.C. to 680s B.C.  I like the way HC further breaks this up:  the Syro-Ephraimite war when Syria and Israel attached Judah (735-732 BC), anti-Assyrian activity against Sargon II (720-710 BC and Hezekiah's revolt against Sennacherib (705-701 BC).   I'm a bit fuzzy about authorship here.  Is it Isaiah of Jerusalem who wrote these chapters as Baker says.  Or, is it just a rehashing from 2 Kings along with the writings of some others as HC says?  Or, as Baker says later, Isaiah didn't write any of it, but it was his disciples who collected his prophecies and wrote them down.  In these chapters, Isaiah emphasizes the power of God, the holiness of God and the importance of reliance upon God rather than worldly help. 

Chapters 40-55 correspond to the Babylonian exile and so the 500s BC.  Here authorship is ascribed to a Deutero-Isaiah who harkens back to what the first Isaiah said (God is the holy of holies, Lord of hosts, the Holy One of Israel), but this prophet is offering reassurance to the Hebrews that their exile will end and they will return to an even more glorious Jerusalem. In this section there's considerable condemnation of idols as well as the comparison of the weakness of idols to the power of the Lord and also a satire of idols (Ch 44).  In Ch 46, idols are burdens to be carried while in contrast the Lord carries us. 

Chapters 56-66 correspond to the return from Babylon.  Here, perhaps yet a third Isaiah, talks about the difficulties the Hebrews encounter once they are back in the homeland and he prophesizes about the punishment of those who are enemies of the Hebrews and the defeat they will suffer at God's hands.

Many familiar passages of course come from Isaiah:  beating swords into plowshare, the Sanctus, the call of Isaiah, the phrases repeated in Handel's Messiah (Chapters 9,10), the Lord's threat to Sennacherib (Ch 37), a voice crying out (Ch 40), running without wearying (Ch 40), the remnant and many others. 

And Isaiah is the Old Testament book most frequently-quoted in the New Testament after Psalms.

There's much more here but I must move on to the prophet Jeremiah.  Perhaps the one prophet will provide further insights to the other.

Sirach

Just determining the author of this book constituted a little mini-study of its own.  The author's name is Jesus, from the Hebrew Yeshu'a, but he is Ben Sira or son of Eleazar who is the son of Sirach.   Consequently the book is known as the Book of Ben Sira, but for Christians it's also known as Ecclesiasticus (not to be thought of as the name of the author and so not to be confused with Ecclesiastes or Qoheleth) meaning the book of the church or churchly matters.  In addition, there is a translator mentioned, Ben Sira's grandson, who translated the book from Hebrew into Greek.

Despite all this, the book was written around 180 B.C. in Jerusalem prior to the Maccabean revolt.

As it turned out, the historical period during which the book was written proved more interesting to me than the content of the  book itself.   Ben Sira lived in a Hellenized Jerusalem and was writing against a background of several threats to Jewish culture.  According to HC, these threats are the rule of foreign kings, disputes between priestly (I presume Jewish) families vying for power, conflicts between the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids who succeeded Alexander the Great (both groups of which I, at present, know precious little), all constituting threats to Jewish religious practices and beliefs and daily living. 

Wisdom of Solomon

The Wisdom of Solomon post-dates the book of Sirach but like Sirach is set against a Hellenic backdrop, and, like Sirach, is not included in the Protestant Bible.

The book is written in 50 B.C. by a Greek-speaking Jew thought to live in Alexandria, Egypt. 

As with the Song of Solomon, the reference to the Hebrew king is to give the author's writings greater credibility.  Solomon is not responsible for the book!   The idea of immortality is introduced here.  Wisdom comes from God and means fidelity to the Laws of Moses.

The Song of Solomon

The Song of Solomon or Song of Songs (meaning the greatest song)  was not written by Solomon and in fact the author is unknown.  The reference to Solomon in the title is to add cache and give credence and greater status to the writings.  The book is thought to be written after the Hebrews returned from their Babylonian exile so post 539 B.C.

Like the books of Ruth and Ecclesiastes, there is no mention of God in the Song of Solomon.

The language is colorful, lyrical, luxuriant.  The reading is almost entertaining.  Human sexuality and married love are metaphors for God's love of his people and vice versa.

The Red Tent Redux

I commented on the novel The Red Tent here, but since then I've had the good sense to actually read the whole novel in order to draw conclusions.

If, as my copy of the book states, this novel presents a new view of women in biblical times, I guess I'll assume that it's a new view based on historical evidence of some kind.  Or, is it just a new view as in a made-up view loosely based on some historical evidence.  I don't know.  But having a tendency toward the literal and the practical, I can get myself hung up on questions like 'Could this really have happened?' or 'Was there actually a tent that was red?'  Thus, I felt unsettled reading about the wonderfully supportive bonding between all the women in Jacob's tribe. Were women of that time really so dedicated to celebrating their femininity, their fertility, their womanhood and  lavishing attentions on one another when they gave birth or started to menstruate?   Or, is this  21st century A.D. feminism overlaid on second millenium B.C. women.  

I also found the injection of romantic love into the picture a little disconcerting.  In the novel, Shechem and Dinah are a case of a head-over-heels-nothing-can-stop-us-now kind of romance.  All rose petals and gardenias, dreamy and lush, but why?  True, the account of their liaison or marriage in Genesis is ambiguous; Shechem does insist that he wants to marry Dinah which is in part I guess what makes the account of Dinah intriguing for a novelist to speculate upon.  But. . . .

There's more 21st century-style romance when Dinah re-marries later on. She finds the perfect guy in Benia the carpenter!  Benia has a sense of humor, he's sensitive, he loves Dinah, they have a wonderful sex life and Dinah is completely fulfilled as a woman. And it's 3,000 years ago in the Middle East. 

Rebekah is given a role in the novel that she doesn't have in the Bible.  The author makes her into a kind of elder stateswoman,  a seer and/or healer.  Again, I'll assume this is a role  that might have accrued to a woman of Rebekah's status.  Then again, perhaps there's no historical accuracy here but just the author's fantasy.  I don't know.  I did poke around and look for interviews with the author and some reviews of the book.

In the final analysis, I guess this type of novel just isn't my cup of tea.