1 Kings

The book of 1 Kings is a continuation of the Deuteronomistic histories as both the study guides and my study Bible kept reminding me.  The two books of Kings are divided up like this:  1)  Reign of Solomon from 970 B.C. - 930 B.C.   2)  The division of the kingdom after Solomon dies; Israel in the north, Judah in the south and the fall of Israel at the hands of the Assyrians in 722 B.C.  3)  The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 587 B.C. at the hands of the Babylonians.

The reign of Solomon includes the building of the temple, Solomon's wisdom in settling the argument between two women who lay claim to the same child, his visit from Queen of Sheba (Sheba thought to be present-day Yemen), not to be confused as I almost did with Solomon's mother Bathsheba.  Solomon's marriages, outside the faith as it were, and his willingness to worship the gods--Astarte, Chemosh and Milcom-- of his various wives pretty much spell his downfall and the break-up of the kingdom.

There follows a string of tales about the kings of these respective kingdoms.  In Israel there is Jeroboam, Omri and Ahab among others.  Ahab is the king who marries the calculating Jezebel.  The story of Jezebel's machinations to kill off Naboth in order to deliver to Ahab the coveted vineyard of Naboth is a good one.

A number of prophets appear in this book.  There is Ahijah and Elijah the Tishbite.  Here is the recounting of the drought and the widow who feeds herself, her son and Elijah for several days even though she had only a small amount of flour and a little oil.  In Chapter 22, there is the interesting exchange between the prophets Micaiah, Zedekiah and others un-named.  As the note in my study Bible points out,  "Even a genuine prophet cannot determine whether another prophet's oracle is true or false."  Who knew.

1 Kings ends with the death of Ahab as prophesied by Elijah.  Apparently, Jezebel's fate awaits her in 2 Kings.

2nd Samuel

The Second Book of Samuel is concerned with David's kingship ( from 1000-960 B.C.) and his various exploits such as that with Bathsheba and his calculated killing of Uriah.  There is also David's attempt to build a house of cedars for the Lord.  I seem to recall studying this passage at some point along the way and the conclusion was that the Lord is reminding David who's who, that he, David, has overstepped the limits of his authority and that God will determine the time and place for building a temple.  In fact, it seems to me that Ch.7, 5-17 is a pretty dramatic declaration to David of the extent to which God'power and might directs the life of Israel and of David its king.  And, it's not without humor.  The Lord tells David (Ch. 7, 6),  'I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day. . . .'  implying, so what the heck makes you think you should build me one now?

Both study guides (Garrison and Baker) mention that there is little theological importance in the books of First and Second Samuel, with the exception of Ch. 7 ( Nathan the prophet assures David of God's promise that David's descendants will rule forever).   In fact, Garrison recommends skimming both books of Samuel (as well as Kings and Chronicles for that matter, but not Job).   He does point out though that these books are necessary because they provide "accounts of the most glorious decades of Israel as a political community" and lay the groundwork for understanding Israel's future. 

Baker also notes the "theological statement" of the "effects of sin on a family."   He refers of course to the way in which David's adultery precipitates a "punishment of disorder and violence"  with the rape of Tamar, Absalom killing Ammon, Absalom trying to kill his father and so on.  We can observe the same sort of disorder and violence being wreaked on the family today as a result of the weakening of marriage and the so-called sexual "freedom" touted by our culture. 

1st Samuel

Book Written:  During the reigns of David and Solomon from 1000 B.C. to 930 B.C.;  written by court scribes

Time Period/Setting:  The one hundred years from 1070 to 970 B.C. so a transition between the time of Judges and the establishment of the kingdom of Israel;  Samuel evenutally becomes one of Israel's judges and will appoint first Saul and then David as kings 

Title:  Two of my study guides make the point that although this book of the Bible is largely about earthly kings, Saul and David, the book takes the name of the prophet Samuel who appoints them. 

In fact, my study Bibles notes that once the Israelites insist on an earthly king, the role of the prophet in the life of Israel changes.  "With the advent of kingship, the role of the prophet in the new age is defined as twofold: the prophet will be an intercessor between Israel and the Lord and an advocate of morality and justice."  See Chapter 12.

The story begins with another barren wife (Hannah), another rivalry between wives (Hannah vs. Peninnah, wives of Elkanah) and another mother who "sacrifices" her only son (Hannah, Samuel).  Hannah explains that for as long Samuel will live, she lends her son to the Lord.

The first book of Samuel gives one of those accounts of God's anger with his disobedient flock that depict the Lord as quick to anger and slow to forgive, just the opposite of how we are to understand him.   Much as He says in Genesis that he's sorry that he made us, he tells Samuel, "I regret that I made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me, and has not carried out my commands (15,10-11)."  An act of disobedience on the part of Saul prevents him from ruling over Israel forever. He's punished.  It's that simple I suppose though it 's a little hard to accept. The matter of obeying God is serious and seems eminently non-negotiable in the Old Testament.  When you're bad, you're bad.  When you're good, well, at least that's better.

In Chapter 9, Samuel travels to Saul's home country to anoint him as king of Israel.  As HC mentions, the account reads  like a fairy tale which, ironically, I find, makes the whole account of Samuel seeking out Saul more believable (didn't C.S. Lewis write about that, myths and reality, etc.):  Saul goes looking for his father's missing donkeys and finds a kingship besides (the donkeys do turn up).   And, looking at the New Testament as an extension of the Old Testament and the Old as a prefiguring of all that is to happen later (allegory or typology according to the Catechism 117.1), Saul, a soon-to-be king of Israel meeting up with a prophet at the well (1 Samuel 9,11-12) is a sign or type of Christ's kingdom and the living water that Christ will bring (John 4, 1-40).  Saul joins Isaac and Jacob as such a sign or type.  Abraham's servant encounters Isaac's future bride Rebekah at the well (Genesis 24, 15-21) as Isaac will assume the role of patriarch.  Jacob meets Rachel at the well (Genesis 29, 9-12) and Jacob will soon be the earthly king of the Hebrew kingdom that will soon follow.  

In Chapter 16, we meet up with Ruth and Boaz's grandson, Jesse, father of their great grandson, David.  David eventually marries Saul's daughter, Michal, but the intrigue and enmity between Saul and his son-in-law and daughter has none of the devotion and charity that Ruth had toward her in-laws or that Ruth and Boaz demonstrated to one another in their marriage.

Ruth

Book Written: Sometime between 900-700 B.C.

Time Period/Setting: Time of Judges; between 1200-1000 B.C.

Title:  Named after protagonist of story though Naomi is equally a central figure


The website, Catholic Womanhood, published my reflection on the Book of Ruth. You can read it here.

Samson

As my study guides point out, Samson is a familiar figure to us from popular culture, and, sure enough, I know something about him because of a song,  "If I Had My Way," on a Peter, Paul and Mary album.  The song, also titled "Samson and Delilah," was written by a blind Baptist minister and guitar player, Rev. Gary Davis, one of those blues and gospel "originals" who enjoyed a rediscovery during the folk music craze of the 60s.    The version of the song that I know is all rhythm and harmonizing and communicates some of the intensity of Samson's story.  Naturally, the account in the Bible is quite a bit more  raw and arresting than the song.

Like Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel, Samson's mother is barren and Samson's birth is special, overseen by the intervention of an angel who instructs Samson's mother not to cut the boy's hair, that he will be a Nazirite (see Numbers 6, 1-21).   Again we have a prefiguring of the angel's visit to Mary and Jesus' birth as well as a reminder that each new life is known to God and is part of his plan.

Samson has his share of adventures with women and riddles.  He first marries a Philistine woman whom he rather unceremoniously dumps when she discloses to her people the answer to the riddle that Samson poses.  Later, the pattern is repeated with Delilah.  Both women are portrayed as coquettish vixens playing on Samson's emotions by telling him that if he really loved them, he'd tell his secret.  (Everything old is new again!) 


I understand that Samson's herculean strength and his defeat of the Philistines comes from God, but Samson himself never acknowledges that until the very end of his life, Ch. 16,  v.28.  Furthermore, Samson seems indifferent where the Lord is concerned.  When he reveals his secret to Delilah, it's not clear whether he really believes his strength comes from God --that is from his hair as a result of  his consecration to God from birth---or whether he regards the Nazirite vow as empty and takes his overpowering strength for granted.   In contrast to Moses or Joshua or to another of the judges, Deborah, Samson is a bit of a brute.  In the Garrison study guide, the author asks, "Do you find it difficult to focus your reading so that you rise above the sordid in Samson's brief biography?"  Answer, yes.

Pope Benedict - Waters of Meribah

This commentary by the Pope is not directly about Moses or the Waters of Meribah, rather the Pope is awarding some prizes in theology, the science of faith, and asks whether or not this is a contradiction.  He speaks of the "double use of reason"

a use that is irreconcilable with the nature of faith and of a use that instead belongs precisely to the nature of faith. There exists, he says, the violentia rationis, the despotism of reason, which makes itself the supreme and ultimate judge of everything. This kind of use of reason is certainly impossible in the ambit of faith. What does Bonaventure mean by this? An expression of Psalm 95:9 can show us. Here God says to his people: "In the wilderness ... your fathers tested me, and put me to the proof, though they had seen my work." Here there is reference to a double encounter with God: they "saw." This, however, was not enough for them. They put God "to the proof." They want to subject him to experiment. He is, as it were, subjected to a questioning and must submit Himself to a procedure of experimental testing. 
  The particular verses go

Do not harden your hearts, as at Meribah, as on the day at Massah in the wilderness, when your ancestors tested me and put me to the proof, though they had seen my work.  (Psalms 95, 8-9)

The Pope says, "God is not an object of human experimentation."  Understanding this helps to understand God's anger at the Israelites as well as, maybe, his impatience with Moses when Moses strikes the rock rather than just commands the rock to yield water (Numbers 20).

Pope Benedict speaks on Moses' Intercessory Prayer

I've included a link to this somewhat lengthy article because I thought it would be useful for future reference and contemplation.  I couldn't absorb it all on the first reading.  Here is how the Pope sets the stage: 

Also at Sinai, when the people ask Aaron to fashion for them a golden calf, Moses prays, thus carrying out in an emblematic way the true role of an intercessor. The episode is narrated in Chapter 32 of the Book of Exodus and has a parallel account in Deuteronomy Chapter 9. It is this episode that I would like to dwell upon in today's catechesis; and in particular on the prayer of Moses that we find in the Exodus account.

Needless to say, there is plenty to reflect upon when considering "Moses, the man of prayer"  as Pope Benedict calls him.

Judges

Book Written:  material gathered during reign of King David; edited in 7th-6th centuries

Time Period/Setting:   200 years, 1200-1000 B.C.,  during which Israel had no centralized authority or king

Title:   Judges or military-theocratic leaders ruled over the different tribes; word 'judge' is mentioned only once in book; not necessarily charismatic leaders 

Judges contains the line, " In those days there was no king in Israel and everyone did as he pleased,"  a line which pretty well describes our modern culture of moral relativism where moral standards are determined not by God's truth but by  "what's right for me."    Of the twelve judges described in the book, four are said to be major, and, of those, two in particular interested me--Deborah and Samson.

So,  here we have Deborah, a woman whose name in Hebrew means 'bee,'  sitting under a palm tree giving orders. What an image.  It has to be only a matter of highly unusual coincidence that Barak is the name of the  military leader that Deborah summons to fight  King Jabin's army led by Sisera.  It must again be coincidence of the highest order that Barak is a  ditherer.  My study Bible uses the words 'reluctant' and 'hesitant'  to describe our president  the man.  It's no surprise that Barak doesn't want to follow Deborah's instructions unless she goes with him.   Barak does screw up the pep to take 10,000 troops against Sisera (maybe those are the 10,000 he's planning to call back from Afghanistan in July?) and he even has the guts to pursue Sisera's chariots.   A woman, Jael, finishes the job for Barak by luring Sisera into her tent and then killing him.  

The literary subtleties of the Song of Deborah, Ch. 5, elude me but there are some beautiful verses that capture the drama of Deborah's victory.  Jael killing Sisera with a tent peg is as follows:

She put her hand to the tent peg and her right hand to the workmen's mallet;

she struck Sisera a blow,

she crushed his head,

she shattered and pierced his temple.

He sank, he fell, he lay still at her feet; at her feet he sank, he fell;where he sank, there he fell dead.  

Joshua

Book Written:  came to its present form in 7th-6th century B.C. via writings discovered while repairing temple during King Josiah's reign ;  not attributed to Joshua

Time Period/Setting:  1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.

Title:  named after main character

I know that Joshua fought the battle of Jericho  because of  the song that I learned one summer in Bible School.  I only vaguely remember the verses, but the refrain was rousing, and I believe we clapped after each of those three Jerichos in the first line. 

Joshua fought the battle of Jericho, Jericho, Jericho

Joshua fought the battle of Jericho,

And the walls came tumbling down.

It was edifying to finally understand that Joshua was Moses's successor in leading the Israelites into Canaan though not his blood relation.  Joshua was the son of Nun. 

The crossing of the Jordan and the curious placing of the twelve stones in the river bed along with the story of Rahab the prostitute were new to me, but I did enjoy the more familiar account of the way the retinue of priest-trumpeters and armed men circled the city for six days without uttering a word.  They said nothing, but blew their ram's horn trumpets the whole time.   What a scene.   After this careful build-up, they then just ran in and razed the city.  Go figure.

Shiloh, Gilgal and Shechem are discussed in my study Bible as important places for "tribal assembly." 

Fr. Baker notesthat Joshua's faithfulness to God throughout his leadership is a theme of this book, that the  conquest of Jericho is not a human victory, but a result of God's intercession, that the name Joshua is a variant of Jesus.  In terms of relating the Old and New Testaments (typology), Baker writes ". . . Joshua's conquest of the Promised Land is a prophecy of the spiritual conquest of the world by Jesus and his Church. . . . . "

Re Lot's Wife Syndrome

I read articles from the site Catholic Womanhood on occasion.  This one got my attention, but disappointed.  Is the syndrome not letting go?   You shouldn't look back?  

Just A Matter of Geography?

The Old Testament readings for this week have been from the Book of Genesis and caused me to go back and re-read some of the chapters.   God brings Abram out of Haran (which is roughly in present-day Iraq) and into Canaan and tells Abraham that this is the land he will possess.  Remembering Moses bringing everyone into Canaan and having just recently  read about Joshua's battle, I started wondering why in the world Abraham just didn't stay in Canaan and possess the land.  I don't know how,  but during the time it's taken me to read from Genesis to Deuteronomy, I seem to have forgotten about all the wandering,  exile and tribal conflicts in the Old Testament. 

The footnotes in my study Bible speak of the dual promise of land and progeny which I take to mean that God's promise to Abraham is of a kingdom, a certain way of living, not just the promise of a tract of earth.  So, while it might be easy to hold on to a piece of land, it's not so easy to hold on to this idea of being God's chosen people.  The study notes  sketch out an elaborate chart on the Abraham Cycle, a chart I neatly skipped over before, which in turn reminded me that there was a migration from Haran (when Abram's family left) and a migration to Haran (I presume when Abraham's servant returned there to find a wife for Isaac).   

Jacob also returns to the homeland (Paddan-aram in the region of Haran) to find a wife, Genesis 28, 1-7 and lives there "in exile"  (Ch. 31) for what was about 20 years!    Later, God instructs Jacob to go to Bethel, Ch. 35 and by Ch. 36 we're back to Canaan where Jacob settles.  We're reminded that his father Isaac lived there as "an alien."   The story of Jacob's favorite son, Joseph, then of course takes us to Egypt.  References to Egypt are also a tad confusing;  my Bible's map of the ancient world shows the Egyptian Empire, 1300 B.C.,  covering roughly the area of the southern portion of the Levant. 

The Red Tent

I've been aware of this work of historical fiction for several years.  Several family members have read it and talked about it;  I confess to only having skimmed it.  Without consulting the Cliff Notes, I'm assuming that the author found it intriguing to reflect upon Dinah, the daughter of Jacob and Leah, who seems lost to history after her story is told in Chapter 34 of Genesis.  Even my study Bible comments that "sadly" Dinah is not mentioned further except for a passing reference in Genesis 46.15 when Jacob's family is re-united with Joseph in Egypt.

 
I'm also assuming that this is a woman-affirming book, a feminist novel.   No harm in that except that it's not of especial interest to me (I have previously dis-avowed any allegiance to feminism!).  It is curious, though, that while Dinah's brothers were central to the life of Israel, she, the biological daughter of Jacob and Leah (a real wife, not just one of the maids) is only a footnote.   Of course, as in the case of my comment about Cain and Abel, God's ways are not our ways, and if Dinah had been more essential to the life of Israel, we would certainly have heard about her. 


In Genesis, Dinah's encounter with Shechem is straightforwardly characterized as rape or "defilement" while in the novel more is made of the love and devotion of Shechem towards Dinah.  (I'd have to read the book more carefully to determine if rape is mentioned at all.)   This seems an attempt on the author's part to tweak historical reality a bit by making Dinah the object of romantic love whereas women in pre-Christian times were usually characterized as just there for the taking. (Well, Jacob did apparently fall for Rachel so things weren't all bad.)  In the novel,  Dinah becomes a mid-wife, far more palatable than had the author made her a priestess or warrior.  As a midwife, Dinah eventually delivers her own nephew, one of Joseph's sons, a neat sort of Dickensian twist.  

Cain and Abel

Apropos of another matter entirely, I chanced to be reading (trying, in my own humble fashion) Pope John Paul II's Evangelium Vitae.  He begins his Encyclical with the story of Cain and Abel and answers a question I asked earlier which was, Why was God unhappy with Cain's offering?  The Pope writes that there is no reason given for this, but he goes on to explain that God  ". . . although preferring Abel's gift, does not interrupt his dialogue with Cain.  He admonishes him, reminding him of his freedom in the face of evil:  man is in no way predestined to evil."  

Oh dear.  What a mundane mindset I had when reading this story.  It's the Bible, not a murder mystery!  What I saw was only that God was being mean to poor Cain who was only trying to be good and that God wasn't being nice, he was being unfair.   He's God, and His ways are not our ways!  

The Pope goes on.  God is "always merciful even when he punishes, . . . "  He put a mark on Cain  ". . . not to condemn him to the hatred of others, but to protect and defend him from those wishing to kill him. . . ."

Deuteronomy

Book Written:  8th century B.C.  not attributed to Moses; edited by Levites at some point
 
Time Period/Setting:

Title:  from Greek deuteros and nomos meaning second law;  in Hebrew the book is known by the first words of the text, 'These are the words'.


While turgid may be too strong a descriptor, I found this book a little abstruse, perhaps because it is, as my study aids helped me to know, a series of three sermons given by Moses in an "oratorical" style.   Deuteronomy means 'second law,' the first law being the Ten Commandments given in the book of Exodus.  The "Great Commandment" (Baker) is found in Ch. 6, 4-6.   

The Lord our God is one Lord.   You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. 

If I remember correctly, these verses always began the worship at the Presbyterian Church we used to attend. 

Fr. Baker explains that the theme of what are called the Deuteronomic histories--Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings--is "the idea of temporal reward for keeping the Law and punishment for violating it."   He notes that Jesus quotes Deuteronomy in Matthew 4 and Matthew 22,35-39.

Numbers

Book Written:  over a period of a thousand years (?); edited in time of Ezra, 5th centuryB.C.

Time Period/Setting:  Numbers is a record of the 40 years of wanderings (1290 B.C. to 1250 B.C.) of the Israelites as they head toward the Promised Land.  I followed their whereabouts with interest on the map; Kadesh-barnea  and the Wilderness of Zin seem to be where most of the action takes place.  There's a record of their journey in Chapter 33.

Title:   From the Greek Arithmoi and refers to census that occurs in first chapter;  the Hebrew name is Bemidbar meaning 'in the wilderness.'

Nazirites.  The Nazirites are introduced to us in Ch. 6.  I had heard of this group with some suggestion that Jesus might have been a Nazirite.  That's probably not the case, but I picked it up somewhere along the way.  Samson, however, was a Nazirite, and the notes in my study Bible about Samson set me up pretty well for his story coming up in Judges. Can't wait.  I've always been fuzzy about Samson and Delilah.

Aaronic Blessing. The beautiful Aaronic blessing is also found in Ch. 6.24-26.  I heard this first and most often in the Presbyterian church;  Catholics seem to refer to it less often.

Moses. Far and away the best part of Numbers, though, is the recurring puling and complaining of the people to Moses. Who doesn't recognize in their voices the voice of a two-year old who stamps his foot and says 'no' or the teen-ager who keeps complaining about how boring his life is or our own voices when we moan and groan about whatever it is that is annoying us at the moment.   "If we only had some meat!"  (i.e. If only we had more  money/time/fill-in-the-blank ..)  "We remember the fish we used to eat in Egypt for nothing."  (i.e.  I told you we shouldn't have done this.)  "There's nothing at all but this manna to look at."  (i.e.  I clean and cook and shop all day and have nothing to show for it.)    ". . .now our strength is dried up" (i.e. It's not my fault.)   "Would that we had died in the land of Egypt!"  (i.e. You're mean.  I wish I was dead!) 

Moses picks up the mood as well and goes directly to the Lord with some irony and humor, "Did I conceive all this people?  Did I give birth to them . .. "(11.12-15)   He gets very upfront and personal, much as before when the Lord first calls him.  In so many words, Moses faults God for abandoning him with this miserable lot of whining good-for-nothings, that if this is the kind of friend God is going to be Moses, thanks, but no thanks, he'd sooner die.   Moses is kind of nervy, a real noodge.  My study Bible refers to him as "indignant" in this exchange with the Lord.

Chapter 20 concerns the waters of Meribah.  Here is where Moses disobeys orders, a lack of faith really, and strikes the rock instead of just commanding the rock (the importance of "the word?") resulting in his being unable to enter the Promised Land.   My study Bible says that "no satisfying explanation has ever been given for the punishment of Moses and Aaron. .. . "  Ever?  As I commented earlier, the punishment seems harsh to me, but maybe the problem here is that Moses doesn't just show a lack of faith, he disregards a direct order from the Lord.  However, lapses of faith and disregarding God's orders  would seem to boil down to the same thing.  They are very human flaws.   Thoughts?

                         
Balaam.  I wish that I might have summoned up more interest in this story, but just didn't. 

  

Leviticus

Book Written:   6th century B.C., time of the Babylonian exile; inspired (?) by
Moses
Time Period/Setting: 

Title:  refers to tribe of Levi; Priest's Manual (early Hebrew name)


Not too much to say here.  I did read or at least skim every chapter.

Exodus

Book Written:  10th century B.C. with editing in 6th century; attributed to Moses

Time Period/Setting:  1290 - 1250 B.C.

Title:  Exodus means 'departure' and is the Greek-derived name;  the book's Hebrew name is taken from the first words of the book, 'These are the names'.


Call To Moses. God's Call to Moses is instructive, wryly funny and depicts human nature in all its weakness.   The reluctant Moses is another one of us average people who would be just as happy to carry on as usual (and be mediocre)except that now God has chosen him to do un-average things. 

After Moses hears that he's the lucky one to be tapped by God to go to Pharoah, he begs off,  as any but the most vainglorious would, and says (3.11) in so many words, Please.  I'm nobody. Why me?  God briefly explains that he will be with Moses.  Not to worry. 

But Moses, who is clearly looking for excuses to worm his way out of this job, tries again and  wants to know what he should say if the Israelites ask for the name of the one who has sent him.  God expounds at some length as to how Moses should respond to such a question and recapitulates his intentions for Moses. 

Ever persistent (and clever, argumentative but not unrealistic), Moses has thought of a third angle to pursue that might get him off the hook.  He asks God what to do if the Israelites won't believe him.  For this one the Lord gives Moses some practical help.  He instructs Moses in giving signs, first, the staff thrown down to become a snake, second  the hand inside the cloak which then reappears as leprous.  The patient Lord must be anticipating Moses' next objection because before Moses can ask what to do if neither sign works, the Lord advises that if you don't get anywhere with the first, you will with the second, pretty spectacular,  but here's a third just in case, turn the water of the Nile into blood. 

Amazingly, Moses comes back at the Lord with a fourth excuse reminding God that he, Moses, is slow of speech.   The Lord in turn reminds Moses that He knows all about Moses' slow tongue, that He is God and can make people deaf, dumb and blind and that furthermore, He can tell them what to say and make them say it! With that, the Lord dismisses Moses with the equivalent of a human wave of the hand by commanding, Now, go!

Not be outdone, Moses again has a rejoinder! But this time he's beaten down.  The only thing left to say to the Lord is what Moses was really saying in the first place which is,  There must be somebody else.  Send them. 
Most remarkable to me about the interchange is that this is the Bible, inspired writing, and Moses is talking as if he's Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof, challenging, questioning and negotiating with God (to paraphrase Tevye, would it really have been such a big deal for  God to have made him a rich man).   Equally remarkable, The Lord talks back and though  Moses tries His patience (4.14), God listens.  Not only does He listen, He finally accommodates and sends Aaron along to help.

Our God is awe-inspiring and mighty but not inaccessible or tyrannical.  Just the opposite in fact.  He sets high standards for even the most average of us, maybe standards that seem out of our reach, but He listens, He hears us, He's patient and, while He holds us to the high standards that He has set, He's more than willing to work with us, I guess, as long as we're willing to listen and work with Him. 

Waters of Meribah. I paid particular attention to the waters of Meribah in 17.1-8. where Moses was instructed to strike the rock in order to bring forth water.   I was unaware until very recently that Moses was denied entry to the Promised Land due to disobeying God's orders later (in Numbers 20.8) when he was supposed to simply command the rock to bring forth water.  Though I've just finished saying how patient and loving God is, here His punishment seems harsh.  Something to think about.

The Ark. Though detailed in the extreme, I did read with interest the instructions for constructing the ark (gold and acacia wood), the lampstand with cups in the shape of almond blossoms with "calyxes" and "petals,"  the tabernacle, the curtain (where did they get the crimson and purple yarns?), the breastplate (and whence the carnelian, emerald, sapphire, moonstone, beryl, onyx and jasper),  the vestments (pomegranates around the hem with golden bells in between, very beautiful) and I was gratified to read about the ephod, having once made the acquaintance of someone named Ephod (a man). 

Moses. Also food for thought is Moses' back-and-forth with God in 33.12.  Is this generally known as Moses' Intercession" as it's called in my Bible?  Moses seems to be challenging God to reveal himself--"show me your ways''-- asking for proof that God is there.    Though God says he'll comply, there are limits--"my face shall not be seen."   Why? 

Genesis

Book written:  10th century B.C.,  editing 6th century B.C. some attribute to Moses

Time Period/Setting:  time immemorial to about 1700 B.C.

Title:  Genesis means 'beginning'

Familiar Bible Stories:  I hope I'll finally remember that all the old, familiar children's Bible stories are told in the book of Genesis:  Creation, Adam and Eve, Cain (the murdering one who was a farmer ) and Abel (the shepherd), Noah and the Ark (and his sons Shem, Ham and Japheth who are constantly memorialized in crossword puzzles), The Tower of Babel, Jacob's Ladder (a favorite Bible School song, too) and Joseph and his coat of many colors.   Jacob wrestles with God in the book of Genesis, and here, conveniently, is Pope Benedict's reflection on the matter.   And, back to Cain and Abel for a moment, why was God  unhappy with Cain's offering.  Maybe I didn't read carefully enough, but that stymies me.

Patriarchs and Wives:  The challenge I had in reading the book of Genesis was keeping the patriarchs and their wives and children straight and trying to place them all correctly in time and space.
 
Abraham and Sarah (formerly Abram and Sarai) started out in Haran which is present day northern Iraq in the year ?  , but at God's instruction worked their way down past Bethel to the Negeb and Egypt.  Seems like an awful lot of territory to cover.   The tale of Sodom and Gomorrah includes the astonishing manner in which Lot offered up his virgin daughters to the mob of angry men at his door.  Something similar happens later on in Judges (19.22  Gibeah's crime).  Let me make clear that I'm not a feminist by any stretch of the imagination, but the status of women in Biblical times makes my hair stand on end.  Talk about an oppressed, sub-par existence.  

Then, through God's power, follows Sarah's pregnancy and she gives birth to Isaac. 

Isaac marries Rebekah, who like Sarah must await God's touch in order to bear their twin sons, Jacob and Esau.  Rebekah was an agreeable figure at first, but proves to be nasty and calculating.  Why?  Are we to learn something from this mean mother (or mean wife)?

Jacob of course wants to marry Rachel, but is tricked into marrying Leah.  When he does get Rachel she, like Sarah and Rebekah, is barren.  God again intervenes.  Each of these births,  Isaac's, Jacob's (and Esau's) and Joseph's is an event set apart just as Christ's birth will be set apart, just as, I can't help but think we are being instructed here, every birth is a special event touched by God.  Marriage, pregnancy, procreation are not hum-drum, every day acts governed by human whimsy.  Nobody is an accident of nature.  Each of us is a distinct intention of God, created for a purpose.

Because God chose these women to be wives and mothers of Israel's patriarchs, I would have expected them to be, well, nicer, more refined, exemplary in their behavior.  But these women are awful.  Sarah is cynical and bitter.  Rebekah, sort of a Lady MacBeth, plots and schemes behind her husband's back.  Leah and Rachel compete with each other over who has had more children.  I would ask, what's their problem, but I think I know.  They have to share a husband and not only with each other!  How about the matter of the sisters "giving" Jacob their maids!  He has two sons with Bilhah and two sons with Zilpah.   And these sons count as his legitimate sons, heads of the twelve tribes along with their brothers.  

Rachel's sons seem to occupy pride of place, especially Joseph, and Rachel's death and burial are given some mention.  Interestingly, she was buried on the road to Bethlehem and  Jacob even puts up a stone at her gravesite.  I believe her tomb is mentioned again somewhere in Exodus or Numbers as the Israelites pass through.  Not sure about that.

Where:  As for where all this takes place, it seems that Jacob is sometimes in Paddan-aram which is near Haran, Abraham's point of origin, and at other times he's in Canaan and maybe other times he's elsewhere.  

Twelve Tribes: Jacob's sons, the twelve tribes, in alpha order:  Asher, Benjamin, Dan, Gad, Issachar, Joseph, Judah, Levi, Naphtali, Reuben, Simeon and Zebulun.