Psalm 73

But me? My feet had almost stumbled;
    my steps had nearly slipped
3     because I envied the arrogant;
    I observed how the wicked are well off:
4 They suffer no pain;
    their bodies are fit and strong.
5 They are never in trouble;
    they aren’t weighed down like other people.
6 That’s why they wear arrogance like a necklace,
    why violence covers them like clothes.
7 Their eyes bulge out from eating so well;
    their hearts overflow with delusions.
8 They scoff and talk so cruel;
    from their privileged positions
    they plan oppression.
9 Their mouths dare to speak against heaven!
    Their tongues roam the earth!
10 That’s why people keep going back to them,
    keep approving what they say.
11 And what they say is this: “How could God possibly know!
    Does the Most High know anything at all!”
12 Look at these wicked ones,
    always relaxed, piling up the wealth!

13 Meanwhile, I’ve kept my heart pure for no good reason;
I’ve washed my hands to stay innocent for nothing.
14 I’m weighed down all day long.
    I’m punished every morning.
15 If I said, “I will talk about all this,”
    I would have been unfaithful to your children.
16 But when I tried to understand these things,
    it just seemed like hard work

Yep! That's exactly how I feel sometimes. Good thing the psalm doesn't stop there, isn't it! It goes on, and in the last half we see the truth, but it is seen through spiritual eyes and will never make sense in the eyes of the world. We need to remember that on a day like today...our hope is not in the institutions of government, however good they might be (or bad). Our hope is in God. Here's the rest of the psalm:

17     until I entered God’s sanctuary
        and understood what would happen to the wicked.
18 You will definitely put them on a slippery path;
    you will make them fall into ruin!
19 How quickly they are devastated,
    utterly destroyed by terrors!
20 As quickly as a dream departs from someone waking up, my Lord,
    when you are stirred up, you make them disappear.

²¹ When my heart was bitter,
    when I was all cut up inside,
²² I was stupid and ignorant.
    I acted like nothing but an animal toward you.
²³ But I was still always with you!
    You held my strong hand!
²⁴ You have guided me with your advice;
    later you will receive me with glory.
²⁵ Do I have anyone else in heaven?
    There’s nothing on earth I desire except you.
²⁶ My body and my heart fail,
    but God is my heart’s rock and my share forever.
²⁷ Look! Those far from you die;
    you annihilate all those who are unfaithful to you.
²⁸ But me? It’s good for me to be near God.
    I have taken my refuge in you, my Lord God,
        so I can talk all about your works! (CEB, from Bible Gateway)

God's word for today

A psalm for this year's election day, Psalm 62:

Only in God do I[a] find rest;     my salvation comes from him. 2 Only God is my rock and my salvation—     my stronghold!—I won’t be shaken anymore. 3 How long will all of you attack others;     how long will you tear them down[b]     as if they were leaning walls or broken-down fences? 4 The only desire of this people     is to bring others down low;     they delight in deception. With their mouths they bless,     but inside they are cursing. Selah 5 Oh, I[c] must find rest in God only,     because my hope comes from him! 6 Only God is my rock and my salvation—     my stronghold!—I will not be shaken. 7 My deliverance and glory depend on God.     God is my strong rock.     My refuge is in God. 8 All you people: Trust in him at all times!     Pour out your hearts before him!     God is our refuge! Selah 9 Human beings are nothing but a breath.     Human beings are nothing but lies.     They don’t even register on a scale;     taken all together they are lighter than a breath! 10 Don’t trust in violence;     don’t set false hopes in robbery. When wealth bears fruit,     don’t set your heart on it. 11 God has spoken one thing—     make it two things—     that I myself have heard:     that strength belongs to God, 12     and faithful love comes from you, my Lord—     and that you will repay     everyone according to their deeds. Footnotes: Psalm 62:1 Or my soul Psalm 62:3 Correction; MT kill them Psalm 62:5 Or my soul Common English Bible (CEB) Copyright © 2011 by Common English Bible

But I want easy answers!

"The role of Job serves as paradigm for a righteous man faced with the human condition. As often noted, Job protests against easy answers, but the power of these protests derives from the many ways in which Job makes his point by challenging accepted wisdom and traditional teachings. In a very real way, Job takes on religious orthodoxy as an insufficient means to express the complexity of life. Job protests against the reduction of tradition into simplistic cause and effect theology."—James D. Nogalski, “Job and Joel: Divergent Voices on a Common Theme,” in Reading Job Intertextually, ed. Katharine J. Dell and Will Kynes, LHBOTS 574 (London: T&T Clark, 2013), 137

Contingency

"These verses [Joel 2:12–14] employ שוב [šwb] positively, twice commanding the people to return to YHWH, and once holding out the prospects that YHWH will return to the people and bless them. These actions are contingent upon one another. Only if the people שוב to YHWH is there a chance that YHWH will שוב to them. YHWH responds by offering a series of blessings (2:18–27), contingent upon the response to the call to repent in 2:12–17."—James D. Nogalski, “Job and Joel: Divergent Voices on a Common Theme,” in Reading Job Intertextually, ed. Katharine J. Dell and Will Kynes, LHBOTS 574 (London: T&T Clark, 2013), 135

<idle musing>
Why is it that as humans we want to grab the promise part (apodosis) and ignore the conditions (protasis)? We want the blessings, but we don't want to turn/repent. But, as we שוב to God, he will שוב to us. James 4:8 says the same thing, "Draw near to God and he will draw near to you." (ἐγγίσατε τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐγγιεῖ ὑμῖν).

But that requires that we change our ways—which requires that we acknowledge that we are wrong! No way! Can't do that! Too damaging to my self-worth to admit I might be wrong! Or so says our culture. So we wander and struggle and fail. Oops, can't say fail, too damaging to my self-worth! Better find a synonym.

Personally, I think I'm better off abandoning the cultural paradigm and embracing the biblical one. It offers me hope, something woefully lacking right about now.

Just an
</idle musing> for a Sunday morning

It's not simple, that's for sure

An author may “quote” another text inexactly. An author may work from memory and simply record a slightly different version of the text, or an author may also deliberately alter the quotation to fit the context or to make a different point. One should attempt to make a decision regarding these alternatives since the presupposition of an intentional change or an oversight can directly impact how one interprets the function of the quotation.—James D. Nogalski, “Intertextuality and the Twelve,” in Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts, ed. John W. Watts and Paul R. House, JSOTSup 235 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 104

But nothing like this

Sometimes [in the ancient Near Eastern prophecies], mild criticism of the king is combined with grandiose promises, when the prophets remind the king of his duties toward the gods, their temples and priests, as well as toward his subjects. This criticism, however, is very different from the fundamental doubts about the cultic system or the existing social order as we find them in the Hebrew Bible.—The Prophets of Israel, page 15

To whom is it addressed?

Prophecy in the ancient Near East was a political tool of state propaganda that was used to preserve the prevailing order. Generally, the divine message of the prophets refers to the king and addresses the fate of the royal house; it has little to do with the common people. In Assyria in particular, prophecy serves to legitimate the ruling dynasty.—The Prophets of Israel, page 15

<idle musing>
A good bit different from the Hebrew literary prophets, isn't it? Sure, they do address the rulers, but not to legitimate them! They rebuke them for their treatment of the poor and marginalized and for their worship of other deities. And they warn of the coming doom unless the change their hearts and lifestyles.

You do see prophets, like Nathan, who legitimate David's dynasty. But Nathan was also the one who confronted David about Bathsheba and Uriah! Don't try that in Assyria if you want to live.
</idle musing>

Praxis matters

Righteousness and justice—how one relates to God and human beings—are the hallmarks by which humanity in general, and God’s people in particular, shall be evaluated. The prophets challenge God’s people in times of crises in order to elicit a change in behavior. When people worship gods who do not control the world, consequences ensue. When people treat the poor as commodities, consequences ensue. These two foci remind readers of the Twelve of their own responsibility to behave as those who fear YHWH, who learn to distinguish between the righteous and the wicked, and who live accordingly.—James Nogalski, "Recurring Themes in the Book of the Twelve: Creating Points of Contact for a Theological Reading," Int 61 (2007):135–36

Those pesky prophets!

Nowhere else in the entire ancient Near East did prophets or other men of God ever proclaim such a message. True, outside Israel, gods could be angry and bring disaster upon their cities, countries, and people. Yet the foundations on which the relationship between God and his king, his city, or his people rested was never questioned. What the prophets of Israel, in turn, announced was outrageous and new in the ancient world. Quite rightly, they have been described as Männer des ewig Neuen “men of the eternally new” (Bernhard Duhm). This is not contradicted by the fact that they really did not intend “to say anything new, they are only proclaiming old truth” (Julius Wellhausen). But since they made this ancient truth—namely, the relationship to God mediated by kings, judges, priests, seers, and sages—dependent on God’s desire for justice, they reversed the traditional order.—The Prophets of Israel, page 8

<idle musing>
A new book started. I hope you enjoy the excerpts as we go along. I'm a bit ambivalent about the book—there aren't any footnotes! How can he defend some of his statements without documentation? So it's more like a series of long lectures on the subject of the Hebrew prophets and the prophetic books. He takes a far more critical stance than I do, but the insights he offers are great, as the preceding paragraph shows.

Enjoy the ride!
</idle musing>

A different perspective

From James D. Nogalski, “Joel as ‘Literary Anchor’ for the Book of the Twelve,” in Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve, ed. James D. Nogalski and Marvin A. Sweeney, SymS 15 9Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 20000, 95: Instead, [Hosea] 14:5–9 [4–8] offers the foundational promise of YHWH’s salvific intention, on which the call to repentance is built. This promise is not offered because Israel has repented; it offers the reason why Israel should repent. The significance of the call to Israel and its position at the end of the writing lies in the open-ended nature of the invitation. It becomes a type of divinely initiated RSVP to which Israel is called to respond, but no response is narrated. In fact, the final verse of the book indicates that the open-ended nature of the call is transferred to the reader. (emphasis original) <idle musing>
Wow! I had always read it the other way, too. What an eye-opener! That's the kind of God we have...
</idle musing>

From beginning to restoration

The Christian life now is not about fear that we will fail to keep happy the One who loved us while we were still enslave to darkness. The Christian life is really about grasping two concepts: our adoption into God’s family—which means Jesus is our brother, and that God loves us like he loves Jesus—and our purpose in God’s plan to restore his kingdom on earth. We are, and will be, God’s new divine council. He is our Father. We are his children, destined to live where he lives forever. We are his coworkers, tasked with helping him release those still owned by the lord of the dead and held captive by unseen powers of darkness.

That is what the Bible is about, from Eden to Eden. That is your destiny. Your life now is not about earning your place in God’s family. That cannot be earned. It’s a gift. Your life now is showing appreciation for your adoption, enjoying it, and getting others to share it with you.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 154

<idle musing>
A fitting final excerpt from the book, wouldn't you say? As I said at the beginning, I like this book. It's a great introduction to the whole issue of the spiritual/unseen realm in the Bible. But—and this is a huge but—it's too simplistic. The real (unseen) world is more complicated than he makes it out to be. Sure, the general overview is correct, but if you spend much time reading the ancient sources, well, let's just say, "It's complicated!" And I think God wants us to see it that way, otherwise we would get too comfortable with the boxes we create. We do anyway!

So, I recommend the book as a first step. But go on and read other stuff; I haven't finished his more scholarly version yet, but what I have read seems good: The Unseen Realm. Another book, which I excerpted from extensively a year or so ago, is World Upside Down: Reading Acts in the Graeco-Roman Age.

A book that recently appeared and that I haven't had a chance to look at yet but looks great is Destroyer of the gods: Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World by Larry Hurtado (and, yes, the lower case "g" on gods is correct!). Hopefully I'll be able to snag a copy of it at AAR/SBL!

Next up? Not sure. I haven't had a lot of time to read this summer, between cabins, Eisenbrauns, and copyediting. Hopefully I'll have something for you tomorrow : )
</idle musing>

Which will it be?

As Christians, we’ve probably heard many times that we need to be like Jesus. We certainly do. But when we hear that, we tend to process it only in terms of being good, or maybe “less bad.” We turn what’s actually a nearly inconceivable idea—that we will one day be as Jesus is—into a performance obligation.

Rather than feel guilty about how much we aren’t like Jesus, and pledge in our hearts to “do better,” we need to let the blessing of what he did, and will do, rewire the way we think about being like him. We can turn Christ-likeness into a task we must perform lest God be angry with us, but that’s bad theology. It turns grace into duty. Or we can be grateful that one day we will be what God is thrilled to make us—what he predestined us to be (Rom 8:29)—and live in such a way that people enslaved to dark powers will want to join us in God’s family. One perspective looks inward; the other looks heavenward.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 153–54

Of the world? Or not of the world?

When our worldview is attuned to God’s plan to rescue people from every nation, making them part of God’s family, we are not of this world. Being of this world is to be absorbed by the world’s concerns and living accordingly. Unbelievers should be able to tell from our speech, behavior, ethics, and attitude toward others that we’re not cynical, selfish, or harsh—that our focus is not on getting ahead or on using people. We should not live to gratify ourselves. We are to be the antithesis of these things. In other words, we are to live as Jesus lived. People wanted to be around him because he wasn’t like most everyone else.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, pages 144–45

Go organic!

Just ran across this, posted by a seed company, not sure which one anymore, but I think it was Baker Seeds. The article is entitled Organic farming beats conventional method, new finding shows Read the whole thing, but this paragraph sums up the mess we are in:

“Results from long-term experiments have shown that continuous use of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides only ensures short term gains in production, but fails to give high yields sustainably in the long-term owing to declining soil fertility as demand for nutrients exceed natural replenishment mechanisms, especially where high yielding varieties are used,” says Dr Anne Muriuki, Centre director KALRO Kabete and technical coordinator of the organic farming trials.

We've lost sight of it

In essence, baptism was a loyalty oath and a message to the demonic powers (as well as any people present) of just whose side you were on in the spiritual war. Ancient Christians understood this better than we do today. Early church baptismal rites included a renunciation of Satan and his angels because of the this passage [1 Pet 3].— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 144 (emphasis original)

<idle musing>
We've lost sight of that, though, haven't we? We're practicing atheists in our daily life, living by our own strength, doing our own thing. Of course, as so many songs say, when we reach end of our own strength, we cry out to God! As if God were simply an energy drink or a Powerbar™ that we took when we ran low on energy.

So, we're selling God short and robbing ourselves of the opportunity to enjoy the presence of God in our lives. Continually. Moment-by-moment. Resting in his love for us and living by his power in us.
</idle musing>

Yep, they're real

Another implication of the passages of Scripture we’ve examined is that the notion of demonic strongholds is biblical. We aren’t given a full description of demonic zones or turf boundaries, or even a spiritual pecking order for the dark side. We are told, however, that the unseen powers see earth as their domain. We’re told those powers resist God’s kingdom and don’t want people to become part of God’s plan to spread his good rule everywhere. That means we should expect resistance we can’t explain with logic or empirical evidence and we can’t defeat it on our own. God has given us his Spirit and unseen agents of his own to help us further his mission (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; Heb 1:13; 1 John 4:4).— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 133

<idle musing>
Mind you, this is written by a non-Charismatic! Further, he is correct—on both counts: demonic strongholds are a biblical concept. And, most important to remember for those who want to lay out a roadmap, we aren't given the details. Nor should we spend a great deal of time trying to develop a roadmap. It's a distraction from the task of living a godly life and shining in the corner of the world where God placed you.

3 By his divine power the Lord has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of the one who called us by his own honor and glory. 4 Through his honor and glory he has given us his precious and wonderful promises, that you may share the divine nature and escape from the world’s immorality that sinful craving produces. (2 Pet 1:3–4 CEB)

What more do we need?
</idle musing>

It's never too late!

This just showed up in my RSS feed this morning. Here's the first two paragraphs to whet your appetite:

A hundred years ago, the New York Times reported on a rather sophisticated study for the time: 4,600 cases of cancer appearing over a seven year period, suggesting that the increased consumption of animal foods was to blame. A century later, the latest review on the subjects concluded that mortality from all causes put together, ischemic heart disease, circulatory, and cerebrovascular diseases was significantly lower in those eating meat-free diets, in addition to less cancer and diabetes.

I’m surprised they found such significant results given that people in these studies typically didn’t stop eating meat until late in life. For example, in the largest study done up until recently, up to a third of subjects ate vegetarian for less than five years, yet they still ended up with lower rates of heart disease whether they were under 60 or over 60, normal weight or overweight, used to smoke or never smoked; those that had stopped eating meat had lower risk, suggesting that decades of higher risk dietary behavior could be reversed within just years of eating healthier.

Do read the whole thing—and consider adopting a whole foods, plant-based diet! It's never too late

The Messianic Secret

The “new plan” of God’s—that he would die and then rise from the dead to reverse the curse of the fall—isn’t at all evident in the Old Testament. Instead, clues are scattered throughout the Old Testament in dozens of places. Never is it all revealed in one place. The messianic profile is only clear in hindsight—and even then only to someone who already knows what to look for and expect.

Intelligent supernatural evil beings, of course, knew the prophesied son of David had arrived (Matt 8:28–29; Luke 4:31–35). That much they could grasp from the Old Testament. But nothing the demons ever say creates the impression that they understood Jesus was come to earth to die and rise again, reversing the curse.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, pages 101–2

<idle musing>
Which is why Paul can call it the mystery of the gospel...
</idle musing>

Take off the blinders!

It’s time we looked at ourselves through supernatural eyes. You are a child of God, fit for sacred space, not because of what you do or don’t do, but because you are in Christ, adopted by God (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:5). You’ve been extracted from the realm of darkness and “transferred … to the kingdom of his beloved Son” (Col 1:13).

We must never, not for a moment, forget who we are in Christ—and what that means to the world.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, pages 84–85

<idle musing>
Ah yes, where the rubber meets the road. The supernatural does intersect with the seen realm in a very real way.
</idle musing>

He's unlike us

Many of the strange laws and practices of the Old Testament are grounded in the need to teach people that God is unlike everything else. In his nature and character, he is unique; he is completely other than humanity and anything else. For Israel, that was a truth that had to be reinforced at all times. Otherwise, God might be thought of as ordinary.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 72

lt;idle musing>
It wouldn't hurt us a bit to realize that, either. We like a tame god, one we can control and manipulate. Fortunately, we don't have one!
</idle musing>

Whence salvation?

Being right with God is another way of talking about salvation. But despite what we’ve often been taught in Sunday school, salvation didn’t come to Israelites by obeying rules, by following the Law. Whether in the Od Testament or the New, salvation is never earned, or even deserved. It’s given by the grace of God in response to faith.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 72 (emphasis original)

<idle musing>
I like to tell people to read Hosea when they tell me that the OT teaches salvation by law. It's just not true! But it sure does make a nice, neat system : (

Life is messier than we want to admit...
</idle musing>

The plot

Our story so far: God cast aside the nations and their people at Babel. The lesser gods assigned to them took dominion (Deut 32:8–9). When God started over with Abraham, it was clear that he planned to one day reclaim the nations through the influence of Israel (Gen 12:3). But the gods of the nations would have to be forced to surrender their power and worship (Ps 82:6–8). That meant conflict—in both the seen and unseen realms. As soon as there was an Israel, she was in the crosshairs of the gods.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 67

<idle musing>
OK. Kind of. I would rate this as a bit too simplistic, but I have to remember he isn't writing this book for me. He is writing this book for the average person who hasn't spent most of their adult life reading ancient languages and ancient texts and histories. So, yes. I can agree with it as a basic overview.
</idle musing>

Image bearers

[R]epresenting God means every job that honors him is a spiritual calling. Every legitimate task can be part of moving our world toward Eden and blessing fellow imagers—or not. God doesn’t view people in ministry as more holy or special because of their job descriptions. God cares about how each of us represents him where we are. We either stand against the darkness, sharing the life God wants everyone to ultimately experience, or we don’t. The opportunity doesn’t need to be spectacular; it just needs to be taken.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 34

Boring

What I’ve heard in church over the years doesn’t just miss the boat—it makes the supernatural boring. And even worse, the church’s teaching emasculates the unseen, supernatural world, rendering it powerless.

A lot of what Christians imagine to be true about the unseen world isn’t. Angels don’t have wings. (Cherubim don’t count because they are never called angels and are creaturely. Angels are always in human form.) Demons don’t sport horns and a tail, and they aren’t here to make us sin (we do that just fine on our own). And while the Bible describes demonic possession in rightfully awful ways, intelligent evil has more sinister things to do than make sock puppets out of people. And on top of that, angels and demons are minor players. Church never seems to get to the big boys and their agenda.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 19

First question

But let’s not lose track of the question I asked at the beginning. Do you really believe what the Bible says? That’s where the rubber meets the road. It won’t do you any good to learn what the Bible really says about the unseen world and how it intersects with your lie if you don’t believe it.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, page 16

<idle musing>
And most people don't—unless it fits their preconceived ideas and endorses their current lifestyle, of course! Then it's true.
</idle musing>

The physical book

When it comes to the format discussion, the physical book is here to stay. With studies published on exhaustive reading, the correlation between screens and reduced retention, and the often expressed active joys of using a physical book, it it impossible for me to see a future entirely empty of them. There is still very much a need and desire for academic book use in its physical form, particularly in the Humanities.—Against the Grain, 28/2 (2016): 20

It's right in front of you!

The members of God’s heavenly host are not peripheral or insignificant or unrelated to our story, the human story, in the Bible. They play a central role. But modern Bible readers too often read right past, without grasping the fascinating ways the supernatural world is present in dozens of the most familiar episodes in the Bible. It took me decades to see what I now see in the Bible.— Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, pages 15–16

<idle musing>
Indeed! I have taught various incarnations of Old Testament Survey many times over the years. The thing that always delights me is when the lightbulb goes on as people see that the biblical world is a supernatural world. All of a sudden they start seeing it everywhere. That's when I'm glad to be a teacher : )
</idle musing>

Apotropaic summary

This study has used apotropaic intercessory texts as windows into ANE and biblical theologies—specifically studying the kinds of human agency the intercessors portray in response to divine threats of doom. Ritual texts present intercessors as straddling divine and mundane worlds: following prescribed pathways for amending the status quo with the gods’ help, even using magical speech with divine approval, while nevertheless petitioning the gods from their position as mortals. The biblical texts show the intercessors’ initiative, courage, rhetorical skills, and love for their people as they speak out in opposition to their deity.

Both the ANE ritual texts and the biblical narratives find their way out of the paradox central to apotropaic intercession—how to depict humans as countering divine will while still holding the gods supreme. But they do so differently. In their depictions of human agency the biblical writers had far more freedom than writers of the ritual texts, and far more at stake than simply avoiding imitation of ritual practices like their neighbors’. While the ritual texts were meant to assist intercessors in accomplishing their goal, the biblical texts, as sacred stories, had a different purpose: illustrating what YHWH seeks from his intercessors, and by extension, his people: standing up for others, with courage, in the face of injustice and near-certain doom—even injustice and doom from YHWH himself! YHWH’s secret applause as his people challenge his own decisions shows his ultimate interest in building human integrity in an uncertain world. The idealized relationships in all these texts, ritual and biblical alike, show divine efforts to help their people navigate the treacherous tides of sin and threat.—Forestalling Doom pages 241–42

Listen! And respond

In 1 Chronicles 21 we see YHWH staying the hand of the angel as if waiting for David to intercede. We also see YHWH lingering after sending off the other “men” to investigate Sodom, waiting to share his plan with Abraham. Repeatedly, we see YHWH giving his intercessors warnings and thus openings for intercession. Amos responds to YHWH’s visions in Amos 7:2, 5, while Moses and Aaron fall on their faces and intercede when warned to move away in Numbers 16.

What these texts model is human initiative, as much as courage, intelligence, verbal agility, and responsibility for others. These intercessors come up with their own speeches, not words already dictated by YHWH.—Forestalling Doom pages 239–40

Dual role

One concept noted repeatedly in this study is the mystification of agency found in causative and particularly in hybrid speech acts. In the namburbis and Text 3, the agency responsible for the magical effect is either attributed to the gods or obfuscated through ambiguous verbal forms. The double illocutionary force of the hybrid speech acts fits particularly well with the role of the Mesopotamian ritual practitioner as recently described by both Maul and Rüdiger Schmitt. Both scholars claim that ANE practitioners “slip into” the role of a god when carrying out magical rituals, actively bringing the gods’ powers into the ritual context. As a human, the practitioner can only petition the gods for help, but as one acting the part of a god, the practitioner can actually enact the desired transformation with speech. Such dual action results from the practitioner’s double role in the blended space of the ritual, both drawing on divine power while retaining his or her human identity as a servant of the gods.—Forestalling Doom pages 238–39

<idle musing>
This is actually very common; if you read much anthropology and/or history of religions, you'll see it repeatedly. The line between the divine and the human is bridged by the ritual practitioner. Eliade called it illud tempus (that time) in his writings.

Now the question to ask is, how do we fall into this trap as Christians? How do we think we can control God and circumstances? I would venture to say that we do it without realizing it...

As always, just an
</idle musing>

Available to all!

The biblical writers have taken care to avoid the appearance of ritual speech. These narratives instead show characters apparently speaking in their own voices, demonstrating the best qualities of which humans and human speech are capable: justice, courage, initiative, verbal agility, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and compassion for others. The intercessors display these extraordinary qualities to the deity at precisely those moments when YHWH plans to wipe out the population, and thereby fend off doom. Instead of “channeling” the gods or changing reality with their words, these intercessors show a kind of agency that is theoretically reachable by anyone. Herein lies one reason that these stories have been passed down for millennia. Rather than any scripted speech or access to divine power, it is the intercessors’ human qualities that are meant as models for re-use: qualities that can—potentially—pull communities from the brink of disaster in a whole range of circumstances. So it is that these biblical texts have achieved a kind of posterity that the ritual texts have not.—Forestalling Doom page 236

<idle musing>
Well, I wouldn't limit the reason they survived to just that; there is a good bit of Holy Spirit action involved, too! But, a good point nonetheless.

Intercession is available to all. Let's make use of it for the good of our neighbors. Intercede on their behalf—not to "make America great again" or "keep America great," whatever that means (see here). But so that they might enjoy the presence and peace of God in their lives.
</idle musing>

A theology of prayer

Intercessors with ritual agency can follow divinely modeled instructions to resolve the problem of disastrous omens. Intercessors with magical agency are capable of divinely empowered speech and can slip into the gods’ roles with the gods’ consent and help. Intercessors with persuasive agency, in contrast, rely on traits and resources available to humanity at large, although such intercessors may enjoy special access to the divine (a common trait among intercessors in human contexts as well). Because persuasive agency is the only kind of agency depicted in the biblical texts, the skill with which these intercessors deploy it is crucial indeed.—Forestalling Doom page 234

<idle musing>
As I was reading this, all kinds of prayers that I've read from the ancient world came to mind, along with the techniques they used. Some obviously magical, some more do ut des, some repetitive—as if to wear the god out until the request was granted—, some full of rhetorical flourishes, and some, especially the from the Psalms, just the pouring out of a heart in distress. And then the admonition by Jesus about vain repetition came to mind.

So what do we do with all these data? I'm still (after 40+ years as a Christian) trying to formulate a theology of prayer. I think the best I can do is, "It's messy, but it works (sometimes)!" What do you think?
</idle musing>

Rituals are minimal...

Persuasive agency is the only kind of human agency found in Texts 5-15. As we have seen, the biblical speech is presented as meaningful in context, non-prescribed, and conforming to the specific situation of the speaker. Gestures and manual rites are minimal or absent. In 1 Chr 21:26 (cf. 2 Sam 24:25) David demonstrates ritual agency only after the apotropaic intercessory speech has been received—and uses an ad hoc ritual prescribed for this particular occasion only, without direct discourse. All of these features present agency in addressing the divine as similar to agency in addressing powerful human superiors.—Forestalling Doom page 233

Intercede!

Unlike the portraits of the other gods in these apotropaic intercessory texts, YHWH is often shown as making room for human responses to his plans before enacting them. Texts 5, 6, 13, 14, and 15 show YHWH as secretly or not-so-secretly inviting intercession, or at least pausing before acting in expectation of a response. In Gen 18:17-22, YHWH explicitly awaits Abraham’s response, and in 1 Chr 21:15, he stays the angel’s hand, giving time for David to intercede. Less obvious are the phrases “Leave me be” and “Leave me alone,” in Exod 32:10 and Deut 9:14. As we have seen in Sections 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.6.2, however, these seeming rejections actually serve as “backhanded” invitations for intercession. Although YHWH does not always accede to human desires, he does so often enough—and thoroughly enough—to show that he attends to such protest. As Patrick D. Miller notes, YHWH must be affected by intercession to some degree, or he would not bother prohibiting it on occasion (see, e.g., Jer 7:16; 11:14; 14:11-12).—Forestalling Doom page 231

<idle musing>
Fascinating idea, isn't it? God wants us to intercede! May we rise to the challenge!
</idle musing>

Circular reasoning

Based on the notion that persuasive speech is tailored to its presumed audience, we can learn something about cultural perceptions of the gods by examining the rhetoric addressed to them. Rhetorical strategies in the namburbi hymns suggest a view of these gods as king-like figures granting an audience to the beneficiary with the intercessor’s help. The deities are offered the gifts of food, drink, incense, praise, and other elements of protocol adapted from the human court to the needs of the ritual and the gods (including the setting and props such as portable altars). In these acts we see the assumption that the gods, like kings, are motivated by glorification and offerings. The praise concentrates on those aspects of the divine personality that the intercessor and supplicant wish to enhance: compassion and love toward humanity and a sense of responsibility for the supplicant’s well-being. Apparently, the deities are assumed to want to stay true to the glorious reputations broadcast in these hymns. The praise-vow in Text 1 indicates Šamaš’s assumed desire for human adherents. Additionally, the ritual structure presupposes a divine interest in following protocol. We see orderly, quasi-legal processes in the juridical language in the hymns as well as in the causative speech acts formally establishing a substitute in Text 1’s second oral rite. The implied success in the progression of ritual steps suggests the view that the deities are, for the most part, accommodating to the intercessors’ efforts and the supplicant’s needs.

The rhetoric of the causative and hybrid speech acts presents a somewhat different image of the gods. Rather than appealing to the gods’ personal reasons for desiring the ritual’s success, here vivid analogies are designed to entice the gods into transforming reality in the ways depicted. The gods are assumed to recognize and validate the conventional associations on which the persuasive analogies are based. There is a circular process here: the gods are understood to have given humans rituals containing verbal techniques and references that the gods themselves would find particularly compelling. This circularity supports the view that the gods desire the rituals’ success.—Forestalling Doom pages 229–30

A Summary of Intercession in the Hebrew Bible

The texts suggest that apotropaic intercession was considered to be generally, but not universally, effective, although even in cases where it appears to have failed YHWH refrains from wiping out all Israel. Yet intercession merely has a partial effect; the HB emphasizes YHWH’s freedom of action throughout. He “does what he wishes” (cf. Pss 115:3, 135:6, Jonah 1:14). YHWH may “change his mind” based on repentance, apotropaic intercession, direct appeal by the targeted victim, or YHWH’s own “good nature”; however, he also seemingly disregards much human intervention and persists in his planned punishment.

In sum, then, biblical apotropaic intercessory utterances aim to persuade the deity, rely on many of the same rhetorical strategies and arguments as supplications to human authorities, and are generally portrayed as effective at reducing or appropriately targeting divinely planned doom. As for the theology of the intercession proper, apotropaic intercessory appeals depict a deity moved by human passion as well as pain, a deity sensitive about his reputation, and a deity attached to his chosen, particularly his patriarchs. This God is stirred by justice but sometimes in need of reminding to protect the innocent in his rush to punish the guilty. YHWH is depicted as resembling a well-intentioned and all- powerful monarch, who relies on his advisers for guidance when the concerns of his subjects are brought to his ears—but who always reserves the final judgment as his own.—Forestalling Doom page 213

Where does repentance fit?

Notably, in none of the cases analyzed does the intercessor claim that the people have turned aside from their wickedness, nor does the intercessor promise that they will. Despite its prevalence in Deuteronomy, Amos, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, this theme is absent in the intercessory speeches I analyze. Only in 1 Chr 21:17 do we see repentance by the perpetrator of an offense. But here David confesses not out of a desire to diminish his own punishment (as he did in v. 21:8), but to spare the innocent.—Forestalling Doom page 212

<idle musing>
Kinda blows the stereotypes out of the water, doesn't it? But it sure does make God more merciful and illustrates the depth of ḥesed!

Another thought: You don't turn/repent in order to avoid punishment. You turn/repent out of thankfulness that God has delivered you! Just an
</idle musing>

Just own up to it!

“Indeed experience demonstrates that we inflict heavier punishment upon persons who deny guilt and advance arguments in their own defense, but that anger desists from those who admit the justice of the punishment to be meted out to them. This, moreover, is reasonable, for denial of the obvious is insolence and effrontery, and there is no mockery or disdain like it.”&mdashJudah Messer Leon, The Book of the Honeycomb’s Flow: Sēpher Nōpheth Sūphīm (ed. I. Rabinowitz; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), 331 as quoted in Forestalling Doom page 169 n. 82

<idle musing>
Indeed. But our natural tendency is to bristle and deny, isn't it?
</idle musing>

What do we make of that?

Two speech act categories are absent from the corpus [of intercessory prayers in the HB]: commissives and declaratives, both hallmarks of transformative ritual speech. By omitting all declaratives, the biblical writers appear to be representing apotropaic intercession as something other than ritual—emphasizing, rather, the spontaneous, personal exchange between the intercessors and their God, fitting Moshe Greenberg’s definition of “prose prayer.”—Forestalling Doom page 202

<idle musing>
Interesting insight, once again illustrating that YHWH isn't a tame deity that we can put on a leash. Something we all need to remember when we try to bend God's will to our own.
</idle musing>

It isn't in the ritual

Like biblical intercession with human superiors, biblical apotropaic intercession with YHWH uses ordinary discourse, persuading through appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos. Without causative language, these utterances lack the need for a special connection to the sacred domain for their language to have illocutionary force. They are also presented as lacking a ritual context. Even in 1 Chronicles 21 (cf. 2 Samuel 24), David’s ritual sacrifice—itself lacking direct discourse—is separated from his verbal intercession in time and space.—Forestalling Doom pages 201–2

<idle musing>
He isn't a tame lion...
</idle musing>

Incense

Aaron’s use of incense in Numbers 17 is anomalous in the HB in that Aaron brings it to the people, running into their midst and “standing between life and death.” Except for the High Priest’s ritual in Lev 16:12-13, no biblical descriptions of atonement rites mention incense. Typically incense is prescribed or portrayed in routine offerings at the Tent of Meeting and Temple, as in Exod 30:7-8. Milgrom argues that its use here stems from the literary context, observing, “The same incense that causes destruction when used by unauthorized persons [in Num 16] averts destruction when used by authorized persons.”[footnote: Milgrom, Numbers, 141. Incense must be used only by those authorized or the penalties are extreme (cf. the rebels in Numbers 16, and possibly Nadab and Abihu who are punished for their use of “strange fire” in Lev 10:1).]—Forestalling Doom page 200

<idle musing>
Bad pun alert: Incense to calm an incensed deity...
</idle musing>

There's an narrow opening

Verse 15, in which YHWH is said to change his mind (נחם) even before David intercedes, makes the reader wonder how important David’s intercession was to YHWH’s ultimate decision. According to 1 Chr 21:15, “God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it, but as he was about to destroy, YHWH saw and changed his mind about the calamity and said to the destroying angel, “Enough! Now let your hand fall!” YHWH does not annul the danger with this instruction, however: the sword still hangs over Jerusalem until YHWH has accepted the sacrifice. It appears that YHWH stays the angel’s hand to give David a chance to intercede, much as he presents openings for intercession in other texts (e.g., Gen 18:17-21, Exod 32:7-10 and Deut 9:12-14). Unlike Abraham’s intercession in Gen 18:23b-32a, David’s intercession is successful: not only does YHWH spare Jerusalem but he exacts no further punishment on David or his household.

Overall, David’s intercession parallels others in that YHWH presents an opening for intercession, David argues for protection of the innocent, and the intercession succeeds. Even its two unique features—confession and a link to ritual—follow biblical precedent: as in Lev 5:1-6, the guilty party must realize his sin, confess, and offer sacrifice before his sin is expiated (נשלח).—Forestalling Doom page 198

<idle musing>
I guess the question is, how sensitive are we to the openings that God gives us to intercede? Are we too busy condemning the guilty to hear God say, "Intercede!"?

Just an
</idle musing>

What qualifies you as an intercessor?

David’s opening words add ballast to his prior confession, not only clearing the people but also seeking to reconcile his own relationship with YHWH, thereby making himself a more credible intercessor. [footnote: Compare the instructions to Aaron to make confession on behalf of himself and his household (Lev 16:6, 11) prior to confessing his people’s sins (Lev 16:16). In the eyes of the biblical writers, David may not have been considered eligible to intercede if burdened with unconfessed sin.]—Forestalling Doom page 197

<idle musing>
In other words, "Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift at the altar and go. First make things right with your brother or sister and then come back and offer your gift." (Matt 5:23 CEB).

So, to answer the question:

Who can ascend the Lord’s mountain?
Who can stand in his holy sanctuary?
Only the one with clean hands and a pure heart;
the one who hasn’t made false promises,
the one who hasn’t sworn dishonestly.
That kind of person receives blessings from the Lord
and righteousness from the God who saves.

Holiness matters...and I'm talking heart holiness, not rule-based pseudo-holiness. You know, the kind that is imparted by the Holy Spirit.
</idle musing>

Turn aside

The goal of Amos’s intercessory appeals is to prevent the divine punishment in the respective vision. In Amos 7:2, the verb סלח (“pardon!”[slḥ]) means “do not destroy” or in Milgrom’s terms, “reconcile.” He argues that there is no nuance of exoneration in this term, which signals rather the cancellation of punishment in order to maintain the covenant. According to Milgrom, “when God extends to man His boon of salaḥ, He thereby indicates His desire for reconciliation with man, to continue His relationship with him—in Israelite terms, to maintain His covenant. . . . Thus, the reaffirmation of the covenant is the most apposite form for divine ‘pardon.’” The verb חדל [ḥdl] in 7:5 has the sense of “refrain from, not to do” a specific action. In Jer 41:8, the verb is used specifically in the sense of “refrain from putting to death.” Often it appears in the context of paired options—either to do something, or not to do it (חדל). Again, there is no nuance of sin being wiped away. Rather, Amos asks that YHWH refrain from bringing the predicted punishment.—Forestalling Doom page 190

Are we practicing atheists, or not?

That's basically what it boils down to in article (which you really should read; it's only a few paragraphs long):

If we are convinced that our violence is responsible to secure our future, then our actions will tacitly witness to the death of god in our culture. This atheistic tendency has been prevalent because of our fears since the destruction of the World Trade Towers. The results have been disastrous. The more we prepare for war, the better our weaponry, the more vigilant we become, the more we engage in “preemptive” war or targeted drone assassinations, the more we live the illusion that we can create peace by violence and in turn leave a wake of destruction that mirrors the very destruction we fear. Because peace and security through violence are political impossibilities, our wars are no longer limited political engagements but ideological crusades, and that should concern all people of good will. (A good dose of Niebuhrian realism would be beneficial.) Even more should it concern people of faith who have been told to love their enemy because this love is the nature of God who loved us while we were enemies. Before we can ask the question, “what would you do if” in a hypothetical situation, it would behoove Christians to ask: How do we best witness to this God who loves us while we were enemies? The cross and resurrection are the inconvenient answer to that question.

So how does a prophet spend his/her time?

The first word in Ezekiel’s intercession [Ezek 9] is the exclamation אהה [‘ahah], which Muffs considers to indicate “prophetic opposition to a divine decree.” The particular combination of אהה [‘ahah] followed by ′′אדני ה [ha‘adonai] also occurs in nine other verses, all of which indicate either distress or protest. In Ezekiel’s intercessory appeals, the word אהה [‘ahah] communicates near-hopeless protest, while the title of respect conveys his subservience. Bound to do YHWH’s bidding, he can only plead that YHWH alter his decree. Thus the three opening words combine address, implicit complaint, and implicit petition.—Forestalling Doom page 185

<idle musing>
As I've been saying for many years now, we get the role of a prophet totally wrong. They spend most of their time interceding with God for the very people they are reprimanding.

How different from self-styled "prophets" today, who spend most of their time "prophesying" wealth and prosperity over people! They are closer to the false prophets in the book of Jeremiah than they are to the true prophets of old!

Lord, forgive us! Raise up true prophets who stand in the gap!
</idle musing>

Moses and intercession

Unlike Exod 32:11b-13, which never refers to the Israelites’ sin, the appeal in Deuteronomy [9] mentions their sin at a point of maximum prominence, the center of the chiasm (v. 27b). Such structural emphasis belies Moses’s appeal to YHWH in v. 27b, “Do not pay attention to (אל תפן אל) the stubbornness of this people nor to its wickedness nor to its sin.” If intended as anticipatory refutation, the reference to sin would have been better placed at the beginning of Moses’s appeal, as it is in Exod 32:31. The emphatic placement makes sense, however, as part of Moses’s message to the Israelites on the Plains of Moab in Deuteronomy 9. One aim of the chapter is to confront the Israelites with all the ways they had provoked YHWH since leaving Egypt (Deut 9:7, 8, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24; cf. 9:5, 6). The emphasis on their sin in Moses’s appeal makes sense in that context. Moses is also striving to persuade the Israelites of all he has done on their (undeserving) behalf: hence his emphasis on the 40 days and nights he spent prostrate while making this appeal (9:25). Thus it is fitting as well that no plague is mentioned; in Deut 9:19 Moses’s intercession with YHWH is presented as if it had been wholly successful.—Forestalling Doom page 183

Pro-choice?

The major distinction between this speech [Num 14] and the one in Exod 32:11b-13 is Moses’s citation of YHWH’s attributes in Num 14:17-18. Here the formula becomes the basis of Moses’s two petitions: his plea in Num 14:17 that “your forbearance be great, as you promised” in the formula, and his petition for pardon in 14:19, which picks up the formula’s key word חסד [ḥesed] The version of the formula used here, like that in Exod 34:6-7, describes both YHWH’s mercy and his judgment on wrongdoers and their descendants. By using it, Moses acknowledges the deity’s freedom to pardon or to punish, although he stresses the deity’s clemency in his petitions, using the strategy of choice.—Forestalling Doom page 176 (emphasis original)

The role of a prophet

Evidence includes Gen 20:7, in which Abraham is called a prophet just prior to being asked to intercede and Jer 27:18, in which Jeremiah spells out the expectation that true prophets will intercede. Cf. Ezek 13:5, 22:30-31, in which YHWH judges or laments the absence of an intercessor, presumably a prophet. … According to Jonathan Stökl, intercession was not considered a prophetic role elsewhere in the ANE (Prophecy in the Ancient Near East [CHANE 56; Leiden: Brill, 2012], 215-16). As Stökl notes, however, ANE prophets speaking in the name of a deity sometimes claimed that the deity had interceded within the context of the divine council.—Forestalling Doom pages 152–53 n. 17

It sure is different!

For the most part the speeches take the form of prose prayer, even in the exceptional case linked to ritual—the story of David and the census (1 Chr 21:17; cf. 2 Sam 24:17). Instead, intercessors appeal to pathos, logos, and occasionally ethos to persuade YHWH that his plans would subvert his own interests, be inconsistent with his nature or his promise to the patriarchs, or cost him the people whom he loves. The emphasis on divine injustice in many of these speeches stands in sharp contrast to Texts 1-4. The final chapter demonstrates how the biblical presentation of apotropaic intercession reflects a very different understanding of divine-human relations than we see in Texts 1-4.—Forestalling Doom page 147

<idle musing>
That sure is different from the other ANE stuff, isn't it? YHWH isn't a god to be controlled by ritual or magic.

And what was true then is just as true now. You can't "claim the promise" and demand that God has to fulfill your (usually selfish) wish—see James 4:3, "You ask and don’t have because you ask with evil intentions, to waste it on your own cravings." (CEB)
</idle musing>

But it doesn't always work

Muršili’s plague prayers attest to Hittite beliefs that the gods need not respond positively to every ritual. These prayers recount the king’s fruitless efforts to appease the gods who had brought years of plague to his country, including his multiple acts of compensation and other deeds in accord with oracular instructions. The tone is one of protest but reveals no skepticism. Rather, the king’s prayers indicate his continued efforts to end the plague by appealing to the gods.—Forestalling Doom page 144

Close enough for horseshoes...and rituals

Many persuasive analogies are intended to transfer an attribute from one entity to another using the supernatural means of similarity. Here, the same entity—the dog—inhabits both the source and target domains. The ordinary canine ability to ward off strangers is transformed within the blended space of the ritual (see Section 1.6.2) into the supernatural ability to ward off the sinister sign. This transformation is an extension of a natural ability. By presenting the dog’s new role as an extension of its ordinary behavior as watchdog, the speaker makes the role seem easy and natural.—Forestalling Doom page 133

It's where it came from that counts

The supernatural rites rather than a special supernatural quality of the human agents (ritual practitioners) give the namburbis’ causative speech its most significant supernatural empowerment. The rites were understood to have supernatural power because they were given by the gods. To be effective, the oral rites had to be uttered by the correct, institutionally empowered individual in the correct setting, but they did not require that this individual be a supernatural agent. Although, as Sørensen writes, ritual leaders can have their own links to the sacred domain empowering them with supernatural agency, the primary reason the āšipu could utter supernaturally effective language was that the gods were understood to have provided it.—Forestalling Doom page 91–92

<idle musing>
And again, I am reminded of the practice among some of "quoting scripture" as a magic remedy...we're still basically pagan at heart, aren't we?
</idle musing>

Speaking of ANE backgrounds...

The previous post spoke of the ancient Near Eastern backgrounds to the prosperity gospel—tongue firmly in cheek, of course. But, there is a serious resource that just became available today: The NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible. The notes in the Old Testament are based on the Zondervan monster 5-volume Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary on the Old Testament and the New Testament is from the IVP equivalent.

I was given a copy of the Bible to review, but don't have time to write up a full-blown one right now. I will say this, though: It is a well-done condensation of the bigger versions.

<Rabbit trail>
Generally, I'm not a fan of study Bibles for the simple reason that people equate the inspiration of the scriptural text with the notes.

Don't believe me? Actual experience...I was in a Bible study one time and they were debating what the text meant. One person (a pastor!) asked someone, "What does your Bible say?" and the person read the notes, not the text. The pastor responding by reading the notes in his study Bible! Ouch! No disclaimer that these were simply notes. The assumption was that they had authority because they were on the same page as the sacred text.
</Rabbit trail>

OK, with that note aside, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend this Bible to anyone as a reference. (I don't recommend it as your reading Bible—but as you probably guessed, I wouldn't recommend any study Bible as your reading Bible.) In fact, I've already added it to the bibliography of the seminar I teach for YWAM on the ANE backgrounds to the OT. So, two thumbs up to Zondervan for a good resource (and thanks to Emily Varner for the promo copy)!

Name it and claim it, Akkadian style

This process did not depend on the āšipu’s possessing a pre-existing or essential connection to the divine realm, but rather the āšipu’s authorized participation in the blended space of the ritual.

One piece of evidence that a supernatural connection empowering causative speech lies with the speech itself is the attention given to precise performance. Instructions are quite specific: certain oral rites are to be repeated three or seven times and accompanied by particular acts or gestures. As Sørensen argues, this emphasis on precision indicates that at least a degree of supernatural power (or as he puts it, “magical agency”) inheres in the speech itself. The speech is being used as a “sort of material object” required for ritual efficacy, rather than (merely) as communication. Stereotypy and special prosodic features such as alliteration provide further evidence for the use of speech as a tool.—Forestalling Doom page 89

<idle musing>
Do it just right and things will happen just right. Sounds oddly reminiscent of some people's view of scripture and prayer...

I think it is safe to say it is a sub-Christian view of God.
</idle musing>

Flattery will get you...

Not only the fact of praise, but the content of the praise is significant. Any selection of specific attributes over others uses the technique of choice. In order to put the deity into a beneficent mood, the chosen epithets presumably praise attributes that Šamaš was believed to value. In addition, attributes were selected to guide the god toward the desired action. Citing such qualities plays on the deity’s presumed desire to continue garnering praise by manifesting the lauded qualities all the more (the reason that praise is so widely used in behavior modification today) .—Forestalling Doom page 66

<idle musing>
In other words, flattery will get you everywhere!
</idle musing>

It's real

[Stefan] Maul (Zukunftsbewãltigung : Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Lõserituale [Namrubi])argues that the animals, plants, or circumstances in the omens do more than signify disaster; they also play an active role in triggering it. In his view, the signifying entity infects its target with impurity—understood as a semi-physical substance—from the moment the sign is perceived. Here this entity is called a “harbinger,” a term that connotes an agent.—Forestalling Doom page 55

<idle musing>
In other words, they thought you could get the spiritual to attach to the physical and thereby control it. And this is the world that the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible inhabits. Think about that...
</idle musing>

So what's a guy supposed to do?

One particular Akkadian term for intercession, abbūti ṣabātu (“to act in a fatherly way”), illustrates the Mesopotamian view that a primary responsibility of the male head of household was to intercede on his children’s behalf. This expectation of intercession extended to metaphorical fathers and children in the larger “households” making up human and divine society. For example, personal deities (the family’s or individual’s divine “father” and/or “mother”) were expected to intercede on behalf of their charges before the high gods. Images on cylinder seals suggest two primary functions of the intercessor: providing the beneficiary with access to the deity and speaking on the individual’s behalf.—Forestalling Doom page 52

<idle musing>
Maybe the people who are into male headship should take a cue from this! That's about the only place I can see male headship making sense: intercessory prayer! Otherwise it seems to be a head trip and all about power...(boy, that was a rabbit trail...)
</idle musing>

Give me more!

While we seek to master the plethora of manuscripts, we also savor their very unmanageability. The textual critic’s heart yearns for even more abundance and leaps at the discovery of new manuscripts. It doesn’t matter whether they were moldering in caves or a synagogue genizah or miscataloged in an air-conditioned library. We crave new texts, even as they drive us to distraction. The superabundance of texts is our joy and our burden.—Ron Hendel in teps to a New Edition of the Hebrew Bible, forthcoming from SBL Press

A subtle difference

The Mesopotamian and Anatolian texts show the intercessors’ use of ritual and sometimes magic with the gods’ explicit aid to protect individuals from divinely decreed doom and remove impurity. In contrast, the biblical texts show intercessors protecting their people with rhetorical skill, standing up to YHWH with courage and his secret assistance. In each case, the gods provide humanity with means to fend off divinely ordained destruction—not guaranteed, but frequently effective.—Forestalling Doom page 50

<idle musing>
A subtle, but significant difference, isn't it? Bear that in mind the next time you try to use the Bible as a magic book!
</idle musing>

Get the wording right

When action-based agency is rooted in speech, words operate more or less as things rather than (or in addition to) being carriers of meaning—in other words, they are ascribed conventional effects in context which may be separate from their actual semantics. A classic example is the vox magica, a meaningless jumble of syllables. Similar connections between words and the sacred realm are manifested in foreign words, often incomprehensible to some or all ritual participants, or in the requirement to repeat a phrase a specific number of times. One general indicator that a link to the divine realm occurs in the speech is the requirement that the speech be rendered correctly and completely. Evidence that a failed ritual was attributed to an improperly spoken oral rite is thus a clue that at least some of the ritual’s magical agency was based in the speech (the action). Here again, the words’ meaning is of secondary importance for the success of the rite; what matters is that the words are said correctly.—Forestalling Doom page 25

<idle musing>
That's the way some people treat prayer...and the way some people treat the Bible, too. But that's not Christianity, it's magic.
</idle musing>

It ain't inerrant!

A perfect text-critical procedure is not at hand. Like all historical inquiry, we see the past indirectly through our (always fallible) evaluation of its present traces.—Ronald Hendel in Steps to a New Edition of the Hebrew Bible, forthcoming from SBL Press

Blended spaces

Sørensen argues that in magical rituals, participants (including ritual performers) view themselves as interacting with elements and rules originating in both the sacred and profane domains—a matter of conceptual blending. The model Sørensen uses for this understanding is based in Mark Turner and Gilles Fauconnier’s theory of conceptual blending which in turn derives from Fauconnier’s theory of mental spaces. Conceptual blending refers to a cognitive process people use to combine elements from two or more “worlds” or domains. Sørensen explains ritual as occupying a blended space constructed of two input mental spaces: one comprising elements from the sacred domain and the other comprising elements from the ordinary or profane domain. Ritual participants bring concepts and image-schemata from each domain into the blended space of the ritual. Because aspects of both input spaces are present in participants’ conceptions in the ritual context, participants understand themselves, or the ritual itself, as having potential access to powers (which Sørensen terms “magical agency”) beyond those operative in the ordinary world. Participants understand how the ordinary world operates, based on early experiences of physical forces, living beings, and communication among human beings: thus they have a solid sense of causality in the input space from the ordinary domain. What those using magic lack is a correspondingly strong grasp of how causality works in the sacred domain. The precise mechanisms linking ritual actions to ritual effects remain mysterious.—Forestalling Doom page 23

But how does it work?

We're starting a new book today:

Forestalling Doom
"Apotropaic Intercession" in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East
Alter Orient und Altes Testament - AOAT 417
by Marian W. Broida
Ugarit-Verlag, 2014
xx + 282 pp., English
Cloth
ISBN: 9783868351101
Your Price: $114.00
www.eisenbrauns.com/item/BROFOREST

Here's the first excerpt:

The efficacy attributed to magic relies on mystery. Believers in the efficacy of magic accept the existence of some kind of causality, one that originates in a connection to the sacred domain. A key aspect of this divine causality is that it follows mysterious rules that differ from those of the ordinary world. Although Sørensen notes that, “in principle the sacred space can be unfolded, revealing its secrets,” the mechanisms of action within this “divine physics” are not simply a matter of the ordinary intuitive science through which people manipulate the ordinary material and social world. Theologians or even children may learn rules or explanations prevalent in their cultures about supernatural agents or magical actions, but this kind of information is learned differently, at later ages, than the intuitive science grasped during infancy. In general, it is the conflict with that foundational intuitive science that leads observers to call something “magic.”—Forestalling Doom page 22

Will I live longer if I only smoke 3 packs a day?

The HMOs talked about so-called preventive medicine, but is such a superficial way that the message had virtually no impact. Their dietary recommendations, by and large, boil down to “eat more veggies, drink fewer sodas, and choose leaner cuts of meat.” That’s like telling smokers to cut back from four packs a day to three—definitely a step in the right direction, but woefully inadequate. And because it was so superficial and inadequate, the “eat slightly better” message was universally ignored.— Whole: Rethinking the Science of Nutrition, page 251

Help a brother out!

OK, this one has been sitting in my inbox for almost 2 months now! I need to let people know about a chance to help out a fellow blogger. Rick Brannan has written a good bit about the Apostolic Fathers over the years and did a long, in-depth study of the differences between ἀλλά and ἄλλα, among other things. Well, now he's written a commentary on the two Timothy epistles, concentrating on the Greek and discourse linguistics. Good stuff.

That's cool in and of itself, but here's the neat part: They are adopting again and to help fund the adoption all you need to do is buy his books. Win-win. You get some good books, they get to adopt.

Here's where you can find out the details: https://rickbrannan.com/2016/06/09/help-fund-our-adoption/

Simple, isn't it?

ad fontes!

We talk endlessly about shifting payment responsibilities among different groups—private sectore or public sector, employer or employee—as if these programs are going to help control our country’s back-breaking health costs: about two and a half trillion dollars in 2009? Limiting these discussions and programs to matters of financing is too narrow. These political machinations, which are often fanned with much publicity and media coverage (or should I say hot air?), may please politicians and special interest groups from time to time, but they do little to address the main question of why we are so sick and why we are so unable to fix our sickness.— Whole: Rethinking the Science of Nutrition, page 251