Second Blog Question: Response
In response to Dane’s comments on the writer(s) of Genesis keeping the language sparse for the sake of future generations, I think I have to disagree with some of them. I think that thinking of the Bible in terms of a guide as the writer’s ultimate purpose in writing is really presumptuous, especially since there has been nothing in the actual text to imply that so far. If the Bible (or even just Genesis) had a subheading of “a guide to living,” or “a guide to making the right choices” or something, I might buy it. But it doesn’t, it’s a lot more ambiguous than that. (And I’m not trying to slam your ideas or make fun of you, Dane, just stating my own observations/opinions).
Looking at what the text is actually saying is critical, I think, in coming to conclusions about the Bible. Nowhere does it say “here is what you do in this situation.” If the writers of Genesis were anything like we are, they probably went to writing this in a similar manner as we would. Like today in class, for example, with the poetry we looked at and the stories we told about ourselves. Everything started with an image, and then progressed. We made inferences about the images, but whether that was the intention of the author or not we can’t be sure of without speaking to the author himself or having it written directly in the text. Seeing as Genesis is a book of stories and not sermons (which it is), it is more likely that they sat down with a writing utensil and an image in their head that they wanted to share (whether placed there by God or conjured by their own imagination – it doesn’t matter, that’s not the point I’m trying to make). I don’t think they thought “Hmm, what’s a good way to show obedience to God rewarded? Ahh! I know! Abraham!” And then, voila, the story of Abraham and Isaac was taken down.
It is also wise to keep in mind the culture/beliefs/influences of those writing these stories down. Since God is beyond comprehension, it would be presumptuous to write about Him as if He was understandable. They don’t even write His name out or pronounce it aloud, so sparse language is to be expected from such a group of writers (or writer?).
The authors phrase things in ways that can or cannot be interpreted easily. I think the ambiguity adds to or points towards importance in the story. It gives situations for the reader to respond to. In Genesis 22:4 it says “On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place far away.”
How vague is that? What place did he look to? Was he looking up above his usual vision line or was he looking at the ground? What is implied by this verse within the context of the story?
Why, for that matter, does God ask Abraham to sacrifice his only son?
In the end we see that Abraham’s obedience to and fear of God was rewarded by sparing his son. Obedience and fear of God are considered themes of this story by many, but the text does not outright say “because Abraham feared God, he agreed to sacrifice his son.” At the end his fear of God is acknowledged is acknowledge by God himself (Genesis 22:12).
But does this mean that obedience to God will spare you from ultimate hardship just because he spared Abraham his son?
I think not. Many people who obey and/or experience God throughout the Bible suffer because of it. Jacob is a prime example. God makes promises to Him, appears to Him in one way or another twice, and he gets a displaced hipbone and promise that he never gets to see fulfilled. Sucks to be him.
So to say that the Bible is a straight up guidebook I think is naïve. To say that themes can be seen and attributes of God can be gleaned from digging through and analyzing stories may be true. I think the most important part of the story in the imagery within it. Separate the showing from the telling, maybe think about why the author might have chosen to say what he did and leave out what he did. And while doing that, keep it in your head that any inferences or interpretations that you make or apply in life are just that – inferences and interpretations. The true reasons and meanings of the stories can only be found by talking to the authors themselves. And since we can’t bring back the dead, well, I think educated, intuitive, and objective reading of the text is important in understanding and appreciating the literary value of it.
In response to Dane’s comments on the writer(s) of Genesis keeping the language sparse for the sake of future generations, I think I have to disagree with some of them. I think that thinking of the Bible in terms of a guide as the writer’s ultimate purpose in writing is really presumptuous, especially since there has been nothing in the actual text to imply that so far. If the Bible (or even just Genesis) had a subheading of “a guide to living,” or “a guide to making the right choices” or something, I might buy it. But it doesn’t, it’s a lot more ambiguous than that. (And I’m not trying to slam your ideas or make fun of you, Dane, just stating my own observations/opinions).
Looking at what the text is actually saying is critical, I think, in coming to conclusions about the Bible. Nowhere does it say “here is what you do in this situation.” If the writers of Genesis were anything like we are, they probably went to writing this in a similar manner as we would. Like today in class, for example, with the poetry we looked at and the stories we told about ourselves. Everything started with an image, and then progressed. We made inferences about the images, but whether that was the intention of the author or not we can’t be sure of without speaking to the author himself or having it written directly in the text. Seeing as Genesis is a book of stories and not sermons (which it is), it is more likely that they sat down with a writing utensil and an image in their head that they wanted to share (whether placed there by God or conjured by their own imagination – it doesn’t matter, that’s not the point I’m trying to make). I don’t think they thought “Hmm, what’s a good way to show obedience to God rewarded? Ahh! I know! Abraham!” And then, voila, the story of Abraham and Isaac was taken down.
It is also wise to keep in mind the culture/beliefs/influences of those writing these stories down. Since God is beyond comprehension, it would be presumptuous to write about Him as if He was understandable. They don’t even write His name out or pronounce it aloud, so sparse language is to be expected from such a group of writers (or writer?).
The authors phrase things in ways that can or cannot be interpreted easily. I think the ambiguity adds to or points towards importance in the story. It gives situations for the reader to respond to. In Genesis 22:4 it says “On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place far away.”
How vague is that? What place did he look to? Was he looking up above his usual vision line or was he looking at the ground? What is implied by this verse within the context of the story?
Why, for that matter, does God ask Abraham to sacrifice his only son?
In the end we see that Abraham’s obedience to and fear of God was rewarded by sparing his son. Obedience and fear of God are considered themes of this story by many, but the text does not outright say “because Abraham feared God, he agreed to sacrifice his son.” At the end his fear of God is acknowledged is acknowledge by God himself (Genesis 22:12).
But does this mean that obedience to God will spare you from ultimate hardship just because he spared Abraham his son?
I think not. Many people who obey and/or experience God throughout the Bible suffer because of it. Jacob is a prime example. God makes promises to Him, appears to Him in one way or another twice, and he gets a displaced hipbone and promise that he never gets to see fulfilled. Sucks to be him.
So to say that the Bible is a straight up guidebook I think is naïve. To say that themes can be seen and attributes of God can be gleaned from digging through and analyzing stories may be true. I think the most important part of the story in the imagery within it. Separate the showing from the telling, maybe think about why the author might have chosen to say what he did and leave out what he did. And while doing that, keep it in your head that any inferences or interpretations that you make or apply in life are just that – inferences and interpretations. The true reasons and meanings of the stories can only be found by talking to the authors themselves. And since we can’t bring back the dead, well, I think educated, intuitive, and objective reading of the text is important in understanding and appreciating the literary value of it.
posted by Kimmy at 9:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home