Notes on Zechariah 6b and 7

If you've been with me since the beginning, you would not be surprised to discover we yet again have three sections:

6:9-15 The coronation and obedience

7:1-6 A technical question about obedience

7:7-14 What Yhwh has always said is important

I think 6:9-15 is the epilogue to the visions, and it draws together several threads. But it also suggests a later time than the visions due to the message about the branch. The language also changes from 6 to 7, which suggests 7 is a new section, as is commonly and rightly held, due to the new time reference in 7:1 (cf. 1:1; 1:7) and to there being something of a parallel structure across 7-8.

6:9-15 The coronation and obedience

I can find a nice chiasm here without too much effort. It looks a little something like this: 

A the word of Yhwh (6:9)

B the Babylonian quartet (6:10)

C make a crown (6:11)

D the branch will build (6:12)

D' the branch will rule (6:13)

C' the crown shall be (6:14a)

B' the Babylonian quartet (6:14b)

A' the voice of Yhwh your God (6:15)

This chiastic structure relies on keywords, and is relatively consistent.

A: In 6:9 you have the regular speech formula, "the word of Yhwh came to me saying...", while in 6:15 it concludes with "the voice of Yhwh your God". While the introduction signals the type of speech, the conclusion notes that it is hearing and heeding the voice of Yhwh is what will lead to blessing. In the same way as disobedience led to being vomited from the land, obedience will result in the future tied up with the rule of God's branch.

B: In 6:10 and 14 we meet the Babylonian quartet, who are called exiles (הַגּוֹלָה) to suggest that they have more recently returned. The four get six names in total: while Tobiah and Jedaiah are consistent, Heldai becomes Helem, and McComiskey points out that Helem is elsewhere Heled and Heleb. The fourth name is Josiah son of Zephaniah, but in the second mention he is Hen, which could either be a name, but plausibly even a title: "his grace, the son of Zephaniah). I don't know if this is legit but it sounds like a nice workaround. I'm not sure why they seem to be the recipients of the crown, or perhaps those to whom it is dedicated "as a memorial in the temple of Yhwh" (6:14) but perhaps this crown is the temple's finishing touch, so they merit a mention as those who helped the project over the line.

C: The crown is mentioned here as being made of silver and gold, and for the head of Joshua. It is also a word which looks plural (עֲטָרוֹת), so it could be that the silver and gold of Heldai, Tobiah, Jedaiah and Josiah are already in crown form, and are combined together into a single mega-crown (n.b. Jesus has many crowns in Rev. 19:12) for this new high priest/king.

D: The two halves which started me thinking about chiasms are the repetition at the end of v12 and beginning of 13: he will build the temple of Yhwh. I think rather than dittography this is highlighting this parallel structure. In the first half there is a little pun: "branch his name; from under he will branch out". (צֶמַח שְׁמוֹ וּמִתַּחְתָּיו יִצְמָח). "From under" (וּמִתַּחְתָּיו) sounds like he's staging a comeback, although this is not Zerubbabel being rescued (cf. 9:9) but Joshua being crowned as the branch. I thought he was a partner with the branch (3:8) but it appears he will have to go it alone.

What that will look like we are told in D`, which is that apart from finishing the temple building, he will have the dual role of priest and king, sitting and ruling, as well as being priest, all from the same throne. This is a holding pattern, awaiting the next Davidide to put his hand up, but for now "there shall be a counsel of peace between the two" - the two roles, in the one throne. 

7:1-6 A technical question about obedience

The chiastic structure of 6:9-15 gives way to an ABAB structure, where A is the speech formula and B is the speech, in the first instance (v3) a question of the priests and prophets, and in the second (v5-6) the answer. The context is the time reference, which puts us a couple of years after the previous references in the first chapter. 

Apart from a temporal reference, we are also given a topographical one - or are we? 7:2 says (in word order): 

And [subject] sent Beth-El Sar-Ezer and Regem-Melek and his men...

The verb is a 3ms, which leads interpreters suggest the township of Bethel as a whole sent Sar-Ezer and Regem-Melek along with the employees of one of those two fellows. It could also be that the subject and/or object marker have dropped out. The LXX has another suggestion (as I read it), which is understanding 7:2 as a continuation of 7:1, meaning it is Zechariah who is inquiring of Yhwh. While is may work syntactically, it raises more questions than it answers, such as why Zechariah would need to ask what Yhwh says, and why he would send to Bethel? Translations of the LXX baulk at this and read Bethel (Βαιθηλ) as the object. It still has the problem of a 3ms verb. 

My (very) minority is that Bethel-Sarezer together is one name, Bethel being attested as part of a compound name. We would then have these two recent arrivals, with meaningful Babylonian names (Bethel-Sarezer = may the house of El protect the prince; Regem-Melek = the king has spoken), the first sending the second along with his own employees, to ask the question about whether the purpose behind these fast days are finished.

The two descriptions of the lament month (presumably day in the month) use four different words, probably chiastic:

7.3 Should I weep (בכה) in the fifth month and abstain (נזר) as I have done these many years.

7.5 When you fasted (צום) and mourned (ספד) and this for 70 years, did you really fast (צום) for me?

I am suggesting weep//mourn and abstain//fast as chiastic synonyms; I don't think Zechariah's answer using different lexemes is implying anything as there is enough in his answer to rebuke the questioners without needing there to be something funny going on there too. But I don't know enough - it would be fun if there was!

The force of the question as Zechariah interprets it, is that the questioners think they have done enough to warrant the coming of Yhwh's blessing as promised repeatedly so far in the visions. His rebuke shows he understands their penitence as purely performative. And also, perhaps a little like the rebuke of drunkenness around the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11, the focus has been less on the fasting and more on the fast-breaking, the eating and drinking he highlights in 7:6.

7:7-14 What Yhwh has always said is important

The question in 7:7 I think points forward, as the words in question will be revealed in 7:9. The point here is the past conditions were easy, and Yhwh's instructions clear and not hard to obey, yet your ancestors rejected them, and you know well the results thereof. The message is clear then, especially having begun reading in chapter 6: Yhwh your God is willing to bless you; you need only obey. Don't repeat the sins of your ancestors, don't get sidetracked by technical obedience. 

In this section we have a double speech formula in vv8-9, and a brief one in v13. This reveals an ABCABC structure as follows:

A 7:7 Past conditions (life was easy!)

B 7:8-9a Divine speech formula

C 7:9b-10 Yhwh's word to live righteous lives

A` 7:11-13c Past conditions (people rejected Yhwh!)

B` 7:13d Divine speech formula

C` 7:14 Yhwh's punishment for wicked lives

Briefly, three things which stand out are:

1. The use of קרא with ביד הנביאים הראשׁנים in both A sections.
2. The multiple body parts used to reject the good instructions of Yhwh: backs, ears, hearts.
3. The pairs of instructions in 9-10. Two positive, two negative: Do judge justly, do do compassion and steadfast love. Don't oppress the disadvantaged, don't plan evil in your hearts.

Summary

I think that's about it. It probably makes more sense to read 7-8 as one unit, which I might come back to next week. But as I have somehow planned this series to conclude 6 and read that with 7, it's interesting to make these new connections. I think 8 will make more sense of 7, but there's also lots just in 8 that I want to get to next week.

Notes on Zechariah 5 and 6a

This week I'll finish off the vision section of Zechariah, which began (1:8vv) and now ends with horses patrolling the earth (6:1-8). There are also two visions in chapter 5, one of a flying scroll and the other of a flying basket. I guess you could also say the horses are flying, but that's in a more metaphorical sense. 

5:1-4 Flying Scroll

5:5-11 Flying Basket

6:1-8 Flying Horses

Of course, there are better ways to describe each vision, so:

5:1-4 A flying curse scroll condemns theft and lying

5:5-11 A basket containing wickedness is flown far away

6:1-8 Horses patrolling the earth cause God's spirit to rest

There are things which all three visions share in common, and lexemes is a key one. 

• Coming/going (יצא) is very consistent through these visions. A sense that everything is happening is created. The scroll zooms in, the basket zooms away, and the chariots zoom in and out of the scene. 
• Each vision mentions the whole earth/land (כל הארץ). In the first instance this is Yehud (Judah), because the focus is the cleansing of the land from sin. But it also broadens out to describe the whole world - the Persian empire, and even beyond.
• The first and second visions also discuss houses, the house of the thief and liar, and then the house being built for the woman in the basket. The contrast here is with the house which has been the focus throughout Zechariah up to this point: the temple, or house, of Yhwh. 

I'm still thinking through the connections between the visions as a whole, which are said to be chiastic. For instance, here's one way they could be construed:

1.7–17: The promise of rest centred on Yhwh’s house (horses!)

2.1–4: Judgement on the scattering nations (horns!)

2.5–17: His house in Jerusalem is the place Yhwh will dwell (measuring man!)

3.1–10: Joshua the priest over Yhwh’s House (heavenly court!)

4.1–14: Not by might or by power but by Yhwh’s Spirit (lampstand!)

5.1–4: Curse on the house of the thief/liar (flying scroll!)

5.5–11: A far-away house for wickedness (idol in a basket!)

6.1–8: Yhwh’s Spirit at rest (horses!)

I've massaged the titles a little to make the parallels a little clearer. The first and last are the clearest because of the shared vision (horses!), and the contrast between the second/third and sixth/seventh passages are workable in terms of near (the house/houses) and far (the nations, the idol's home). The middle two are about the two key players (Joshua and Zerubbabel), and maybe there's a thread through the first, fourth, fifth and eighth visions. 

The issue with this approach is the chiasm was uncovered by the image of the visions (horses!), but that's the only time it works. Every other parallel is thematic or a keyword. I guess I want my chiasms (if this is even properly a chiasm - something beyond the verse level is better called a parallel or envelope structure) to present themselves. There's a fair bit of work to get here, and even then it's not too tight. 

For me it makes more sense that these visions, like any dream, are pieced together from sights and sounds and experiences from every day. There are people building walls and temple furniture, there are discussions about Zerubbabel and Joshua, about Babylon and Persia, and the horses and chariots of the empire are zipping around, being the eyes and ears of Darius. Now, it can well be the case that both of these are true. But there is enough to keep them together without insisting on an intentionally designed structure.

5:1-4 A flying curse scroll condemns theft and lying

A similar introductory formula to the other visions has Zechariah seeing unprompted for once. Normally the angel draws his attention to something but the scroll is obvious enough to see, because it is flying, and also because it is massive. It's something like 10m x 5m (20x10 cubits), although it's not clear if this is rolled up or not. It's also not clear if Zechariah can see what's on it, or the angel just knows and tells him.

In any case, the angel is there to help and without the 20 questions of the previous vision tells Zechariah what's happening. It's a flying scroll which is also a curse. It's a מגלה עפה ... האלה (megillah 'aphah ... ha'alah). And it has two specific targets, every thief and everyone who swears ... who swears falsely by my name.

The explanation of what swearing entails is held off by a verse, perhaps for suspense, or there was just no need to explain it. Of course swearing in parallel with theft will be the bad type of swearing, and we find out quickly enough that it is.

The assumption here is that these two targets are breaking two commandments of the Decalogue, the 8th (don't steal) and either the 3rd (don't misuse my name) or the 9th (don't bear false witness). The difficulty with the second one is it takes terms from both the 3rd and 9th commandments. But the solution is I think resolved by referring to Leviticus 19, where the wording is almost identical to Zechariah 5:4. This also importantly places these commandments in the context of life in the land, which is not to be like the nation they have been rescued from nor the nations surrounding them. This is the reasoning behind the sexual ethics in Leviticus 18 and also makes sense of the fruit laws in Leviticus 19. The point then of theft/swearing being targets is that these are laws, which, when broken, would lead to them being yet again vomited out of the land. 

5:5-11 A basket containing wickedness is flown far away

This time it's the angel who is doing the coming and going, and he tells Zechariah to look at what things are coming and going up above. It's another flying object, a basket, evidenced by the command to raise his eyes and look. But although he's looking up, he is also looking in, and sees a woman (אשה) in a basket (איפה) - an ishshah in an ephah. to go with our megillah 'aphah ha'alah from the previous vision.  

Of course, it's not all revealed at once. First he sees the basket, then sees a lead disk rising, and then he sees the woman, only for her to be pushed down by the lead cover. 

So far then we have three measurements, two of which are also eponymous for their object (container/weight). We did have cubits for the scroll, and now we have an ephah, which can also stand for the basket, and on top of this is a kikar, which is the word both for a talent (in this case, of lead) and also the shape it comes in, a round object, in this case a cover for the basket. 

There is a textual issue, despite manuscript evidence, where the woman in the based is called עינם (their eyes?), but is pretty universally read עונם (their iniquity) based on logic as well as the evidence of the versions. There are attempts to make it mean something, such as "appearance", as in the appearance of iniquity, but this still assumes it's iniquity.

More interesting to me is the next description, that she is wickedness. The fun pun here is that רשעה is a near anagram for the goddess אשרה. And this then explains how this woman is able to fit in a basket - she is not alive but an idol. She is from Babylon (the plains of Shinar) and to there she will return. 

How will she get back there? Two other women, with stork wings. And the counter pun is now found with the wings of the stork, the חסידה, which is of course very close to חסד. Wickedness represented by Asherah is removed by the stork-winged women representing faithfulness. 

I'm sort of interested by who these women are; divine messengers are generally not feminine in appearance or description (as far as I can recall) so I want to assume these are angels of some description but we really know nothing else. And of course it's a dream. 

6:1-8 Horses patrolling the earth cause God's spirit to rest

Last off are the horses, but this time they're pulling chariots. Which raises the question of whether they were pulling chariots too back in chapter 1. Maybe that's how the same person could be riding a horse as well as standing among the myrtle trees - he was standing aboard his chariot, so he was both mounted and standing. We also have a different number of horses. There were three colours in chapter 1, now there are four, and possibly different colours, but it also reduces to three colours of horses. Presumably each chariot has horses all of one colour.

Where are they going? North, south, and a third direction. NIV says it's west, as in behind, as in, from an easterly orientation. But it makes more sense to say after the north horses, because that's what it says, but also because west would be into the sea, and also because north is the end point in 6:8 of the chapter. What's with north and south? I think it's because the nations who have been most in their faces are Egypt (south), and Syria, Babylon, Assyria and Persia - because everyone needs to access Yehud from the north, if they aren't going through 1000km of desert.

This doesn't resolve the question of where precisely the spirit ends up in v8. Is it in Damascus, Babylon, or Ecbatana? Or is it just [gestures wildly] somewhere up that way? Perhaps the answer is less where but what. As in, what is the purpose of Yhwh's spirit being at rest in the north? The most consistent answer is with the same meaning as chapter 1, that this is a sign the earth is at rest, and the returnees can now get to work building the temple and being the people of God, in God's place, and under God's rule. 

This has all taken three days to get to the end of, because I keep getting called away. Sleep is calling now, and then I'll preach through it tomorrow. And then, the rest of 6 and chapter 7! Until then. 

Notes on Zechariah 4

Zechariah 4 is a book which is treated by most interpreters like a Mad Magazine fold-up cover. It works really nicely if you extract 6b-10a, reading as a straight-forward (notwithstanding the contexts) conversation between Zechariah and his divine messenger-guide.

The conversation goes as follows:

4:1 Angel wakes up Zechariah
4:2a Angel asks what he sees
4:2b-3 Zechariah describes what he sees
4:4 Zechariah asks the angel what he just saw
4:5a Angel asks if he knows
4:5b Zechariah says no
4:6a,10b Angel explains what he saw
4:11 Zechariah asks more of what he saw with a description
4:12 Zechariah asks what he saw
4:13a Angel asks if he knows
4:13b Zechariah says no
4:14 Angel explains what he saw

Right in the middle are two words from Yhwh focussing on the significance of Zerubbabel, first to Zerubbabel himself (4:6b-7), and then to Zechariah (4:8-10a). Both of these are about Zerubbabel, but for the hearing of the people.

There are then three things to focus on:

1. The first item in the vision - the lamps
2. The second item(s) in the vision - the olive trees
3. The paired oracles about Zerubbabel

Briefly, before dealing with these three, is the question of why this construction. The short answer is it doesn't make a lot of sense. One could argue this embeds the oracle lest it become separated out. But in the centre of chapter 4 it has no place to go: it must be related to the vision which surrounds it. The dissonance of reading v6 and v10 as is means one is forced to reassemble the passage so the answer begun in v6 can be concluded in v10. The flow then continues to the end, but of course, having skipped the centre, one must return and grapple with the oracles but now in light of the understanding of the vision as a whole.

The Lamps
I'm not going to lie. It's very confusing. My best attempt at an explanation is as follows:

1. I don't think it's describing a menorah.
2. Rather, we have a stand, with a bowl on top of the stand, filled with oil, in order to feed the lamps.
3. The seven lamps are arranged around the bowl in the centre.
4. The type of lamp is what I could best describe as a pinch-lamp. It looks like an ashtray, pinched in the corner, but there are seven corners. And in each corner would be a wick.
5. This would then be literally quite brilliant, with seven seven-lipped lamps, containing a total of forty-nine burning wicks.
6. The bowl in the centre has grooves which feed the middle of each pinch-lamp.

It could be that I'm wrong, and that there are seven grooves for each lamp, but I think part of the point is that it's dazzling. 7x7 is much more impressive than 7 lamps each fed by seven grooves.

What's it all about? The lamps seem to stand for Yhwh's reinstated presence in centre of the community, enabling them to shine as lights in the darkness.

The Olive Trees
Either side of the lampstand are two olive trees, which are somehow feeding the bowl. One might ask how this is possible when there's no press; olives do not simply drip with oil. But this is a vision, in whichever level of Inception we might be in at the moment (remember 4:1, Zechariah is awakened into this vision from his dream).

Who are they, to restate Zechariah's question from 4:12? They are the "two sons of the oil", not "sanctified" (otherwise they could be messiahs), but with a similar idea. Perhaps "consecrated" comes closest. And they are standing by (על) the Lord of all the earth. So these two people (whom we know to be Zerubbabel and Joshua) also have a role in the heavenly assembly, which is an astonishing statement. That said, we did see Joshua there in the previous chapter, so the new thing is that the oft-mentioned Zerubbabel will join him.

Both men get a symbol - one olive tree each - but while the previous chapter was Joshua's, this is Zerubbabel's. Which brings us to the centre of the passage.

Oracles about Zerubbabel
Not to labour the point, but this is a weird spot for this oracle. It begins as oracles should ("this is the word of Yhwh to Z"), not as an answer to a question about lamps. And after the first oracle, the formula: "says Yhwh of Armies." So I'm quite certain we're in prophecy land, not angelic answer world.

The oracle breaks down into three parts.

1. To Zerubbabel, rebuking his means: Not by might nor by strength but by my spirit. (4:6b)
2. To the mountain, regarding Zerubbabel: You will be as flat as a footy field (4:7)
3. To the people, about the temple: Zerubbabel started it and Zerubbabel will finish it (4:9-10a)

To work through the points:
1/ Might/Strength vs Spirit
This is a rebuke. The theory George Athas suggests is that Zerubbabel got a whiff of independence. He tried taking it and got found out. The point then is to not. God rescued them by his spirit out of Babylon, not by political or any other agitation. So keep trusting in God do work for you.

2/ Flattened Mountain
The two main possibilities are the Zagros mountains in Persia, their powerbase standing for their power. They will be as if flattened when Yhwh raises up his kingly figure.
The second possibility is describing the rubble on Temple Mount. It's hard to know where to even begin. But never fear, work with Zerubbabel and it will flatten itself out as many enthusiastic hands make light work.

3/ Trust the Process
The fear is that when Zerubbabel was sanctioned, that was the end of the temple. But it won't be. It will indeed be built. And Zerubbabel will be there to do it.
The next bit talks about two things, a "day of small [things]", and the tin stone (v10). The small things here refers to the humble beginnings of the temple build. And the tin stone (not to be confused with the capstone/foundation stone mentioned in v9) is a humble image of Zerubbabel up on the wall making sure it's nice and vertical. This will cause everyone to rejoice! It's a "small thing", but an important thing, and a sign that trusting in Yhwh's means is the right way to achieve his ends.

Summary
Zechariah 4 is confusing because of the awful syntax in the EVV trying to make v10 one coherent sentence. It's not. And once you've separated out the filling from the sandwich bread either side, the way the passage works makes much more sense. The imagery is still weird, but it's all coalescing to one coherent theme, about how Yhwh will work with his chosen leaders through humble means to ensure his glory is known and beheld by all. 

Notes on Zechariah 3

Again this chapter divides into two unequal halves around each of the visions, 3:1-8 and 3:9-10.

An alternative division is with the mainline, where there are words to Zechariah about Joshua in 3:1-5 and then words to Joshua from 3:6-10, giving us two very equal halves.

But if we acknowledge both of these divisions (having/eating cake) the passage divides nicely into three parts:

1. 3:1-5 - a vision of Joshua the high priest
2. 3:6-8 - the instructions for Joshua
3. 3:9-10 - a vision of a stone for Joshua

The vision of the stone is embedded in the speech to Joshua, which seems like it is for him,
but Joshua is mentioned in the third person, which makes it seem like it's addressed to Zechariah.

3:1 setting

The verb ראה is used yet again to tell us that we are in a new vision. This time it's hiphil, so there's a more active sense: Zechariah is being shown this vision.
He is shown Joshua the High Priest (this title is repeated in full in 3:8) but also another figure: the accuser, standing there to accuse him. This verb עמד, as a participle, turns up six times just in this chapter, and five times in the first five verses (2x in 3:1, then vv3,4,5). Among other reasons this provides a contrast with v8 and those who are sitting. But the main reason is that this is a courtroom scene. Like Job 1-2, השטן (the accuser, "the satan") is there, before Yhwh or his divine messenger, to have a go at the accused, or, perhaps, to use the accused as a case study with which to accuse Yhwh.

I think, as with the theodicy discussions around Job, the accuser has issues with Yhwh's favouritism and uses people like Job and like Joshua to point the unfairness of this out. As the story goes on, Joshua, the high priest, is filthy. I guess the point is, how can someone dressed like this be the high priest? and, importantly, how does this reflect on Yhwh?

3:2 rebuke

The Satan doesn't get any speaking lines. Before he gets the chance to rebuke anyone, he himself is rebuked and is never heard from again. Yhwh has chosen Jerusalem (1:17; 2:16; 3:2) and he has evidently chosen Joshua, who was in the fire (i.e. Babylon) but has been plucked from the fire and is still on fire (i.e. he is deadly?). So yes, being in the fire is bad, but if the result is you are toughened and powerful, then Yhwh can use you powerfully. As he will.

3:3-5 cleansed

Joshua is identified as in filthy clothes, which are then removed, and then Zechariah chimes in, asking that clean headwear of some form (צָנִיף; cf מִצְנֶפֶת in Exo-Lev) be given him (3:5).

This replacing of filthy for clean garments is possible because of v4, the removal of Joshua's iniquity (עָוֹן). This is an interesting choice of lexeme. It is not ritual impurity from having been far from the temple and eating impure food, but speaks to deliberate misdeeds. There is no discussion of what this might be, simply that he had iniquity upon him, and that has now been removed. This acts as a synecdoche, looking forward to the removal of iniquity from the land (3:9). One difference is that in 3:9 the verb is מושׁ (depart, although qal qatal?), while in 3:4 it's the more normal עבר (in the hiphil).

If I had to land somewhere, I might point to Jude 23 which talks about clothing stained by corrupted flesh. Has Joshua's flesh been corrupted by being associated with iniquitous people and practices, even if he himself is without sin? 

3:6-7 command

The second half of ch3 is a command to walk in Yhwh's paths, with a double set of "if...then" constructions. IF you walk in my paths, and IF you guard my requirements, THEN you will govern my house, and THEN you will guard my courts.

The final line of v7 is a promise of a place among those standing here, whoever they may be. Who these people are is not explained. Could it be those who in v8 are sitting? The confusion over who was sitting (on a horse) and standing reigned in chapter 1, so maybe they are the same group? Or maybe those sitting (3:8) are other priests, while those standing (v7) are the heavenly court? I think this makes the most sense, but again, it's a vision, so it's anyone's guess.

3:8 branch

The command to Joshua continues with an imperative using his full title again. The divine messenger explains that Joshua and his friends/colleagues sitting before him will be מוֹפֵת (portents?) THAT he is bringing his servant, his branch (I think we are to assume the branch = Zerubbabel, although he is not yet mentioned).

The logical language here is a little confusing, as these men haven't yet done anything. It could just be their existence and location, which in and of themselves are wonders (another translation of מוֹפֵת) and proof that Yhwh is doing something big here, with the return of his people, the return of the priests (those sitting), the installation of the high priest (Joshua), and, immanently, the return of his servant, the branch.

3:9-10 stone

Another significant event or item is signalled with another כי הנה (cf כי הנני in v8). This new thing is the stone, a stone with eyes, seven of them, inscribed with an inscription. It doesn't tell us what the inscription might be. There are three options:

1. the next line: I will remove your iniquity in one day
2. the following line: sit under your vine and fig tree
3. the other inscription in the book: קדוש ליהוה (holy to Yhwh), from the final paragraph of Zechariah - 14:20

I like the iniquity one because it preaches well. It's also the closest in proximity. Technically נְאֻם יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת (a declaration of Yhwh of Armies) is closer - maybe that's the fourth option? I also like the third one, although the word "inscribed" isn't actually in the text at 14:20 (it's implied, reflected in translations). Maybe the second one is the one which contextually makes the most sense.

The role of the stone seems to be similar to that of the horses of ch1. As they went around and surveyed the land, so too is the stone all-seeing, and it is the guarantee to Yehud that they can happily go and sit with their friends in their gardens and orchards. The horses declared that the land is at rest, the eyes on the stone know if anything is coming. Therefore the people can relax, finish building the temple, and enjoy life in the land, knowing their iniquity has been taken away, and will be able to be in perpetuity because Yhwh has cleansed and installed his high priest, who, along with the Davidide who is en route, aka the branch, aka Zerubbabel, will shepherd and govern this people.

Notes on Zechariah 2

When I say Zechariah 2 I'm talking about the Hebrew numbering; in English it's 1:18-2:13. Conveniently the Hebrew versification gives us two chapters of equal length. 

And, as with chapter 1, the basic division gives us two sections of unequal length. Chapter 1 was divided by the date formulas into 1:1-6 and 1:7-17. Chapter 2 is divided by the vision formulas into 2:1-4 and 2:5-17. However, as with the secondary division I suggested in chapter 1 (revealing 1-6; 7-11; 12-17), the second part of chapter 2 divides into two as the visions give way to a divine oracle. This reveals the following structure:

2:1-4 The vision of the four horns
2:5-7 The vision of the measuring man

2:8-17 The word for Daughter Zion

1. The four horns

The four horns are mentioned four times, with a fifth in the singular in the final line of v4 (Eng. 1:21). These horns are what Zechariah sees in this vision, and there are four of them, which could, depending on how you count horses, have somehow morphed out of the horses of chapter 1. It's interesting that in chapter 6 and the final vision, there are explicitly four chariots, while at least the first (and presumably the others too) had four horses, which are also four spirits. 

Apart from date formulas, it is only in chapters 2 and 6 where the number four appears. While I haven't yet started to think about the suggestion of a chiastic structure of the vision sequence, it does seem at this point that the first two visions somehow meld into the final vision. But as I say, I'll think about that after I get to the midway point of the book.

However, while the horses of ch1 were scouts, these horns are the powers which scattered Judah and Israel and Jerusalem. At first I thought this could be a way of speaking about the power of Yhwh but the four smiths (2:3-4) would seem to be the anti-horns and also working for Yhwh. Therefore the horns are the powers of the nations, perhaps identified with Assyria (Israel), Egypt and Babylon (Judah & Jerusalem) and I'm not sure who the fourth would be. Perhaps Persia? I know they're sort of God's means of return but that doesn't make them the good guys either. 

2:4 is a super confusing verse; it's also super long. It says something like:

And I said
   "What are these going to do?"
and he spoke and said
   "These are the horns which scattered Yehud
      such that a man's lip could not lift his head
   And these [the smiths?] are going to terrify them [the horns]
      to throw down the horns of the nations
      who raised up a horn against the land of Yehud, to scatter her."

I think the smiths probably represent the general vibe that Yhwh will sort them out. They are his agents for destroying evil powers. This also feels a bit like Daniel, with the kingdoms (some of whom have or even are horns) but at the end they are destroyed by God's agent of destruction and restoration.

2. The measuring man

With the same formula the next vision is a new scene, which reintroduces the measuring line of 1:16. However rather than Yhwh of Armies stretching out his line, it is this man in the vision. 

But while Yhwh promised to measure Jerusalem for a new fit-out, another divine messenger jumps in to stop him, not because he's doing something wrong, but because Yhwh's vision for his city has been enlarged, such that no wall could hope to enclose the multitude of man and beast which will be within it. Thankfully she will not be defenseless, but Yhwh will be a wall of fire around her. 

I'm not clear how this answers the question of the rebuild Zerubbabel is commissioned to do. Perhaps it is about priorities - don't fret about the wall, focus on the temple. The wall can wait, and maybe you won't even need it. 

There is a similar ring to the description of future Jerusalem and Jonah's Nineveh, with it not just being about people but animals (בהמה) too. The difference of course is that Yhwh does not promise to dwell in Nineveh, but he will be in Jerusalem: a fiery wall without and glory within. 

3. Daughter Zion

This final part is punctuated by the declaration formula (נאם־יהוה) and also divides quite nicely into בת־בבל (daughter Babel) and  בת־ציון (daughter Jerusalem). 

2:10-13 (Eng. 2:6-9) is a warning to flee and be free of Babylon, the land of the north (I guess you have to travel north to get east?), and then 2:14-17 (Eng. 2:10-13) are the promise of the new life in the restored land. 

The first section here thrice has the interjection הוי, which is sometimes "woe!" and sometimes just like it sounds: "oi!" McComiskey explains that with the verbal idea it precedes it has to be something similar, like "up!" or as the NIV puts it, "come!" The conjunction כי (ki - for) turns up here surprisingly for the first time in the book. It's five times in 2:10-13 and another three in 14-17, and clearly seems to providing some structure. 

In the second section שכן (to dwell) occurs twice, and this is the key promise. Yhwh will dwell among his people in his city in land. This reverses the departure of Yhwh from the temple in Ezekiel, and is the foundation upon which the future of Yehud as the reconstituted people of God can proceed. "He has roused himself from his holy dwelling" (2:17) in order to make Jerusalem again known as the place where he dwells. 

This is also the beginning of the promise which reaches its pinnacle in ch8, that of the nations coming in to be joined to Yehud and become with them the people of Yhwh. 

Conclusion

It is this final idea of Yhwh bringing in all the nations to his city to fill it to overflowing which ties the whole passage together. The destruction of the horns of the nations, the pausing of the wall rebuilding, the return from Babylon, all make sense as the future for God's people in God's place under God's rule is revealed. 

Notes on Zechariah 1

This term I'm going to be preaching through Zechariah. Last time I went through it in depth was in fourth year Hebrew, so back in 2011. I'm excited to get back into it. I will endeavour to put up some notes as I work through the Hebrew text.

1. Chapter 1

Zechariah 1 finishes after v17 in the Hebrew. The English includes four more verses before beginning chapter 2. It's really neither here nor there, although I think the return of the verb שוב (to return - this was a pun) in v16 means that paragraph is something of a bookend so 1:1-17 works as a complete unit.

2. שוב (to return)

The verb שוב (to return) sets off the first section as 1:1-6. שוב occurs four times: "return to me and I will return to you" (v3); "return (turn back) from your evil paths and from your evil deeds" (v4, cf v6b); "they returned" (v6a). We don't meet that verb again until v16, "I have returned to Jerusalem with compassion."

3. The vision in the middle

This vision is the first of many, and links to the next two visions, with the craftsmen (2:1-4 Heb; 1:18-21 Eng) and the bloke with the measuring line at the beginning of ch2 (Eng; 2:5 Heb). 

While the theme is straightforward (the earth has been observed and it all seems to be at peace, so you have no excuses to get to building), identifying the characters is not so easy. There could easily be a whole bunch: 

• Zechariah (9a)
• the angelic messenger (9b)
• the bloke on the horse (8a)
• a different person standing among the myrtles (10)
• some plural entities in who respond to the messenger - possibly the horses? (11)

I think it's possible there are fewer characters - the messenger could be on a horse, but then standing among the horses. As far as the plural goes, it could be that all the horses have their own riders, but this is a vision - why should it not be the horses talking?!

In any case, the horses have been galloping about the earth, התהלך בארץ (1:10-11), a phrase which Yhwh speaks to Abram in Gen. 13:17, promising him future ownership of wherever he walks, and similarly by Joshua to his men in Josh. 18. We will also hear it again in ch6 when we meet the horses again. This image of Yhwh having complete knowledge of earthly affairs is a consistent theme, and the purpose seems to be to encourage his people to act in light of this divine knowledge.

4. Mercy, goodness and compassion

In the final section, vv12-17 the trio רחם, טוב and נחם (mercy, goodness and compassion) occurs twice. First in v12-13 and then in v16-17, giving some shape to the whole. This also draws a contrast with the beginning, where rejection by their fathers led to the opposite of these things, but their return will again (again, עוד, occurs 3x in the final verse) mean all these things in abundance; Yhwh will again choose Jerusalem. 

In between this is a repeat of key words, similar to the first section with קצף in v2, now קצף occurs three times in v15 and קנא twice in v14. He was super angry with his people in v2,  but now he is super jealous for them, he is very angry with the nations (14-15). 

5. Conclusion

This chapter divides into three, bookended with שוב, with a central vision, and a contrast between judgement of forefathers in the beginning and compassion on the current generation at the end. 

Ogling Obadiah

I've been really getting into Obadiah this last week. I noticed a few points about the structure which have really helped me understand how it is shaped.

For background, Obadiah has always resonated with me because of the way it tells its story. It seems undeniable to me that it's reflecting on Edom's scavenging through the ruins of Jerusalem after the Babylonian destruction, and promising destruction for this scandalous behaviour. I say "seems undeniable" because I came across a TGC article arguing it's predictive prophecy from the 9th century rather than reflecting on the events of the 6th, but I don't buy that.

Things to notice to help with the structure:

1. The speech formulas: v1, 4, 8, 18. 
   This gives us an introduction and three big blocks: 1, 2-7, 8-16, 17-21
2. The day: of the Lord in v8 and 15; of disaster/distress 10x between v11-14.
   This provides some kind of chiastic structure in the centre, with the day of the Lord in 8-10 and 15-16 bracketing the day of Judah's disaster from 11-14.
   I think you can probably find the centre of this in v13a, "you shall not enter into the gates of my people on the day of their distress."
3. "Height" language at the beginning and end, both metaphoric, in terms of arrogance, in 2-4, and literal, in terms of Edom's location, in 19-21.
   
4. The imagery of no remnants in 5-7 maps on to the complete purging through fire in 17-18.
5. The language of the emissary and the nations and the decree from "Lord Yhwh" in v1 also maps nicely on to the final line, 21b: "And the kingdom will be Yhwh's." 

Putting all this together we have an ABCDCBA structure, with some lower-case letters in the middle:

A. Yhwh's message by his envoy (1)

B. The high brought down (2-4)

C. Nothing left (5-7)

D. Your day vs Yhwh's day (8-16)

C'. Everything eaten up (17-18)

B'. Your heights occupied from Mt. Zion (19-21a)

A'. Yhwh's kingdom (21b)

and in the centre: 

D. The day of Yhwh (8-10)

a. 11

b. 12a

c. 12b

d. 12c

e. 13a

d'. 13b

c'. 13c.

b'. 14a

a'. 14b

D'. The day of Yhwh (15-16)

This central structure highlights the greatest crime of all, which is, as with the foreign kings in the following centuries who transgressed the sanctuary, entering into his holy place; in this case it's the gates of his people.

The big structure has well-matched pairs, with the royal language in A, the heights in B, the total end of Edom in C, and the Day of the Lord in D. 

I haven't really seen a structure like this around, probably because most commentators are concerned with the questions around the composition of the book and discerning the redactional layers. But I think this works really well, is very clean, has an appropriate central focus, and a wonderful resolution.

Psalm 33 as a continuation of Psalm 32

 I’ve been looking at the joins between psalms in Book 4 of the Psalter these last few weeks: where they are and aren’t, when they are consistent and when they aren’t. But I was looking at Psalm 33 for a different reason and noticed a couple of things.

 

1/ Psalm 33 is what Peter C. Ho would probably call some sort of acrostic. Not having a go at him but he calls things acrostics which most people in a million years wouldn't consider acrostics. In Psalm 33's case, it's certainly not an acrostic, but it does have22 verses, and it immediately precedes Ps34 which is an acrostic, so it sort of is even though it isn’t.

2/ Psalm 33 is one of the few untitled psalms in the first three books. Apart from Pss 1-2, this is the first since Ps 10 not to have a title. And that’s significant, because Ps 9-10 are often joined together, especially in the versions. The next one without a title is 43, which, again, is often joined to 42 beforehand.

3/ As you finish Ps 32 and move on to 33 you notice that pretty much all the vocab of the final verse of the former is present in the first verse of the latter. And with one exception, it’s in a chiastic order. The prefix for Yhwh is the same in both, and while the forms for רנן and ישר are different, we’ve got an ABCDCBAD layout on our hands:

שִׂמְחוּ בַיהוָה

וְגִילוּ צַדִּיקִים

וְהַרְנִינוּ

כָּל־יִשְׁרֵי־לֵב׃

רַנְּנוּ

צַדִּיקִים

בַּיהוָה

לַיְשָׁרִים נָאוָה תְהִלָּה׃

All of this together makes me wonder if this wasn’t some attempt to have us read 32 and 33 together. Although I have William Yarchin's amazing list of hundreds of manuscripts with variant segmentation, I am not aware of any manuscripts in which these two were read as one psalm, but it’s certainly tempting to do so.

33:1 feels just like a restatement of 32:11, perhaps a (poorly-done) exercise of rewriting in one’s own words. If (and here I’m getting into scary German approaches here) Psalm 32 finished at v7, Ps33 would be a fitting response. That is, 32:8-10 seems a bit out of place. Perhaps the compiler/editor thought 33 should be read rather as the better response to the psalm, where the faithful (חסיד) of 32:6 meet the faithfulness (חסד) of Yhwh in 33:22.

Where I’ve taken this in the preceding paragraph is all pretty wild and speculative, but where I started, the close and deliberate connection between Psalms 32 and 33 cannot be denied, by (1) the lack of title and (2) the reuse, in a chiastic order, of the same lexemes in neighbouring verses of the two. 

Amos 5 Chiasm

I'm working through Amos a few verses a day and came across this nice structure at the end of chapter 5. At the centre of 21-27 is the famous line of v24, "Let justice roll on like a river, and righteousness flow like a never-failing stream." This verse is a very tight chiasm on its own, ABCCBA, but it also acts as a centre-piece for some really perspicuous structures either side of it, which I want to look at briefly.

5:21-23 A four-fold rejection of false piety

These three verses contain four rejections by Yhwh, where something which would normally be praised is rejected. 

21. Hold a festival, a solemn assembly? I won't smell them וְלֹא אָרִיחַ

22a. Offer a burnt offering or a gift? I won't accept it לֹא אֶרְצֶה

22b. Offer a peace offering? I won't look on it לֹא אַבִּיט

23. Sing me a song or play me a tune? I won't listen לֹא אֶשְׁמָע

The structure here is very formulaic, except for the first one, where an additional object follows the negated verb. But otherwise, these verses present four examples of piety, but they are all rejected. Why is this the case? That will become clear after 5:24; acts of piety absent of justice and righteousness are no piety at all.

5:24 Instead, justice and righteousness

As mentioned, this verse has two clauses, which are mirror-images in form.

וְיִגַּל כַּמַּיִם מִשְׁפָּט

וּצְדָקָה כְּנַחַל אֵיתָן׃

24a is verb-comparative-subject (let roll-like waters-justice), and 24b reverses that (and righteousness-like a river-let it flow). The terseness and the precise attention to form highlight this verse as the centre and focal point and their abject absence from all their cultic activities in the previous verses.

25-27 A three-fold carrying

The response and second half of this section uses three near-synonyms for "carrying" to highlight the past, the present and the future. 

25. Did you offer up (נגש) sacrifices those forty years in the wilderness? 

26. Yet you carry around (נשא) the statues of your home-made gods.

27. Therefore I will carry you off (גלה) to Damascus, says Yhwh, God of Armies.

Of course these are not exact synonyms, but they're certainly a variation on a theme. Sacrifices go up, statues go around, and exiles go off. The NIV also points out three variations on idol in v26:

the shrine of your king,

the pedestal of your idols,

the star of your god

I think makes 25-27 another concentric structure, with the added layer in the middle of v26 and also the verbs either side: you carry them, you made them. 

In all, I think these verses are very tightly crafted, with three clear principles behind each group of verses: 21-23 have a negated verb, 24 has the terse justice/righteousness chiasm, and 25-27 plays both with the idea of carrying and the past, present and future. 

Jonah in Acts 18

It's always enlightening reading the Bible in different languages. 

Last night at a German-language Bible study group we were going through Acts 18, and I read something I'd never noticed in English or Greek, which is that God says to Paul (who'd been having an awful time in Corinth), "ich habe ein großes Volk in dieser Stadt." - "I have a large people in this city."

English translations go with "many" because it works better, but the word groß (big) fits πολὺς (many) just fine, AND it made me think of Jonah and Jonah 4 in particular. 

Throughout Jonah the word גדול "big" comes up more than a dozen times, although the Greek word is μέγας (mega!).

But in the last line of Jonah we do get the word "many", speaking of the many animals who would have been destroyed, not to mention the 120k+, had Yhwh not had mercy on them. The "more than" is the adjectival form of πολὺς: πλείους. So we have "many" in the conclusion of Jonah, as in Acts 18:10.

All this makes clear what God is saying to Paul in Acts. Just as God had mercy on Nineveh through the unwilling Jonah, so too will he have mercy on the people of Corinth through the willing (if slightly battered) Paul.

It is a great city, with a great many people in peril with out God's salvation. 

An extra verse in Psalm 118

There's this weird thing which happens in the Great Psalms Scroll in the 16th column. After Psalm 136, Psalm 118 follows directly on. That Psalm 118 follows Psalm 136 is not the weird thing. That sort of thing happens a lot, and is really interesting and quite fun, and has been keeping me entertained for months now.

But the weird thing, or things, are three-fold. 

The first is that Psalm 118 follows directly on, not starting on a new line, not signalling a new paragraph. (You can have a look at it here at the DSS library! Psalm 118 begins with the fourth word on the top right.)

The second is that we've already seen Psalm 118 in this scroll! Way back in the early columns, which are only fragmentary, the last few verses of Psalm 118 begins column vi and leads directly on to - you guessed it - Psalm 104! (The fragmentary columns are in lower case Roman numerals, while those parts of the whole scroll are either in capital Roman numerals, or, as per my practice, in normal numbers.)

The third thing however is the contents of Psalm 118 in column 16 aren't what we expect. It goes something like (and in this order) 118:1, 15-16, 8, 9α, 9β, 29. For this reason this isn't Psalm 118 proper, but what is called a "catena", meaning a connected series of texts; the connection being they are all drawn from Psalm 118. 

At first glance there are two versions of v9, what I'm calling 9α and 9β. But properly speaking, v8 and v9 are very similar; they are versions of each other. What we meet in this catena then is a third variation, and also much more interesting versions of the v8 and 9 we are familiar with.

Here are the normal v8 and 9 in Hebrew and then English:

8 טוֹב לַחֲסוֹת בַּיהוָה מִבְּטֹחַ בָּאָדָם׃

9 טוֹב לַחֲסוֹת בַּיהוָה מִבְּטֹחַ בִּנְדִיבִים׃

8 It is better to shelter in Yhwh than to trust in man.

9 It is better to shelter in Yhwh than to trust in nobles.

You notice a clear pattern: "It is better to shelter in Yhwh than to trust in X", where X can change. 

What is different in 11Q5 (this scroll we're looking at) is that each verse has more internal variation, as well as having a third permutation.

Again, in Hebrew then in English (you'll notice this is unpointed Hebrew text, and also that I haven't written Yhwh in Paleo-Hebrew as per the scroll, because I don't know how to make my computer do that.)

‏8 טוב לבטוח ביהוה מבטוח באדם׃

9α טוב לחסות ביהוה מבטוב בנדיבים׃

9β טוב לבטוב ביהוה מבטוח באלף עם׃

8 It is better to trust in Yhwh than to trust in man.

9α It is better to shelter in Yhwh than to depend on nobles.

9β It is better to depend on Yhwh than to trust in 1000 people.

The basic form is the same, but you can see there are more variations here. It's not just "better to shelter in Yhwh than to trust in X", but each verse begins with a different verb (trust, shelter, depend), and ends with another variation also. Notably there is no variation which has the same "shelter-trust" as per the Masoretic text. 

Another interesting point is the third variation, which seems to build on the first two: man > nobles > 1000 people. I also don't know the new verb, which I've translated "depend". It seems to be a synonym for "trust" but it has all the same letters as "good" (the first word in each clause translated as "better"). I probably need a dictionary of Qumran Hebrew to figure that one out with more certainty.

You might want to know why this extra clause, and that's certainly a good question, but one that's impossible to answer from this perspective. We may actually want to ask the question the other way: why did the Masoretic Text leave out that third clause, and standardise the form of the two clauses it retained? 

In any case, it's fascinating to see this additional clause, which while not adding anything new in terms of theology, certainly adds to the numbers game: sure, I would trust Yhwh better than one man, and better than some nobles. But an army? 1000 people? Well actually, yes, to trust in Yhwh is indeed still better. 

bal and 'aph in Psalm 16

I was having a look at Psalm 16 today and noted it uses the words בל bal and אף aph a few times (4x & 3x respectively); they also occur quite often together in Scripture.

Where else are they found?

To explain what I searched for, when I look up בל and אף and when they occur within the same chapter, Accordance tells me there are 69 hits in only 49 verses. Which means they often occur together - not just the same chapter but the same verse.

They're pretty popular together in Proverbs, a little bit through the other psalms, but it's really Isaiah where they occur lots and lots. Isaiah 26 has 7x בל and 3x אף; ch.33 also has 7x בל but only 1x אף. Isaiah 40:24 has three sets of  אף בל, and 44 has four of each. 

So what do they even mean?

I once wanted to try and write an article on בל but then realised (1) I had too much on and (2) I was well out of my depth. But it's a fascinating particle, it just means "not" but seems to have an emphatic force and is often used in poetic contexts. (I also wonder if it plays a similar role to μη but wondering is the most research I've done on the topic.)

Similarly אף seems to be emphatic, but it's positive: "surely." It's a homograph (written the same as) for the word for "nose" and also "anger" - think a bull with angry steam coming out of its nose. 

How are they helpful in understanding Psalm 16?

As I read through Psalm 16 I am struck by the certainty of the psalmist. They recognise that Yhwh alone is their hope, Yhwh alone is the giver of good things, Yhwh alone is the source of security in a turbulent world. These two particles then point to not just a description of Yhwh but to an appropriate commitment to him, of the creature to their creator. 

This is also not just a commitment of things that the psalmist would do in their love for Yhwh, but also a commitment of what they would not do. As the wonderful BCP prayer confesses, we ask God for forgiveness not just of sins committed, but also good omitted. This psalm however promises to both do the good and to not do the evil. 

The key verses; בל in bold, אף underlined

16:2 I said to Yhwh, You are my lord / my goodness is not anywhere but you;

16:4 They multiplied their sorrows, they run after others / I will certainly not pour out to them libations of blood / I will certainly not lift up their name on my lips.

16:6 Boundaries fell to me in pleasant [places] / Surely the possession is beautiful to me.

16:7 I will bless Yhwh who counsels me, / surely by night my kidneys instruct me.

16:8 I set Yhwh before me always, / for from my right hand I won’t be shaken.

16:9 Therefore my heart rejoices, my mass rejoices / surely my flesh dwells securely.

In sum

The psalmist exudes a confidence in God's character and protection which causes them to trust in God, to preach the gospel to themselves, because he is trustworthy and a certain shelter in the storm. 

The afflicted one cries out - Psalm 102

Psalm 102 is one of the rare psalms in Book IV to receive a title, and an intriguing one at that. So far we've had:

1. 90: A prayer of Moses the man of God
2. 92: A psalm, a song, for the Sabbath
3. 98: A psalm
4. 100: A psalm, for thanksgiving
5. 101: Davidic, a psalm
6. 102: A prayer of an afflicted one who has grown weak and pours out a lament before Yhwh
7. 103:Davidic

As you can see, this is long and unique among the psalter, but especially among 90-106. Commentators often work hard to find a time in the life of David or another king (often Hezekiah) to correlate to the experience described here, but I don't know this is particularly fruitful. 

What the title does give us however is some vocabulary which will be important throughout the psalm. For instance:

1. תפלה, a prayer, also 1x in v2(1) and 2x in v18(17)
2. ענה, to afflict, or, here, an afflicted one, also in v24(23) as a verb (Yhwh is the one who afflicted the psalmist), and also a homograph meaning "to answer" in v3(2) - perhaps a pun? "answer your afflicted one
3. √פנה, usually as לפני, meaning before, but also face, occurs 4x throughout the psalm, in v3(2), 11(10), 26(25) (meaning perhaps "before"), and 29(28). There's also the related verb meaning "to turn" in 18(17)

These three lexemes and related roots are important throughout the psalm; it as a whole stands as a prayer of the afflicted one, to the one who has afflicted them, that they might turn their face and respond.

Another word which is important from a Sitz in der Literatur perspective is the word for complaint (or praise? in Ps 104), שׂיח, which occurs at or near the beginning of four other psalms (55, 64, 142) and at the end of another (104). We also meet it the same number of times in Job (7:13; 9:27; 10:1; 21:4; 23:2). 

But these three repeated words go some way to explaining the recursive nature of the psalm, which seems to follow a back-and-forth pattern as follows:

1. Heading: for the one who suffers   1(0) 

2. Plea for Yhwh to hear   2-3(1-2) 

3. Explanation/description of human finitude  4-12(3-11) 

4. A plea to Yhwh the eternal one   13-16(12-15) 

5. Description of Yhwh’s eternal glory and concern for those who call out in their suffering   17-23(16-22) 

6. Plea based on the contrast of man’s brevity but Yhwh’s eternity   24-29(23-28) 

The net effect of this alternation is to call on Yhwh to show mercy from his eternity to this poor afflicted one whose days are brief, are only halfway done (25(24)).


As an exodus psalm (see my series) this looks back to the plight of Israel post-the golden calf incident, as Moses appeals for Yhwh not to destroy his people despite their great apostacy. In this connection it is noteworthy that the name of God that he revealed to Moses at the beginning of the exodus appears some nine times in this psalm. 

On the other side of the exodus, parts of this psalm are applied in praise to the other name, Jesus, as the one who sits on an eternal throne (Hebrews 1:10-12). This posits the people who know God through Jesus as the afflicted ones who cried out to God for rescue, and were answered in that prayer by the coming of Jesus to bring his salvation.

Some patterns in 1 Corinthians 13

While researching my masters on the structure Ecclesiastes, I came across John Harvey's "Listening to the Text", where he sets the foundation for how one should and should not seek to understand and describe structures in texts. I found it immensely helpful (I say "chiasm" a lot less these days, preferring "ring structure" or "concentric symmetry"), but his interest is really in Paul's letters (and even then, his Hauptbriefe), so I couldn't make use of any examples, just the theory. 

But now I'm in 1 Corinthians, I've been able to refer to some specifics in his book, and while he's sceptical about the second structure (because of a lack of linguistic parallels), his suggestion for the third is pretty convincing. So I'll suggest my own for the first, and develop his (rejected) one for the second, and also show a bigger picture one which I think is helpful.

Bookends, 12:31; 13:13

Beginning at the end then, it's noteworthy that the end of 1 Corinthians 12 finishes with Paul telling the Corinthians that they should rather desire the "greater" (μείζονα) gifts. He then goes on to discuss love, what it is and what it isn't, which seems so out of place that Conzelman for instance suggests ch13 is an interpolation, or has been dislocated from perhaps after ch12. However, after mentioning faith, hope and love, he returns to the word "greater" (μείζων) to describe love in comparison with faith and hope. I think it's fair to say that love, and ch13 as a whole, is the governing principle for the wider unit chs12-14. As good as prophecy, tongues and the other charismata are, it is love which must govern and order their use.

Life without love, 13:1-3

The first section, vv1-3 is just three parallel phrases, beginning Paul's use of triplets in this passage (see also v8, 13). These three verses all have three parts: 

1. If I am x
2. But I have not love
3. I am y

Where x is something which could be good, but is probably used to boast in their context, and where y is something not so great: in v1 it is an annoyance, in v2 it is nothing, and in v3 it gains him nothing.

This ties well back to the issues brought up in chs1-4, where the Corinthians are boasting and getting in fights over the wrong thing. Here too, while Paul thinks tongues are great, as is prophecy and great faith and gospel-centred priorities, these things without love are nothing. Instead of things that are not becoming things that are, here they are inverting that, turning things that are into nothing.

What love does/doesn't, 13:4-7

Harvey's issue with any paragraph-wide structure here is the lack of lexical parallels. Which is fair enough. But what we do have are four sections which are each tightly contained, and together forms something of an ABBA structure.

Love is patient
Kind is love

Love doesn’t:
get jealous,
brag,
puff up,
dishonour,
self-seek,
get provoked,
record wrongs

Love doesn’t rejoice in evil
but
does rejoice with the truth.

Love always protects,
always trusts,
always hopes,
always perseveres.

Note there is a legit chiasm in the first verse (v4a), and then a list of "doesn'ts" (v4b-5), then a contrast between οὐ χαίρει and συνχαίρει, while finally the passage crescendos with a four-fold πάντα. So while there aren't bracketing words or structures to this section, the movements between each sections, with the positive outside and negative inside, I think holds this section together well as a "what love does/doesn't". 

Love outlasts, 13:8-13

Finally in the last section there is a more legit concentric ABCDCBA structure, complete with a bookend of ἡ ἀγάπη (v8,13), but also alternating sets of contrasts.

8a Love never ends

8b–d Prophecies, tongues, knowledge will cease

9–10 In part? Won’t matter

11 Children will grow up

12 In part? Will be fully

13a Faith, hope, love will endure

13b Love is the greatest

So there is a lexical bookend, a doxology to love. Then a contrast between those things which will cease (a triplet: prophecies, tongues, knowledge) and those which will endure (another triplet: faith, hope, love). The third level into this structure reuses the "in part" (ἐκ μέρους) idea, which is thrice in vv9-10 and returns once in v12. There is also a contrast between a negative implication in vv9-10 and a positive application in v12. Finally the central section uses the word "child" four times, which is probably an unsubtle way of telling the Corinthians to grow up!

In summary then, I think ch13 holds together well, in three clear sections, with three clear ideas in each. Each of the three sections hold together tightly and make it clear both where the Corinthians should aspire, but also where they are failing, which makes all the more sense as they reflect on the state of their public worship in the chapters either side.

If you're interested in structure, you should check out John Harvey's book. Here is my goodreads review if you want some more thoughts. 

Review: Ecclesiastes and the search for meaning in an upside-down world

It took a while but my copy of Russell Meek's "Ecclesiastes and the Search for Meaning in an Upside-Down World" finally arrived, and this afternoon I set aside some time to read it. It's only a short book, coming in at 69 pages, and with three easily digestible chapters.

So what is this book? It's part autobiography, part thematic commentary and part encouragement to live well under the sun. From my internet interactions and observations, Russ has always been one to wear his heart on his sleeve, and he wants to share his own story, not as voyeurism or triumphalism, but to show how Qohelet struggles just like us, to understand real issues in the real world. Qohelet's world is not so different from our own; he simply is not afraid to call it out. 

The first chapter, "The Genesis shape of Ecclesiastes," brings his 2016 article, "Fear God and Enjoy His Gifts: Qohelet's Edenic Vision of Life," to a popular audience, and proceeds to take us through the intertextual links between the opening chapters of Genesis and Ecclesiastes. I'm grateful for how Russ filled this out, as the creation thread in Ecclesiastes is very important for me in understanding how the world, despite everything, remains good. Russ acknowledges that not every link will convince or even be noticed by everyone, but he puts forward a very strong argument, and demonstrates how seeing these links expands our reading of Ecclesiastes.

The second chapter, "Abel and the meaning of 'Vanity,'" reworks a 2013 chapter from "The Words of the Wise are like Goads," and explores the fascinating suggestion that to best understand הבל (vanity) in Ecclesiastes, the link to Abel (also הבל) must be understood. I found his biblical survey enlightening for the use of this term in Ecclesiastes, and this again helps the reader better understand the frustration encountered by Qohelet.

The final chapter, "From here, where? Enjoy God and his Gifts" takes another aspect of his 2016 article, and in particular discusses 12:13-14 as the key to the whole book. Here Russ really builds on the idea of covenant, and shows how the fear of God is a good thing, showing us how to live well in this world, in right relationship with our creator. As a concluding chapter, this was both lighter from a scholarly aspect, but also much more pointed from a theological aspect. 

Ecclesiastes is indeed such a powerful book; it deals with the real world, in an eyes-wide-open kind of way, asking real questions, grappling with real struggles, but always returning to the creator God, the giver of all good gifts, to ground us and give us true hope.

Although I paid for the book myself, I'm still really thankful to Russ for putting this together, and I look forward to commending it to anyone grappling with Ecclesiastes and the questions it raises.