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. 

Keeping an eye out - Psalm 101

Psalm 101 is a David psalm, but not really. It is perhaps a psalm for David, or looking forward to a better David, rather than a psalm about David (one key is Yhwh's house (v2,7) was not constructed under David but his son, Solomon). It is the first David psalm for a while (not since Ps 86), and, with Psalm 103, is one of only two "David psalms" in Book IV.

It's an interesting psalm, which shifts quite a bit after the first four verses. That is, in the first four verses, each clause contains a verb, and although they are all related, any clause could stand on its own. 

1 Of steadfast love and justice shall I sing
you, Yhwh, shall I praise
2 I will closely attend to the blameless path
when will you come to me?

I will walk with integrity of heart within your house
3 I will not set before my eyes worthless words
the deeds of deviants I hate
it will not cling to me
4 the heart of the crooked will turn from me
no evil shall I know

In the first half of this psalm we find mostly 1st person yiqtols, the "I will ..." verbs; only "I hate" is a qatal among the 1st person verbs. Nonetheless, the distribution of the verb is either at the front or the back of the clause. It seems more regular (to my ear) to have it at the front, while when it's at the back (v1a,b; 4b) it seems to highlight what precedes it (steadfast love and justice, Yhwh, no evil). 

The second half of the psalm, from 5-8, each line depends on two clauses to make sense, as follows:

5 the one slandering in secret their neighbour
        this one I will silence
the haughty eyed and arrogant hearted
        this one I will not endure

6     My eyes [will be] upon the faithful of the land
in order [that they] might dwell with me
        the one walking in blameless paths
this one will minister to me.

7 They will not dwell in the midst of my house,
        whoever does deceit.
        whoever speaks falsely
will not be be established before my eyes.

8 By morning I will destroy
        all the wicked of the land
in order to cut off from the city of Yhwh
        all doers of iniquity

As you can see, you need both clauses to say something. Who will not dwell in my house? Whoever does deceit. And so on. Verse 8 is really the only verse which seems to be one thought over four clauses. 5-7 however are all good examples of synonymous parallelism, where both halves say essentially the same thing. 

There might be some overarching structure, with Yhwh only in the first and last verses, and your house // my house (v2, 7). There's also a contrast between the "faithful of the land" who will dwell there, (v6) and the "wicked of the land" who will be cut off (v8).

As a whole, this psalm feels unfinished, with no development. If anything, it feels like a downwards spiral, from praising to destruction, from calling on Yhwh to act at the beginning, while at the end committing to enact human judgement. I would almost prefer to read this psalm in the reverse order, where we move from human action to trusting and praising Yhwh alone. 

So I'm not really sure what to do with this psalm. It could be I'm tired after a week of travel and sickness and classes I can't see why anyone would have this psalm as their favourite. 

As an exodus psalm, this almost feels like Moses speaking to the Israelites after they have been caught in their idolatry and no more will he put up with sinfulness among the people. Only those who match their words (1-2b) with their actions (2c-4) will be those who may come into Yhwh's promised rest. 

Back to school with Esther

I'm in my forties, and I'm back to school. Part of my PhD program is I have to do a couple of classes, so this semester it's Medieval Hebrew, Esther and Daniel. Today was really fun, with my first outing into Medieval Hebrew, but I have to prepare Esther 1:1-9 for tomorrow, and there are a couple of interesting points to note.

First is, there are very few verbs. In this first section, 1:1-9, there are only five active verbs, and I think this gives us our five sections:

1. And it happened in the days of the great king Ahaseuros (1:1)
2. The generous king held a great feast and displayed his wealth (1:2-4)
3. The king held a banquet in his ornate palace garden (1:5-6)
4. The king instructed the wine to flow without restriction (1:7-8)
5. The queen Vashti held a banquet for the ladies in the king's royal house (1:9)

The great care with verbs means they are infrequent, and three of them are repeated, leaving only the first, "and it happened", which introduces the story, and then the confusing verb, עסד (yissad), which could mean various things, but in context, means something like "made a firm instruction" (to not withhold wine from anyone).

The second thing which stood out was the royal names and the word "king" and "queen". Each of the five active verbs more or less has an accompanying "king" or "queen", which is indicated in the summary above. This is particularly skilfully used by the narrator, because when we hit the fifth verb, it is not the king, but the queen, and she is having her own royal booze-up, but just for the ladies.

This, of course, very clearly sets up the tension which will allow for Esther to enter the story, and the rest of the goings on.

Fourth, the centre of the passage, 1:5-6, has a lot of unknown vocab, which I gave up on. It's just a long sequence of nouns, which I take it are just trying to show how very rich and opulent and overwhelming is the king's palace garden, where this final banquet for the king's nearest and dearest is held.

Finally, there was one nice bit of parallelism which I quite liked: 1:4 has this repeated structure:

         בְּהַרְאֹת֗וֹ

אֶת־עֹ֨שֶׁר֙ כְּב֣וֹד מַלְכוּת֔וֹ

וְאֶ֨ת־יְקָ֔ר תִּפְאֶ֖רֶת גְּדוּלָּת֑וֹ

he let them see

his kingdom's glorious wealth

and his majesty's previous pomp

The very tight repetition stands out, perhaps because the rest of it is such a slog. But it does feel a bit like Hezekiah (Isaiah 39), although I'm not sure there's any fear that the guests will take over his kingdom.

Anyway, that's the first section of Esther 1. I'm looking forward to find out what else we'll find out in class! 

The Exodus Psalms

A number of years ago I wrote about Book IV of the Psalter, in some circles known as the Exodus Collection. I've been slowly working through them after reading them both on my own and with the insightful MC, and here are the links to the pages, which I'll keep updating as I get to them.

• Psalm 90
• Psalm 91
• Psalm 92
• Psalm 93
• Psalm 94
• Psalm 95
• Psalm 96
• Psalm 97
• Psalm 98
• Psalm 99
• Psalm 100
• Psalm 101
• Psalm 102
• Psalm 103
• Psalm 104
• Psalm 105
• Psalm 106