Trying to preach through the Bible

 I've been at ND since 2012, and wanted to keep a record of how much of the Bible I've preached through (or had preached through by others). I've included proposed preaching for next year, but haven't included one-off guest spots or topical/doctrine talks.

I tend to follow the pattern of Term 1: Gospel, Term 2: OT, Term 3: Doctrine, Term 4: Epistle. I try to rotate through the major divisions of the OT (Law, Prophets, Writings), and alternate between Paul and non-Paul for the Epistles. 

Old Testament

Law

* Genesis - 2012 (5)

* Exodus - 2022 (22)

* Leviticus - 2018 (10)

* Numbers - 2012 (3)

* Deuteronomy - 2025 (9)

Prophets

Former Prophets

* Joshua - 2015 (13)

* Judges - 2020 (10)

* 1-2 Samuel

* 1-2 Kings

Latter Prophets

* Isaiah - 2024 (14)

* Jeremiah

* Ezekiel - 2017 (10)

The Twelve

* Hosea - 2021 (10)

* Joel - 2012 (3)

* Amos - 2014 (7)

* Obadiah

* Jonah

* Micah

* Nahum

* Habakkuk - 2021 (4)

* Zephaniah

* Haggai - 2023 (2)

* Zechariah - 2026 (11)

* Malachi - 2023 (3)

The Writings

Poetry

* Psalms - 2012 (4), 2019 (14) (120-135)

* Proverbs - 2023 (5), 2024 (5)

* Job

Scrolls

* Song of Songs - 2021 (4)

* Ruth - 2026 (4)

* Lamentations - 2019 (5)

* Ecclesiastes - 2016 (7)

* Esther

Others

* Daniel - 2013 (12)

* Ezra and Nehemiah  - 2023 (5)

* Chronicles

New Testament

Gospels & Acts

* Matthew - 2014 (15), 2015 (12), 2016 (13) (= 40)

* Mark - 2012 (4) (ch's 4-5), 2021 (10)

* Luke - 2013 (12) (9:51-18:30), 2023 (13) (1:1-5:11), 2024 (12) (5:12-8:25), 2025 (15) (8:26-11:32) 2026 (13) (11:33-15:32) (= 65); also most Christmases 

* John - 2017-18 (28)

* Acts - 2019 (28) (ch's 1-17)

Epistles

Pauline

* Romans - 2025 (17)

* 1 Corinthians - 2016 (5) (ch's 6-7), 2022 (22)

* 2 Corinthians - 2014 (12)

* Galatians - 2016-17 (11)

* Ephesians - 2023 (6)

* Philippians - twice through; one church camp and one preaching group (8)

* Colossians - 2012 (9)

* 1 Thessalonians - 2018 (8)

* 2 Thessalonians - 2018 (5)

* 1 Timothy - 2024 (11)

* 2 Timothy - 2026 (7)

* Titus - 2020 (5)

* Philemon - 2021 (2)

Catholic

* Hebrews - 2013 (13)

* James - 2017 (10)

* 1 Peter - 2015 (9)

* 2 Peter - 2023 (3)

* 1 John - 2021 (8)

* 2 John - 2019 (1)

* 3 John - 2024 (1)

* Jude - 2023 (3)

* Revelation - 2020 (19)

There are obviously some big gaps there; I really have to do another decent series from the Pentateuch (the two short ones were from before I had control of the preaching program), and there is a lot to fill in the writing prophets. I haven't touched the monarchy at all (1-2 Sam, 1-2 Kg, 1-2 Chron). It's a problem of the OT being 80% of the Bible and only having a term per year (although the Persia series allowed me to hit 4 books). I need to do a big Romans series, maybe for six months - breaking my system (again). That being said, I've hit every division of the Bible at least once and most a couple of times. 

Over all I think I'm pretty happy with the diet I've fed to people in terms of the breadth and depth, but it goes to show how even with an systematic, expository preaching approach, it still takes a long time to work through the Bible, and it could easily take me another nine years and I still wouldn't have got through it.

Good and Bad things happen in threes - at least for Samson

Some things I've noticed in the Samson Saga (Judges 13-16), many of which happen in threes.

Three part structure

The saga comes in three parts:

1. Samson's parents and commissioning (13:1-25)
2. Samson judged Israel 20 years (14:1-15:20)
3. Samson judged Israel 20 years (16:1-31)

Parts 2&3 both begin with Samson meeting a woman.

Parts 2&3 are also bracketed with the location, Between Zorah and Eshtaol:

1. 13:25, where Samson received the spirit of Yhwh
2. 16:31, where Samson was buried

Three women

Samson shacks up with three different women. 

1. The first (ch's 14-15) is an unnamed Philistine woman who is then given away, allegedly because her father thought Samson hated her. The ripple-effect of this liaison is the slaughter of 30 Philistines to settle a bet, the arson of the Philistine grain, the woman and her father being burned to death, Judah turning on and handing over Samson, and the death of 1000 Philistines with a jawbone.
2. The second (16:1-3) is an unnamed Philistine prostitute, which gives the Philistines an occasion to ambush Samson. He does not stay the entire night with her, leaving early and helpfully relocating the city gates to a hill opposite Hebron.
3. The third (16:1-21) is named - Delilah - and is likely also a Philistine (although it is not explicit, and her name is Semitic). The results of this union is his capture, blinding, and servitude.

Three breakouts

While Samson is with Delilah, three times he tells her a lie about the source of his strength - although they each hint in some way to the truth.

1. tie me up with fresh strings (16:6-9)
2. tie me up with new ropes (16:10-12)
3. tie my hair in a loom (16:13-14)

This is obviously what Samson looked like.

Three gifts of the spirit

Three times Samson has the spirit of Yhwh. 

1. 13:25 it begins
2. 14:6 he rips a lion apart
3. 14:19 he slays and deprives 30 Philistines of their clothing

When Samson receives the spirit it is certainly not a "dwelling within" gift of the Spirit, but a "equipping for a task" gift of the Spirit. The first isn't assigned to any particular task, so it has the feeling of the dwelling-within kind-of spirit, but the life of Samson doesn't testify to that being a likely understanding.

This triple gift of the Spirit in part 2 of Samson, where he is empowered by strength from Yhwh, is contrasted with the three times he breaks out with his own strength in part 3; note that the fourth time, where he tries and fails to break out, is also where his strength (that is, the spirit) leaves him. In this we see a parallel with Saul and his downfall.

 

Three numbered slaughters

Samson kills a few times. Three times there are numbers of dead people given, and there is also an escalation evident.

1. 14:6 kills a lion
2. 14:19 kills 30 men
3. 15:8 "viciously attacked and slaughtered many" (NIV) "tore them limb from limb" (CSB)
4. 15:15 kills 1000 men
5. 16:27,30 kills 3000+ men and women

It's also interesting, with this focus on threes, that two of the three numbers have threes - 30 men and 3000 men and women on the rooftop. 

It's probably nothing, but it's also interesting how similar the words Samson and thirty are: שׁמשׁון & שׁלושׁים. Sure, they're not that similar, but Shimshon and Shloshim do sound very similar. Also, it's three hundred foxes that Samson catches and sets on fire. 

Conclusion

Good things, as well as bad things, do come in threes. There may be others that I've missed, and there may be some tenuous ones I've suggested. 

By far the biggest thing which stands out for me is the comparison between part 2&3 of the saga, and I think the threes add to that and help us be on the lookout.

When God Remembers

I've finished my Psalm a day, and then a month of Ecclesiastes a day, and now I'm on to a chapter of the Bible a day, starting at the beginning. I hit Genesis 8 this morning and came across this:

But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and he sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. (Gen 8:1)

It reminded me of one of my favourite passages at the end of Exodus 2:

God heard their groaning and he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. So God looked on the Israelites and was concerned about them. (Ex 2:24-25)

After four centuries of slavery in Egypt, the groans of Israel are about to be answered with action.

What was interesting was doing a quick search for God and Remembers (זכר + אלהים), and amazingly there's only four in the whole Tanach. I changed the search to include Yhwh, but that only added one further occurrence, 1 Sam 1:19. Here then are all the times when the Bible records God "remembering" his people. (If you have others which don't match the construction, let me know - this is just from a quick Accordance search.)

1. God remembered the floating Noah (Gen 8:1) and caused the waters to recede
2. God remembered the worried Abraham (Gen 19:29) and rescued his nephew Lot
3. God remembered the barren Rachel (Gen 30:22) and gave her a child
4. God remembered his covenant for the sake of his enslaved Israel (Ex 2:24) and began working to rescue
5. Yhwh remembered the marginalised Hannah (1 Sam 1:19) and gave her a child

Obviously God remembering doesn't imply the opposite - that he could ever forget - rather it points to the fact that he has chosen that time to act and to intervene for the sake of those he loves.

Judge Jephthah in Context

Jephthah in Context

I've been thinking about Jephthah this week, and there are two things to note from the outset. The first is the context. After the long saga of Gideon + Abimelek, and before the long saga of Samson, there is a classic bookended structure:

Minor judges (10:1-5)

Jephthah (10:6-12:7)

Minor judges (12:8-15)

We can obviously say a lot more about the structure, but as a starting point the structure of the minor judges either side is used to mark out Jephthah in the centre as a major judge. But if we wanted to fill out the structure a little more, we can see another layer and more parallels: 

Two judges; many sons on many donkeys (10:1-5)

Sin, subjugation, suffering, supplication (10:6-16)

Jephthah the new judge, one of multiple sons, saves Israel (11:1-33)

A stupid vow and the slaughter of a virgin, succeeded by civil war and a shibboleth (11:34-12:7)

Three judges; many sons on many donkeys (12:8-15)

The parallels between the minor judges (two before, three after) are self-evident. Jair (10:3-5) had 30 sons on 30 donkeys ruling 30 towns. Ibzan (12:8-10) had 30 sons (to whom he married 30 women from outside his clan) and 30 daughters (who he married off outside his clan), and Abdon (12:13-15) had 40 sons and 30 grandsons on 70 donkeys. 

We will meet more donkeys in the chapters to come, but we have seen the wiley Aksah upon a donkey securing extra water rights  (1:14-15) and donkey goers are exhorted to pay attention to the call to unity by Deborah (5:10-11). But we have also seen an army slain with a donkey's jawbone (15:15-16) - perhaps having a dig at these wannabe warlords on their donkeys. 

The numbers 30 and 70 come up as well; 30 pops up several times in the Samson saga and in the epilogue (20:31,39), but 70 is both the number of kings mutilated by Adoni-Bezek (1:7) and the number of his own brothers murdered by Abimelek to become leader - a deal involving 70 shekels (8:30; 9:25). Are these new 70 a redemption of the number or simply a continuation? 

But apart from the minor judges, the structure highlights the situation before Jephthah (sin, subjugation, suffering, supplication; 10:6-11) but also that, after Yhwh grants him the victory, things aren't much different (11:34-12:7). The judges to whom Yhwh grants his Spirit (in Jephthah's case, 11:29) are going to become worse and worse leaders, worse and worse examples, and will highlight more and more what a failure it is to trust in human leaders, who cannot (really) save.

The Shortest Judge

The second is that Jephthah leads for the shortest time of all the judges:

That being said, we aren't always told the full details. We sometimes know how long they were judge for (from Tola onwards) and we sometimes know how long there was peace for because of their reign (up to Gideon). It could be that these timespans are coterminous, for example with Gideon it says "During Gideosn't lifetime, the land had peace for forty years." (8:28b) But we don't have the same information for other judges, and there seems to be a judgement in the latter judges (from Tola onwards) in that Israel weren't granted peace after their judge died. 

But Jephthah stands out because he is at the very bottom of the barrel in terms of lengths (not including Shamgar because we know so very little about him), and, even though we are in a sense comparing apples (years of peace) with oranges (years led for), the only information we are given is what we have to work with. That is, 40-80 years is associated with the first four judges, while 6-23 are the years associated with the latter seven. And Jephthah is at the bottom of everything:

• Jephthah: 6
• Ibzan: 7
• Abdon: 8
• Elon: 10
• Samson: 20
• Jair: 22
• Tola: 23
• Gideon: 40

I think why this matters is because Jephthah is not given a clear rebuke from Yhwh despite his evil vow and his evil fulfilment thereof. Rather, Yhwh is silent throughout. His name is invoked, but he is not. The response is threefold:

1. Jephthah's line is finished. His daughter's virginity is emphasised, as is her being his only child. There will be no Jephthaian dynasty.
2. The immediate aftermath to his victory over the enemy is civil war. There will be no united Israel under Jephthah.
3. His leadership (including his two wars) is the shortest of any judge: only six years. His only legacy is to be known as "the one who couldn't shut up"; Jephthah coming from פתח - to open (one's mouth).

Errata

 As I've been going through Ecclesiastes again, I noticed an error in my book. 

On p50 I wrote: 

"in 4:1 there is a fourfold use of עשׁק (to oppress), which occurs four times as a participle, albeit in different forms each time,"

It's clearly only thrice. In trying to understand why I made this error, I think I must have misread נַעֲשִׂים (from עשה) as הָעֲשֻׁקִים (from עשק). It's also possible that my brain was looking for groups of four - in the same paragraph I discuss 4:4 and "four near-synonyms for work." 

If you want to fix it, perhaps the paragraph should read,

This similar formula is seen with את־כל (twice in 4:4), and then patterns of three: in 4:1 there is a triple use of עשׁק (to oppress), which occurs three times as a participle, albeit in different forms each time, while in 4:4 the pattern of three is made up of three synonyms for work, with מעשׂה, ,כשׁרון ,עמל as well as, for a potential fourth, what Qohelet describes as work’s functional equivalent, namely כי הוא קנאת־אישׁ מרעהו (for this is one’s envy over their friend).

I'm not sure how it got through so many readings and readers, but there you go. I also still need to track down the library copy of my MTh and fix a separate typo there (which thankfully I caught before the published version). 

Sisera's mother

In chapter 5 of the book of Judges, there is a three-verse aside about Sisera's mother, absent from the chapter 4 account of the same battle, which I've always found intriguing. Here are a few thoughts I've gathered together

Sisera's mother among the women of Judges (5:28-30)

Through the window peered Sisera’s mother, Behind the lattice she whined: 

“Why is his chariot so long in coming? Why so late the clatter of his wheels?”

 The wisest of her ladies give answer; She, too, replies to herself:

 “They must be dividing the spoil they have found: A damsel or two for each man, spoil of dyed cloths for Sisera, spoil of embroidered cloths, A couple of embroidered cloths round every neck as spoil.”

(Judges 5:28–30 JPS)

In the story of Deborah and Barak, there are three female characters, two of them named.

1. Deborah, the key figure 
2. Jael, the unlikely victor
3. Sisera's mum, waiting for her son's return

But there's a couple more groups of women. 

1. First, the handmaids of Sisera's mum, who are standing by to help her out
2. But second, the female captives they expect will be the spoils of the battle

Nimrud ivory carving with “Lady at the Window” motif; Daniel I. Block, “Judges,” in Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, vol. 2 of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Old Testament. ed. John H. Walton; Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 149.

The true picture of the mother

It seems quite innocent, but it's actually quite disturbing. 
This lovely old lady, looking out her window, waiting for her son to slaughter the naughty Israelites, to plunder their villages in retaliation, and to steal their widows and daughters as sex slaves. 
Because this is what she's waiting for - some nice fabric for her and some pretty women for him.
For comparison, here's a tribute list from Ashurnasirpal of Assyria (883–859 B.C.):

I received tribute from Sangara, king of the land of Ḫatti, 20 talents of silver, a gold ring, a gold bracelet, gold daggers, 100 talents of bronze, 250 talents of iron, bronze (tubs), bronze pails, bronze bath-tubs, a bronze oven, many ornaments from his palace the weight of which could not be determined, beds of boxwood, thrones of boxwood, dishes of boxwood decorated with ivory, 200 adolescent girls, linen garments with  multi-coloured trim, purple wool, red-purple wool, gišnugallu-alabaster, elephants’ tusks, a chariot of  polished (gold), a gold couch with trimming—objects befitting his royalty.

The other thing to mention is that the word isn't woman or female - it's "womb" - or perhaps something even cruder, which is to say there is no value to these women except as their utility to their male captors. 

Thankfully, when Israel do something just as evil in Judges 21 - the final chapter of Israel's descent into evil - the women there will at least be wives - therefore worthy of protection and support.

Sisera's Mother as anti-Deborah

Deborah is called a mother in Israel (5:7); Sisera's mother is unnamed - known only as Sisera's mother (5:28). This is important, because, from Israel's perspective 

the story ends with Israel being forged as a nation through this victory, but Sisera's mother becomes barren, her son lying dead. 

Deborah became a mother through victory, while Sisera's mother became an un-mother through defeat.

Sisera's Mother as anti-Jael

Jael is just minding her own business, doing her own thing. She's non-aligned - an independent. Sisera thinks she's allied with Jabin, but is unaware that Israel are her distant relatives through Moses's father-in-law (cf 1:16). But I think that the Kenites (her people) are able to choose their own path - do what is right without obligation. We might contrast this with Sisera's mother, who has raised her son; her hopes are his hopes, her morals his morals, and they are not good morals.

At the end of the episode, Barak turns up, a little puffed, because he's followed the Canaanite army and cut them down - but no Sisera. So he's doubled back and in 4:22 asks Jael if Sisera came by. Jael opens the curtain of the tent - might this be the commander you're looking for?

The contrast to this pulling back of a curtain with the curtain pulled back by Sisera's mum, standing by the window and waiting - I wonder where my boy is?

The aftermath

The story of these three women is the story of three different world-views.

• Deborah is the willing servant of Israel
• Jael is servant of none, master of her own destiny
• Sisera's mum is anxious, awaiting the return of her brutal son and his depraved idea of spoil from war.

I should note - Israel are going to go down a not dissimilar path - as we see how far they too have fallen. But for now there's a choice - clearly Israel have a mother (Deborah) and a cousin (Jael) who choose the right path. After their victory Israel have 40 years - an entire generation - of peace and prosperity, but Canaan is done; we won't hear from them again, as they are on the out and the Philistines will rise up to take their place as the chief enemy of Israel.

For a time, at least, the people will mimic their mothers - Israel will mimic the wise and measured Deborah - and they will prosper while Canaan, following the instruction of people like Sisera's mother, are headed for extinction as a people - there are no more Canaanites today.

We should rejoice at the destruction of this evil warlord and his army, and the eventual freeing of Israel from their oppressors. However, the evil expectation we see even in the mother of Sisera will sadly be matched by the Israelites at the end of the book, after which we hear the final words, "everyone did as they saw fit in their own eyes". S

o even though evil from the Canaanites is averted right now, we also know that Israel will show themselves to be no better, 

and as we continue on through the book we await with dread the inevitable.

Where is Cushan-Rishataim from?

In my previous post, I quoted Barry Webb's comical survey of origin suggestions for the foreign king who subjected Israel to slavery for eight years:

Cushan-rishathaim has been variously identified as a Babylonian Cassite (cf. Gen. 10:8), a Nubian, an Edomite, an Asiatic usurper in Egypt (Malamat), a Midianite (cf. Num. 12:1; Hab. 3:7), a chieftain of a tribe related to the Midianites who had migrated north and settled in Syria (Kaufmann), a surviving chieftain of the southern Judean hills (Boling), and, more recently, an Aramean adventurer from the great west bend of the upper Euphrates (Kitchen).

Barry G. Webb, The Book of Judges, New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 159.

As I've been working on it a bit more, I doesn't seem quite so intractable a problem. Let me tell you why.

We are told two things about this king's origin. First, at the beginning of the episode:

3:8b And he sold them into the hands of Cushan-Rishataim, king of Aram-Naharaim

And then at the end of the episode:

3:10d And Yhwh gave Cushan-Rishataim the king of Aram into his hand

It seems the main difficulties with describing him as an Aramean seems to be the spatial dislocation. Aram is north of Israel (roughly modern south-west Syria), while from chapter 1 we know that Othniel is in the south of Israel, linked to the tribe of Judah, and these are pretty-much as far away as can be.

However there are a couple of things worth noting. The first is the exceptional circumstances. In chapter 1 Othniel was called to step up in order to defeat a city and thereby to gain a wife. In chapter 3 however the Spirit is at work. We know from elsewhere that the Spirit may dislocate people (see the farcical episode in 1 Kings 18), so why not?!

The second thing worth noting is that, even if we don't know what Aram-Naharaim refers to (v8), we do know where Aram (v10) is. We also know what Naharaim means - it means "pair or rivers", with -aim the dual-form ending, and nahar meaning river. And we also know that in Aram there are two rivers, described by Naaman in 2 Kings 5:12:

Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Couldn’t I wash in them and be cleansed?” So he turned and went off in a rage.

Now, I had a look on google maps and they're not readily apparent. You have to know what you're looking for and zoom in. A lot. They're two rivers which don't seem to come from or go anywhere - they just peter out as far as I can tell. Today they're called (respectively) the Barada and Awaj rivers, with the Barada flowing (when it does flow) through the heart of Damascus; the Awaj at its closest point is 13km or so south of the Barada. 

Image made using Accordance Bible Software.
Rivers are the thin blue lines with the red words describing them.
Abana is the more northern river, Pharpar the more southern.

The point is, in a desert landscape, despite their diminutive size, these two rivers would be pretty important, and one could understand why a king would be titled after his kingdom's not one but two water sources. That being said, one could also understand why this king might want to extend his kingdom to the more well-watered land south toward Lake Chinnereth (the Sea of Galilee).

So I don't know if I've solved a riddle, or simply added yet another to the long list of suggestions, but it seems like it makes sense. 

Update:

Here's a clearer image from research gate. It seems they come from springs and end up in lakes, which I assume fill and dry up, depending on the season. 

The names of Israel's enemies in Judges 3

Cushan-Rishataim

I've been reading through Barry Webb's NICOT commentary on Judges, he noted the way Cushan-Rishataim's name is used multiple times, and it gives shape to the whole episode.

There is an introduction (3:7-8a), then we hear Cushan-Rishataim's name twice (3:8b-c). The action follows in 3:9-10c, and in the denouement we hear Cushan-Rishataim's name twice more (3:10d-e), before the ending (3:11).

3:7-8a Israel's evil, Yhwh's anger

3:8b-c Cushan-Rishataim set loose

3:9-10c Israel cry out, Yhwh raises up Othniel

3:10d-e Cushan-Rishataim cut down

3:11 Quiet in the land

We can see how the two double uses of Cushan-Rishataim's name frames the raising up of the judge his actions of saving Israel by judging and making war. 

We actually know nothing about Cushan-Rishataim; Webb surveys the various suggestions as to his origin in a list that become ever more farcical: 

Cushan-rishathaim has been variously identified as a Babylonian Cassite (cf. Gen. 10:8), a Nubian, an Edomite, an Asiatic usurper in Egypt (Malamat), a Midianite (cf. Num. 12:1; Hab. 3:7), a chieftain of a tribe related to the Midianites who had migrated north and settled in Syria (Kaufmann), a surviving chieftain of the southern Judean hills (Boling), and, more recently, an Aramean adventurer from the great west bend of the upper Euphrates (Kitchen).

Barry G. Webb, The Book of Judges, New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 159.

There could also be some funny business going on with his name. 3:8b describes him as "Cushan-Rishataim, king of Aram-Naharaim." Naharaim means "two rivers", so if you deconstruct Rishataim, the "aim" ending is a dual form (i.e. two) and the "Risha" beginning uses the consonants of "wicked" - hence "Double-wickedness". We don't know anything about what wickedness he got up to, but he dominated Israel for eight years, causing them to repent (at least for a time) of their apostacy and to cry out for a saviour.

Eglon the king of Moab 

Anyway, that is all a precursor to what I was most interested in - the use of the name of Israel's enemy in the second section. Essentially what we see is a degradation in the name of Eglon the king of Moab throughout the episode. It begins with a short chiasm:

3:12a Israel again did evil in the eyes of Yhwh

3:12b Yhwh raised up Eglon the king of Moab

3:12c Because they did evil in the eyes of Yhwh

As the episode goes on, Eglon the king of Moab is mentioned numerous times:

3:12b And Yhwh strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel

3:14 And the children of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab 18 years

3:15c And the children of Israel sent in [Ehud's] hand a gift to Eglon king of Moab

3:17a And [Ehud] presented the gift to Eglon king of Moab

However, this is the last time Eglon gets the full title. The next mention, in the same verse, is just his name, and no title:

3:17b Now Eglon was an exceedingly fat man

After this devastating description, his name is never mentioned again. He is "he", "him", and is described as in the WC (literally, something like "the upper cool room"), on his "throne" (I think this is a punny way of saying the toilet), and so overwhelmingly obese that Ehud's sword is swallowed by his fat as faeces comes out.

Indeed, the only other time he gets a mention is as "their lord" (3.25d), who had fallen on the ground, dead. 

Once Eglon the king of Moab is dead, Moab are prey for the hunter, and Ehud has Israel essentially guard the Jordan so that any Moabites trying to escape back over the border get killed , with 10,000 rich and powerful men dying. 

Reflection

I'm still trying to work out whether this is about making fun of Israel's enemies, or about making fun of Israel. On the one hand, the death of Eglon is told comically (with certain similarities to the poo jokes in Daniel 5), so that Israel's victory through an unlikely saviour (a lefty!) is even greater. But on the other hand, it is these morbidly obese people who are able to subdue Israel for 18 whole years. Those they killed trying to escape at the Jordan were not warriors but fat bureaucrats, and if Israel were devoted to their LORD rather than to evil, then they may have been able to withstand their Moabite "Lord".

Epilogue

Interestingly, Shamgar, the final Judge of this chapter (3:31), has no named adversary, but just the Philistines more broadly. If you're interested to read more about him, there's a fascinating blog over at isthatinthebible you might be interested in. 

The unfilled eye - Ecclesiastes 1:8; 4:8

I'm working through Ecclesiastes again for a daily devotion thing I'm sending out, and noticed a phrase pop up again which I hadn't previously. It's "the eye(s) is(are) not filled." 

It's an odd phrase because we don't think about eyes being filled, although it's not hard to make sense of it. It's also missed because the two occurrences are translated differently. In 1:8 the NIV has "the eye never has enough of seeing, nor the ear its fill of hearing." (has enough represents the verb שׂבע.) In 4:8 it comes across a little differently, "there was no end to his toil, yet his eyes were not content with his wealth. (not content represents the verb שׂבע.)

As you can see (no pun intended), the same verb with the same subject represents two different subjects which can never fill one's eyes. In the opening poem, it is the ever-changing world and innumerable experiences which can never fill the eyes. In the observation of the lonely man in chapter 4, it is greed which is the bottomless hole. Of course, it could be that greed for experiences in chapter 1 is what binds the two expressions together. Although it is described as wearying in chapter 1, it could well be that this is the reflection of someone who has spent life trying to experience enough (like Faust, perhaps) and has reached a point when they have lost all desire to learn anything or experience anything new (like the end of The Good Place, perhaps). 

It was also interesting to chase this phrase a bit further. "Not filled" is a phrase which occurs some 20 times in the Old Testament, fairly evenly divided between the prophets and the writings (only once in the Pentateuch, Lev. 26.26). 

Mostly the description of what one cannot be filled with (moving now beyond just the eye) is food as a punishment. "You will eat but not be satisfied" is the common way of expressing this. Usually a punishment, it can also be Yhwh's means of testing - when they realise this, will they turn back to me?

The next most common way this phrase is used is to do with idolatry, as people went whoring after the nations or after greed, but as they did so and were not satisfied, their idolatry was exposed. They pursued something they thought would satisfy their desires but were left nonetheless with a bottomless hole, a gaping pit that could not be filled. 

One interesting unsatisfiable was Sheol/Abbadon, which could not be satisfied with death. I'm not sure if this is negative or nature - if probably depends on the context (eg Prov 30:15-16). There was also one positive, which was Job's conative use, asking whether anyone ever went away from his feasts not satisfied (expecting the answer "no"). 

But for me it's the greed-idolatry one which stands out most clearly. The way God has ordered this world means that serving the god of greed is a service which can never end and never give satisfaction. When greed, the accumulation of wealth is your god, there can never be enough. You will sacrifice friendships to the altar of greed but you will still never the gifts from the hand of God of true friendship, of true security, of shelter in the storm (see Eccl. 4:7-12).

Hallelujah!

I'm getting to the end of my psalm per day reflection that I've been sending out to people from church (plus a few others) and in the last few I'm coming across the phrase "Hallelujah" quite a bit. You probably know that it means "Praise Yah", where Yah is short for Yahweh (or, as I choose to write it, Yhwh). It's one of those transliterations, which is to say "Hallelujah" isn't a translation, nor is "Hosanna" or "Baptise" or "Amen" - they have acquired meanings in English but they are not translations. (For those who are interested, Hosanna means save us, baptise means wash or overwhelm, amen is to do with agreement or trust).

Hallelujah is mostly two words, sometimes joined with a maqqep (essentially a Hebrew hyphen), sometimes separated, and once they are joined into one word. Oh, and they all occur in the last third of the psalter, as follows:

• Hallelu-Yah 17 (102:19; 104:35; 105:45; 106:48; 113:9; 115:17; 115:18; 116:19; 117:2; 135:3, 21; 146:1, 10; 147:20; 148:14; 149:9; 150:6b)
• Hallelu Yah 9 (111:1; 112:1; 113:1; 135:1; 147:1; 148:1; 149:1; 150:1, 6a*)
• Hallelujah 1 (106:1)

I think this is all of them - it's from a software search and I haven't double checked it. But you'll notice a couple of things:

1. The two words joined with a maqqep is by far the most common. 
2. There is one case (150:6a) where the verb takes a different form, it's tehallel yah (all breath will praise Yah).
3. Every time the standard form occurs without a maqqep, and including the time where they're joined (106:1), is in the first line of the psalm. The hyphenated form never occurs at the beginning of a psalm, and with the exception of 150:6a, the un-hyphenated form only occurs at the beginning. 
4. If the form begins the psalm, it often occurs later on also. Of the nine which begin with Hallelu Yah or Halleljuah, seven have Hallelu-Yah later on. 
5. As mentioned already, they are all in the last third of the psalter, and are clustered in a few groups: 102-106 (but not 103), 113-117 (but not 114), 146-150, with 135 the only one on its own. 

It's also noteworthy that the phrase Hallelujah (or Allelujah in the KJV) has come into English, perhaps not from the Psalms, but from the book of Revelation, where it is transliterated from Hebrew to Greek and then into English. It occurs four times in Revelation 19:1-6, and is the noise of those in heaven roaring praises to God for destroying Babylon, vindicating his saints, and bringing them to the wedding feast of the Lamb. 

What do we make of all this? I'm not yet sure. But it's interesting! It's also wonderful that we say it so much - and I think probably preserving the meaning - Praise Yah for his powerful works of rescue and redemption on earth, and for the future he is bringing about through the Lord Jesus. Hallelujah indeed!

 

Titus 3 structure

As I mentioned recently, one thing that stands out in Titus is the number of times works are mentioned. There are good (agathos) works, there are beautiful (kalos) works, and there are righteous (dikaiosune) works. All three of these turn up four times in chapter three, with beautiful (kalos) works turning up twice, as well as a third use of kalos (translated excellent in the NIV, in parallel with profitable).

What stands out is, for the four times works occur in this chapter (v1,5,8,14), between the first and second, and between the third and fourth, there is a description of the opposite of good works, including disobedience, depravity and division. 3:3, 9-10 essentially describe the type of person previewed back in 1.16 - the person who is unfit for, and unable to do, good works. 

There is also, along with 2.11-14, the greatest and clearest description of the gospel in this short letter, in 3.5b-7, which occurs between the second and third occurrences of works.  This reveals this structure:

A 3.1-2 Remind them about relationships with others, and to be ready for good works (ἔργον ἀγαθὸν)

B 3.3 We used to be pretty awful people

C 3.4-5a God saved us - not by our own righteous works (ἔργων τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ)

D 3.5b-7 We were saved by Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit, in the hope of eternal life

C'3.8 Those who believe in God should be devoted to good works (καλῶν ἔργων)

B' 3.9-11 There is no more place for those who behave in awful ways

A' 3.12-15 Those with whom I am in relationship with; remind people to commit to good works (καλῶν ἔργων)

I like the way this structure begins and opens with practical examples of good works, moves through descriptions of the opposite of good works, then back to good works, and finally, moving to the centre, has this beautiful description of the saving gospel. 

I've only just started working on this passage, but looking forward to preaching on it in a couple of weeks to conclude our short Titus series. 

Books of the Old Testament by Title

 As a follow up to the popular Books of the New Testament by Title, here is my attempt at summarising the Old Testament in a similar way. 

This one is probably a little more controversial for what I have not said: I have not said Daniel is the author of Daniel - if that troubles you, here is a brief summary of why I think that. 

I'm not sure whether Jonah wrote Jonah - that seems unlikely to me. So too the others, especially when they die in them (ehem, Samuel). It could be that Ezra wrote Ezra-Nehemiah - I haven't looked into that at all; I'll probably have to do a humble-pie update later on. 

I think the others are okay. Leviticus refers to the rules given to the Levites - perhaps that should be an event also; if they were a group then the book should be called Levites, which it isn't. In Hebrew it's just called "wayyiqra" - and he called. Maybe I should do another one on Hebrew titles. 

Oh, and Ecclesiastes is the Greek translation of what they assume Qohelet means. I think Qohelet refers to the assembler of wisdom rather than an assembler of people, but you'll have to buy my book to find out the reasoning for why I think that. 

Books of the New Testament by Title

Still thinking about Titus...

It's one of only four NT books which is entitled by its recipient: only Philemon and 1, 2 Timothy have that honour. 

Of course, by grouping the books/letters like this, I'm not making any definitive statements about authorship; only to say that's how we are supposed to understand them. Interestingly, Hebrews is the only book which we have zero idea about (wild guesses like Paul, Luke and Apollos not withstanding). 

Anyway, enjoy. I just thought it was interesting to sort them in this way.

Who is the saviour in Titus?

I've always thought Titus was a gem, and have also had some fascinating exchanges with JW's due to the way it describes Jesus and God with identical terminology. In particular the use of "saviour" for both, with an ABABA(C)B structure to its use, in pairs throughout the letter:

God our saviour (Titus 1.3)
Christ Jesus our saviour (1.4)
God our saviour (2.10)
Jesus Christ our saviour (2.13)
God our saviour (3.4)
(saved … by the Holy Spirit – 3.5)
Jesus Christ our saviour (3.6)

It's interesting to see the Holy Spirit snuck in there between the final two as well. That said, it could be a suggestion that the whole letter is riffing off the credal statement (as assumed by some, including the NA28 editors) in 3.4-7, as the three persons of the Godhead are described as working salvation. This is of course followed with the phrase, Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος, "this is a faithful saying" (cf the identical phrase in 1 Tim. 1:15; 3:1; 4:9; 2 Tim. 2:11).

Two other brief unrelated notes:

1. Teaching vocabulary is seen throughout, in 1.9a, 9b, 10; 2.1, 7, 10. 
2. The language of "good works" is also throughout the letter, 
• works, good works ἔργοις ... ἔργον ἀγαθὸν (1.16) - are not possible for the disobedient
• good works καλῶν ἔργων (2.7, 14; 3.8, 14) - should be given as an example, and should be zealously pursued by the godly
• every good work πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν (3.1) - people should be ready for these
• works of righteousness ἔργων τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ  (3.5) - these works cannot save, but only God

Lots in this little letter, which we start this Sunday and will work through over five weeks.

Joshua 7, Achan and Eve

A few things stand out in Joshua 7, which tells of the failed fight against Ai and the sin of Achan.

1. One is the use of עבר, the verb for crossing over, passing over. It has that base meaning everywhere else in Joshua (50 odd times), but there are three cases, two of which are in Joshua 7, where it is used for sin; crossing over the covenant of Yhwh. Achan, in his sin, crosses over the covenant with Yhwh, rejecting God's way and choosing his own.

2. The second thing which stands out are three intertextual links. 

2a. One is Achan's actions are described in 7:15 as stupid - נבלה (nebalah)- which makes us remember the actions of the eponymous fool, Nabal - נבל - of 1 Samuel 25 infamy. There are of course other stupid (נבלה) acts in the Bible, prime among them being the instance with the Levite and his concubine in Judges 19-20. The stupidity in these cases (cf also Gen 34:7) is not just the action itself, but also the consequence. One also wonders whether the homophone of נבלה (albeit with different vowels) - carcass (eg Lev 5:2 et passim) - also plays into this. The stupid act (נבלה) means that this stupid man (נבל) will become a carcass (נבלה).

2b. The second link is the "babylonian garment", which I wonder whether is a retrojection from the babylonian exile, or prefigures it in some way. It could also be looking back to the Tower of Babel story in Genesis 11, which is described as being built in the plain of Shinar - the same word used here translated "babylonian". The confusion that ensued there is seen in the one who has become confused about the great promises which would and could and should be his - if only he didn't choose folly and the beauty of Shinar and thus exclude himself from the promise.

2c.The third link is back to Genesis 3:6, where the woman saw that the fruit was good (טוב) and desirable (חמד), she took it (לקח) and sinned. So too for Achan (7:21): he saw the robe was good (טוב), he desired it (חמד), took it (לקח) and sinned. This brings us back to Ricoeur's statement that each of us both continue but also begin, Achan beginning it all over again with the borrowed vocabulary from Genesis 3.

3. The final thing is the way that Achan's death is on behalf of the whole community. Just as his sin poisons his whole family, meaning they and all their belongings are stoned and/or burned, so too does his death work for the cleansing of all Israel. We might compare Achan to the true Israelite, who did not covet, did not grasp, who was the embodiment of wisdom - though he was called foolish. And where Achan died for his sin - wrapping his family up in the horrid consequences - his death meant that all Israel was spared. Jesus of course did not die for his sin, but for the sin of all who trust in him, but in dying he died in our place, delivering us into the promise through his body.