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

Thanking God in Psalm 100

 Psalm 100 is one of the shorter psalms in the Psalter, coming in at only five verses. It has a heading, "Psalm, for thanksgiving," which is more expansive than 98's "Psalm", but doesn't give us much more information. However, that this psalm is "for thanksgiving" is reinforced throughout the psalm, as v4a encourages entry to be "in thanksgiving", and v4c is an imperative to "give thanks." This whole psalm is a noisy and an active psalm. 1b has all the earth shouting, 2a joyfully serving, 2b entering with rejoicing, 4c giving thanks, 4d blessing his name. And I can only imagine the acknowledging (v3) was similarly vocalised.

Structure

The psalm could be divided in two, with the first half (1b-3) praising Yhwh as God the creator (all the earth; he made us, his sheep), while the second (4-5) praises Yhwh as God the king (his gates, his courtyard).

There are a couple of noteworthy features in this psalm. The first is what appears to be an ABAB structure; two pairs of alternating panels. The first (1b-2, 4) give instructions to give thanks and praise, while the second (3, 5) explain the reasons that Yhwh is praiseworthy.

A 1-2 Shout, serve, enter before. All the earth.

B 3 Why? Because we are his creation, his people, his sheep.

A 4 Enter, thank, bless.

B 5 Why? Because Yhwh is good, steadfast, faithful.

This leads to the second feature, which (and I could be wrong here) are the two cases of ellipses. The first ellipsis is uncontroversial and rather assumed, in v4 באו (enter, come) is implied:

enter his gates in thanksgiving,

[enter] his courtyard in praise.

The second however relies on the alternating panels, and assumes the דעו (acknowledge, make known) of the first B panel (v3) is implied in the second B panel, v5, so that we have:

3 Acknowledge that Yhwh, he is God...

5 [Acknowledge] that Yhwh is good...

There's also one fun little text issue, which could really go either way. In v3, after "he made us," the written text (ketiv) has "and not we ourselves" (i.e., we did not make ourselves). Although true, this sounds a bit weird. So the read text (qere) suggests "and for him are we" (i.e. and we are his, or we are made for him). The qere makes more sense in the context, and due to their being homophones, it seems simplest to trust the Masoretes' suggestion here.

Psalm 100 as an Exodus psalm

Throughout Book IV I've been asking how we might read these psalms as Exodus psalms, and there's a nice little shout out to Exodus 3 here in the last line of the psalm. His goodness, his steadfast love, and his faithfulness are his characteristics forever, from generation to generation. And in Exodus 3, where Yhwh reveals his name to Moses, he concludes with,

This is my name forever, the name you shall call me from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:15)

Exodus has לדר דר, while the psalm has עד־דר ודר. So not the same, but the repeated דר (generation) in the context of Yhwh's character seems fitting. It's also worth briefly noting that similar phrases (the double דר) occurs in Book IV at 90:1 (בדר ודר); 102:13 (לדר ודר), 25 (דור ודורים) and 106:31 (לדר ודר). So 16 times outside of Book IV and 5 times within. So it's not quite unique to Book IV (unlike the use of Moses and Aaron, for instance) but it seems that the context matches.

The other potential link might be the repeated use of בוא (enter, come) in this psalm, which might link with the similar use in Exodus 15:17-18

You will bring (בוא) them in

you will plant them in a mountain of your inheritance

a place you made for your dwelling, Yhwh

a holy place, Lord, founded by your hands.

Yhwh will reign forever and ever.

What is a promise in Exodus 15 has become a reality to celebrate in Psalm 100. The promise to bring them in is answered with them entering the gates, his courtyard. The promise that there will be a holy place for Yhwh to dwell is precisely where Israel now "serve Yhwh with joy" (2a).

Psalm 100 as Christian Scripture

How doe we read Psalm 100 as Christian Scripture? There are plenty of images here which point to Jesus, perhaps primary being his identity as the good shepherd who laid down his life for the sheep. The one who made us, who spoke creation into being, is the same one who gave himself for his sheep. Romans 12 encourages the response to this in similar language and with a similar dynamic, to offer yourselves as living sacrifices as your true and living worship. 

Exalt Yhwh our Holy God - Psalm 99

 I'm up to Psalm 99 in my meander through Book IV of the Psalter (90-106), and it's a shorter one, only nine verses, but nonetheless some really interesting features.

Holy Holy Holy

There is a repeated refrain, which seems to conclude each of the three stanzas: Holy is he! Following that gives us 1-3, 4-5, 6-9, and then another feature sticks out, namely the description of Yhwh at the beginning of the first two stanzas, v1 begins "Yhwh reigns," while v4 starts with "and a mighty king," both the noun "king" and the verb "to reign" are from the root מלך mlk.

The third stanza begins describing not Yhwh but three of the most important figures of the exodus and pre-monarchy period: Moses, Aaron and Samuel. Interestingly, David is not mentioned, which could well be because he as king is certainly not the focus of this psalm; Yhwh is king, and Samuel is not important because he anointed the first two kings of Israel, but because he called on Yhwh, and Yhwh answered him.

You could then summarise the three stanzas as:

1-3 Yhwh reigns over the earth

4-5 Yhwh is the king who establishes justice

6-9 Yhwh answers the pleas of his servants

Apart from concluding with a "holy" phrase, the final verse of each stanza is a tricolon, whreas the other verses are all bicola.

Speech

One interesting factor in this psalm is where Yhwh is addressed. In three places and 5 times total Yhwh is addressed by the psalmist:

3a They praise your name; 

4c You established uprightness,

4d justice and righteousness have you worked in Jacob. 

8b You answered them

8c A God who carries away [sin] were you for them.

Each of these are roughly in the middle of a stanza, which gives further shape to the structure mentioned above. The first two also bookend reported speech, which comes in 3b-4b, bridging the first two stanzas:

“Great and awesome;

Holy is he!”

And, “Mighty king

he loves justice!”

Call and Response

If we were to divide the poem into two roughly even halves, 1-5, 6-9, with the speech at the centre, the psalm takes on a different shape and a different emphasis. The first half focusses on the peoples praising Yhwh who establishes uprightness, justice and righteousness. The second moves its attention to the three aforementioned figures, and the remarkable thing it is for Yhwh to answer them and to respond to their pleas to deal with sin. Both halves then conclude with a near-identical refrain:

Exalt Yhwh our God (5a/9a)

and bow down before his footstool (5b) / holy hill (9b)

Holy is he (5c) / Holy is Yhwh our God (9c)

Both halves also contain the 2nd person address in the centre, so that the stanzas run:

Statement about Yhwh and his people (1/6)

Location of Yhwh (Zion v2/pillar of cloud v7)

2nd person address (3-4/8)

Exalt our holy God Yhwh in a location (footstool v5/holy hill v9)

To me this structure seems more satisfactory, and explains the movements in the text.

Psalm 99 and the exodus

This psalm is clearly written after the exodus; the references to Zion (v2) and Samuel (v6) show that it is from a later time. And yet, the absence of any reference to David (except perhaps by allusion through "Zion") suggests that the author was not interested in going back to the time of the monarchy. More important are images which remind them of the exodus journey, with the cherubim (v1; cf Ex 25:18) and the pillar of cloud (v7; cf Ex 13:21; 19:9), not to mention the decrees and statues which are linked to the exodus (v7; cf Dt 4:45).

One odd lexeme is עלילה 'alylah (99:8d) which occurs fairly rarely in the Bible (24x), and here is usually translated "misdeeds." It's a little confusing; in Psalm 103 and 105 it's the deeds or decrees of Yhwh, whereas in Deuteronomy 22 it means slander. Although it's not described with the same vocabulary, I wonder if the times Moses and Aaron sin could be described as slander? And if it's their sin which was carried away? The alternative is that v8 is speaking more generally of Israel's sin, dealt with by the priests.

In any case, this psalm looks back to a time when Yhwh was honoured as king, when he spoke and the people responded in praise—the optimists' memory of the exodus!

Psalm 99 as Christian Scripture

By harking back to time when Yhwh was acknowledged as king, this implies a time when Yhwh was not acknowledged as such. What greater (worse?) time could there be for that than when Jesus was ignored as king. He was neither praised nor exalted above all peoples (v2-3), even though he spoke clearly to his people (v6-7). Despite this, he was the one who carried away our sin, dealing with our slander (v8). Our praise then is directed not to the temple, but to the holy hill (v9) on which he died, worshipping at the cross the one who, though being holy, died for sin.

Singing the new song - Psalm 98

 Psalm 98 is a bit loud:

• v1 sing
• v4 make noise, break forth, exult, praise
• v5 make music
• v6 make noise
• v7 roar
• v8 clap hands, exult

Why the racket? In v1-3 the psalmist looks back for reasons:

• Yhwh has done wonders
• Yhwh has wrought salvation
• Yhwh has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness

Three times Yhwh's salvation is mentioned:

1. In v1 it is seen in his right hand and his holy arm.
2. In v2 he has made his salvation known before the nations.
3. In v3 the ends of the earth have seen his salvation.

And it is his faithfulness in the past that means those who sing this psalm can look forward in the final verse:

• he is coming to judge the earth
• he will judge the cosmos with righteousness
• and he will judge peoples with uprightness.

The beginning and the end of the psalm then speak of his acts of salvation, some past, some yet to come. And the praise in the centre of the psalm looks backward and forwards in light of this. The noise from the peoples (singing and playing instruments) in v4-6 seems to be looking back to what has gone before, while the noise from creation in v7-8 (the sea and cosmos roaring, rivers clapping, mountains exulting) looks forward to the salvation which is to come.

1-3 Past salvation

4-6 The people rejoice and give thanks

7-8 All creation makes noise looking forward

9 Salvation to come

Of course, this unravels a riddle from v1 which didn't become apparent until we hit the end.

Sing a new song because he has done wonders.

What is confusing is the new song refers to past events, things which have already happened and already been revealed. But at the end we see that the new song begins with the old story, in order to look to the future with confidence.

Psalm 98 as an exodus psalm

For those who came in late, part of my project in going through Psalms 90-106 is to think through them as potentially telling the story of the exodus. And in this psalm v1 in particular shouts out to me as an exodus psalm. The נפלאות (wonders) sung of here consistently speak of the wonders done in rescuing Israel from Egypt (cf Exodus 3:20; 34:10; Micah 7:15). Similarly, the mention of "his right hand, his holy arm" is a clear call-back to the language of Exodus 6-7 (6:1,1,6,8;7:4,5) as Yhwh promises Moses that his mighty hand will bring them salvation.

Psalms 98 recalls Yhwh's salvation out of Egypt, and looks forward (as does Micah, above) to his future acts salvation along similar lines.

Psalm 98 as Christian Scripture

The creation language of this psalm directs me to the language in Romans 8 as Paul writes of the groaning of creation; here the creation has a certainty which causes it to pre-emptively sing and rejoice.

Psalm 98 proclaims Yhwh as the king (v6); this side of the cross we know Jesus as the king who gave his life to bring salvation, and we look back to that event for our hope in the future and in living now, trusting that God continues to remember his steadfast love and faithfulness (v2) for all who call on his name, for all who know his salvation, even tot he ends of the earth (v3).

Habakkuk Structure

I've been working through the short book of Habakkuk in preparation for a four-week preaching series. It's one of those books which is easy to skip over, but once you spend a bit of time in it, it really grows on you. 

In terms of structure, it's three chapters, with the third chapter clearly set apart from the first two as a chiastic psalm. 

The first two chapters consist of a back-and-forth between Habakkuk and Yhwh, with Habakkuk beginning his brief complaint and Yhwh responding with a longer description of the answer. This is then flipped, with a longer second complaint by Habakkuk and an even briefer response from Yhwh. Technically this ties in to the rest of chapter 2, but the five woes and the roughly chiastic structure of 2:4-20, in my opinion, set that apart from the introduction in 2:2-3.

Apart from the move signalled by changed speakers, key structuring elements seem to be the divine name, Yhwh, which introduces both of Habakkuk's complaints (1:2, 12), Yhwh's second response (2:2), and the middle and end of the five woes (twice at 2:13 in the central 3rd woe, and 2:20 to conclude). Yhwh also occurs twice at the beginning (3:2), twice at the end (3:18-19) and once in the middle (3:8) of Habakkuk's psalm. 

I'm also reading through Habakkuk with my Thursday morning Hebrew group, which has been fun, and I'm also really engaged by some interesting text questions, which are a good way in to considering things like this if you're interested. The Qumran Habakkuk Pesher, the Syriac and the Septuagint all have some readings which give different emphases at different points, so working out what's going on there is quite important in interpretation. 

If you haven't got in to Habakkuk, have a look. I hope this little structural overview helps you get into it.

3 John Structure and key ideas

I've been spending this term working and preaching through 1 John, and have previously preached a baptism sermon on 2 John. So with baptism approaching, I'm doing some work on 3 John (or, as other Anglophone countries might put it, Third John). 

This is the shortest text in the Bible, at a lean 221 words, and forms a partner letter to 2 John, which is also short (a slightly bulkier 248w), and is similarly by "the Elder". But where 2 John is written to "the lady" (most likely a church community), 3 John is written to a person, Gaius. In that way, in 3 John we are reading someone else's mail (to steal a chapter title from Mike Bird). 

As far as a book of the Bible goes, the structure is very straightforward, with an introduction and a conclusion, with the body in the middle. I reckon 4 paragraphs in the body, three of which begin with the vocative "Beloved" (often translated Dear Friend). I like translating it "Beloved" to maintain the lexical link with "love". We have the same issue in 1 John, where "love" is such a common word, but we might miss the link to "Dear Friends" if we aren't aware that it translates "Beloved".

The other paragraph is marked by the asyndeton "I wrote (something to the church)" as well as the change in subject. 

Something I find fascinating is the difference between the verse count in English translations and the Greek. The Greek has 15 verses, but the English has only 14, combining the final two into one. It is of zero consequence, but it is nonetheless fascinating to me that they couldn't agree on how many verses there might be. I can think of only one time I noticed this (but can't remember where that was). 

Key words: 

• Love: The title beloved (4x), the verb I love (1x) and the noun love (1x) make this the second-highest grossing irregular word in the letter (not including conjunctions and articles). This carries on from 1 John, and is pointing us to Gaius as an exemplar of the love talked about in the larger letter.
• To beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth
• Beloved, ... they bore witness to your love
• Truth: The noun truth (6x) and the adjective true (1x) point to another theme carried over from 1 John. 
• Gaius is loved in truth
• People bear witness to your truth
• You are walking in the truth
• My children are walking in the truth
• We might be coworkers in the truth
• Demetrius is born witness by ... the truth
• Our testimony is true
• Rather than an abstract idea, truth as a noun is always linked to action, to love which is lived out toward other people and toward God.
• Bear witness: this is the last idea I wanted to note, as this verb appears four times to describe a community and their response.
• They bore witness to your ... walking in the truth
• They bore witness to your love before the church
• Demetrius is born witness by everyone
• We also bear witness [to Demetrius]

To the structure (I wrote something on this over a decade ago! This could be considered the updated version of that):

A  1 Greeting

B  2-4 Well wishes in response to receiving a visit

B` 5-8 Encouragement to continue in godly conduct

C  9-10 Being unwelcoming betrays a bigger heart problem (like Diotrephes)

C` 11-12 Mimic the good instead (like Demetrius)

A` 13-14/15 Final greetings

The opening and closing frame the body well. The two examples at the end put forward the negative and positive cases. It's interesting to me that none of the three lexemes mentioned above (love, truth, bearing witness) occur in the negative panel (9-10). It's as if John would not let those words come into contact with such a one as Diotrephes lest they be sullied by merely being in the same paragraph. 

I'm not sure if this is a thing or not, but it seems that there are lots of prefix lexemes in 9-10 - like the name Diotrephes! There's εκ, επι, υπο, another επι, and two more εκs, as well as a μη and ουτε. Again, this could be nothing, but I wonder if there's a deliberate collocation of these around the name Diotrephes which looks like a prefix form (διο-) to reinforce how far he has stepped out of line.

Reading the Whole of Hosea

Have you ever read Hosea? Have you heard a sermon series preached on it? As I planned a series for Term 2 this year, I wracked my brain trying to remember if I'd ever heard a series before. And I think I had—but from memory it only got as far as the first three chapters. Which is surely not good enough! So with great enthusiasm I began preparing to preach through the whole of this book which heads the Book of the Twelve (aka the Minor Prophets). But I quickly encountered a little problem: while there's a great story in chapters 1-3, I was not prepared for the eleven chapters which followed! The characters of the prophet Hosea, his wife Gomer, their three children Jezreel, Lo-Ruhamah and Lo-Ammi who dominate the first three chapters just disappear into the ether, and I wasn't sure what the connection was supposed to be between their story and the rest of the book.

Well, after doing a little more work on the book and digging a little deeper, there are some fascinating connections which show how the book holds together despite the stark differences between the story of 1—3 and the prophecies in 4—14. Let me briefly take you through the story and the way the names are important, and then show you some elements in the rest of the book which ties those final chapters together with the opening three.

The characters in 1-3

The eponymous character Hosea is the one we meet first up, as a prophet to whom God speaks. As with the major prophets, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Jeremiah, his life will be an example to his nation. His name comes from the verb "to save" (yasha'), which is obviously meaningful for a nation on the brink of destruction by a foreign army (Assyria is on the near horizon). However, Hosea's name occurs only three times, and that's only in the first three verses of the introduction. Thereafter Hosea is simply referred to as "he" (1:3,4,6). But while his name is not mentioned again, salvation is. So we read in 1:7

“Yet I will show love to Judah;

and I will save them—not by bow, sword or battle, or by horses and horsemen,

but I, the LORD their God, will save them.” (NIV11)

Hosea then, is a sign that Yhwh will save at least Judah; Israel must hold on a bit longer for a positive word.

Although we will have more to say on her later, sadly Hosea's wife, Gomer, is only mentioned the once (1:3), and we don't meet the related verb "to finish/complete" (gamar) at all in the book. Indeed, Gomer as a character recedes so far into the background, that when it seems we meet her again in chapter 3, we aren't even sure if it's a retelling of chapter 1, a recommitment, or a new wife.

Jezreel, the name of their first son, is probably the most flexible of the names. It can refer to

1. a proper name (as in 1:4b, the son of Hosea and Gomer)
2. the events of 1 Kings 21 and 2 Kings 9 (as in 1:4c, the bloodshed at Jezreel)
3. a place name (as in 1:5c, the valley of Jezreel).

And beyond these, in chapter 2, we see a fourth use related to the verbs behind Jezreel: "to sow" (zara') and "God" (el), so that God can promise to "sow her for [him]self in the land" (2:23). Jezreel's name is a promise of transformation, from bloodshed to fruitfulness.

Lo-Ruhamah is their daughter, and in 1:6-7 we see both her name and the meaning explained:

Name her Lo-ruhamah,

for I will no longer have compassion (lo ... arahem) on the house of Israel. I will certainly take them away.

But I will have compassion (arahem) on the house of Judah," (Hosea 1:6b–7a CSB17)

In the following chapter, compassion, or the lack thereof, comes up several times. Their current situation is a time without compassion, but a time of compassion will follow (2:4 now, but 2:1, 2:33 are promised).

Lo-Ammi is their final child, explained in 1:9, "Call his name Lo-Ammi, for you are not my people." At the end of the chapter this is reversed, as "Lo-Ammi will be called sons of the living God," (1:10), and their brothers are to be called "my people (ammi)," (2:1, so too 2:23).

This wordplay is quite in your face in chapters 1—3, although translators have to choose between keeping mixing Hebrew and English and potentially missing the connections, or just translating to make some connections explicit while missing others.

Congratulations! You've made it through Hosea 1—3. Now what? Where did Hosea and Gomer (their celebrity couple name is obviously Homer), and their three kids go? Well, buckle in, because I think they might still be around. Let's work through the names again, and have a think about where we might see evidence of their presence in how Hosea 4—14 is written and the images are explained.

Uncovering the characters in 4—14

People (Am), from Lo-Ammi's name, remains an important theme throughout Hosea, especially in chapter 4 (4:4,6,9,12,14). Yhwh was right to punish his am, because they so thoroughly rejected him as their God. Yhwh also makes a promise to restore ammi (6:11), which echoes the promises spoken in the earlier chapters.

Lo-Ruhamah's name is not recalled at all in the book until the final chapter. In 14:3 Yhwh promises that the orphan will find compassion (yeruham) in Yhwh. By encountering this promise at the end, we are immediately drawn back to recall the beginning, and the promise of reversal.

Beyond simply the word raham, there are also related ideas, such as hesed (often translated steadfast love or loyalty), which we met earlier in 2:19, "I will betroth you in ... steadfast love (hesed) and compassion (raham). It is this paired idea which Hosea uses multiple times, for instance in 6:4 and 6:6, where Israel's love has been anything but steadfast in loyal, but Yhwh is ever steadfast, ever loyal, and he calls them to demonstrate their changed heart by living out hesed (12:6).

As with Lo-Ruhamah, Hosea's name is not recalled again until toward the end of the book, where we find it three times:

• 13:4 There is no saviour except for me.
• 13:10 Where then is your king, your saviour?
• 14:3 Assyria will not save us.

Each of these usages points to the frailty of every other potential saviour—be it a local king or a foreign king; only Yhwh is willing and able to save.

The agricultural imagery which is part of Jezreel's name is important throughout the rest of Hosea. The word zara' (to sow) only occurs twice, playing first on Israel's inability to sow anything of value (they sow only wind, 8:12), and then encouraging them to sow righteousness as they wait for Yhwh to respond in kind (10:12).

There is further related imagery in other chapters, such as chapter 9, where the agricultural location of the threshing floor is linked to idolatry (9:1-2), where sin is described as briers and thorns (9:6) as well as dry roots and useless fruit (9:16). And this continues into chapter 10 with a familiar description of Israel as a luxurious and fruitful vine, but sadly the plethora of fruit matched the number of altars, which would in turn be met with a poisonous herb (10:4) and their sacrifices would be covered with thorns and thistles (10:8).

There is however a promise of reversal which was foreshadowed for Jezreel already in chapter 2, where at the end these thorns and thistles are transformed into blossoming like a lily, a tree's deep roots (14:5), splendour like an olive tree, fragrance like a tree of Lebanon (14:6), living grain and sprouting vine (14:7), and a green fir tree brimming with fruit (14:9).

Gomer, whose name we heard only the once, is perhaps surprisingly the one whose identity is most often referred to throughout the book. In 2:1 she was described of a woman of harlotry, who would have children of harlotry, for the land has certainly committed harlotry. This word "harlotry", along with "adultery" and "lovers" occurs more than 20 times between 3:1 and 5:4, and harlotry is linked elsewhere with uncleanness (6:10), while adultery is linked with wickedness and treachery (7:3-4). The literal and the figurative often mix in Hosea, such that the literal harlotry which formed the backdrop of Hosea and Gomer's family is seen to be more broadly related to dishonour and spiritual infidelity.

Gomer also leads us into one last realm of connection which might help you as you try to connect the opening to the rest of the book, which is the language of wife/mother and son/daughter/child. Some key moments here are for instance in 10:14, where the suffering of the innocents reinforces the sadness of the collateral damage which always results from sin. Another instance is in chapter 12 where the Jacob story is recalled, with his marriage to be read in light of the story of Hosea and Gomer. Chapter 11 discusses the children of Yhwh, and chapter 9 discusses childbirth, both of which are again to be read in light of the children of Hosea and Gomer.

Reading the whole of Hosea

Hopefully this little piece is something that will help dispel the fear that might creep in when you turn past chapter 3 of Hosea and wonder where all these fascinating characters have gone. Even though Hosea feels very different across its two uneven halves, the story in the beginning really does set us up to read the rest more deeply. Every time we come across something related, whether it's related words like Hosea and saviour, or related themes like Jezreel and anything to do with plants, we can see how the author of Hosea is trying to recall in our minds the introduction to the book. So while Hosea might get tough or dark in some places, we are still encouraged that the God who declared his people who were no longer his, who said he would no longer show compassion, that this is indeed the same God who adopts as us his children, who has compassion on us, transforming our adulterous hearts into hearts which desire to sow righteousness, and redeeming us through God's anointed one and our saviour, the Lord Jesus.

Review: Achievement Addiction

 Justine Toh, Achievement Addiction (CPX/Acorn, 2021)

Since I first met Justine 15 years ago, I was impressed with her knowledge of pop-culture, be it written or screen. And it's nice to see nothing has changed. She brings her wide and deep reading to bear in this newest addition to CPX's Re:Considering series, in this easily digestible volume considering all things achievement related.

Chapter 1, Strive, was really a look inwards, at the Asian in all of us. This is something I've grown to understand, coming from possibly the whitest school in Australia (there were two non-white kids in my grade), to now living in Sydney, pastoring a Chinese church, and having to learn some Cantonese to speak to my in-laws. But what Toh demonstrates is the views stereotypical of Asians are values shared by many of in many ways. It's the constant push to succeed, to be driven and to drive your children. We are addicted to achievement because we valued, and value, by our status in society.

Chapter 2, Suffer, is about what we will put ourselves through in order to achieve, and to be seen to achieve. Toh talks about Fitbits, but it could as easily be my unbroken record of 400+ days of Duolingo until I went cold-turkey. Because suffering to achieve can become dislocated from what we are actually suffering for. So with a retelling of the plot of A Lonely Girl is a Dangerous Thing (or one might think of Herman Hesse's devastating Unterm Rad), the point is driven home, that to suffer to achieve can become a striving which can never reach its goal.

Chapter 3, Smug, pricked me the most. Growing up little, bookish and bullied, I sometimes wonder whether those who saw me as an easy target would think twice if they knew how far I've come academically. But of course they wouldn't; it's my smugness to think that I've achieved and they haven't and therefore I'm better than them. If life is divided into the haves and the have-nots, I can rest easy in my smugness. But of course, as Toh suggests, there is nothing virtuous about achieving: smugness makes one unwise, unkind, blind and prejudiced.

Chapter 4, Story Time, suggests a different way. Beginning with Eliza Hamilton's gracious forgiveness of the smug, unwise and unkind Alexander, we see in the one who said that "the first will be last and the last will be first," a different way of living and being and achieving. Rather than the equation "hard work + perseverance = rightly earned success", a life lived by grace, receiving as a gift, transforms how we are in the world. It enables true community (as suggested in O'Donovan's Common Objects of Love), so that achievement is not simplistically diminished, but "put in the service of others." (58)

Achievement Addiction is a charming and provocative read. Even if I missed the Harry Potter references, and had not heard "bougy" before, I thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated this book. I also have a few more books to read—just need to add them to my list and instagram a photo of how tall my to-be-read pile is growing...

A reflection on Ruth 2

 Naomi left the house of bread for the fields of Moab

but the fields of Moab meant only death

So she left full but returned empty (1:21)

and worse than empty - burdened by her foreign daughter-in-law

but 1:22 they've come back to the house of bread at the beginning of the barley harvest

Ruth suggests a way to not be a burden, which is to gather leftovers in accordance with the Levitical laws

Note how she is described by Boaz in 2:11

And Boaz answered

and he said to her

"It has been fully declared to me all that you have done for your mother-in-law

after the death of your husband

and you forsook your father and your mother and the land of your birth

and you walked to a people whom you did not know until this time."

What is interesting here is the language is very similar to Genesis 12:1

Yhwh said to Abram,

“Go from your land and from the land of your birth and from the house of your father

to the land which I will show you."

Like Abraham, Ruth leaves everything, entrusting herself to Naomi and Naomi's people and Naomi's land and Naomi's God

Like Abraham, Ruth didn't know what would lie ahead,

but in God's providence, she found herself in the land of bread at the time of harvest and under the protection of a kind man of standing.

Fast forward to the end of the first day and it's meal time (2:14):

And Boaz said to her at eating time

"Come here and eat from the bread

and dip your piece in the vinegar"

And she sat on the side of the harvesters

and he held out to her roasted grain

and she ate

and she was satisfied

and there remained extra

From full to empty to full

and again, when she gets back to Naomi that night (2:18):

18 And she carried

and she came to the city

and her mother-in-law saw what she gleaned

and she brought out

and she gave to her what remained from what satisfied her

From lack to abundance

and although there is more to come

even from the eating we can see that God is the God of the nations

that God is the God of abundance

that God gives to overflowing

and this points us, of course, to the banquets Jesus set out for thousands who came to hear him (Mark 8:19–20):

“When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?”   “Twelve,” they replied.

“And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?” They answered, “Seven.””

12 is enough for the Jews - like Naomi

and 7 is enough for the Gentiles - like Ruth

God is the provider for all who place their trust him.

A reflection on Ruth 1

We can easily get swept away with the story of Ruth; we just want Ruth and Boaz to get together already! But it's important to slow down and notice the details along the way.

v1 a man walked, from the house of bread, to sojourn in the fields of Moab.

A man walked. Already we're told to slow down.

He walked - he didn't run, he didn't journey, he didn't ride. He walked.

The next line tells us who with, and the line after that tells us their names.

But for now it's just a man, and he's walking from Bethlehem - or literally, the house of bread in Judah -

God's people in God's place, the place where God provides daily bread for his people.

And they're leaving for the fields of Moab.

It could have just said Moab,

but it's the fields - the fields in a foreign land with foreign gods, in order to plant grain in their fields.

And they walked.

How many times did they pause along the way, where they might have reconsidered their actions - it would have taken a long time before they were even half way - why not return? why not wait on God's favour to return to his house of bread?

If you look at this phrase, "a man walked",

5 times you will find it exactly

and each time it's fleeing, scattering, people who have lost trust in God and in his plans (Judg. 7:7; 9:55; 20:8; 1 Sam. 8:22; 1 Kg 1:49; 13:12; Jer. 11:8; 16:12; 51:9; Mic. 4:5; Psa. 39:6; Prov. 6:28).

so too this man

with his wife and his two sons.

Well the next time we hear the word walked, it's "they" walked

but it's a different group

this time it's Naomi and her daughters in law,

with her husband and two sons having died.

Is it any wonder she demands her name be changed to Mara - bitter?

v7, they walked in the road to return to the land of Judah.

and she says to them,

walk! return! each of you to your mother's home.

they walked in order to return to her home

and she ordered them to walk in order to return - but to their mothers' homes.

In v9 there is a kiss, then their voices are raised, then they weep.

they say to her v10, we shall return - with you! to your people!

but Naomi, thankful as she is, says v11, return, my daughters - why walk with me?!

and v12, return my daughters, walk.

we can see these two words, walk and return, are easily reversed,

they are Naomi's instructions for them to turn back

but they are their reassurances that the only walking and returning they will do is with her, to her people.

as with v9, in v14 again there is a kiss, raised voices, and weeping,

although it is a different order.

The kiss is held off until the end, and it is Orpah; a kiss goodbye,

But where Orpah walks and returns, Ruth clings.

So Naomi speaks again,

v15 Look, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and to her gods

return after your sister-in-law

She has listened; why won't you?

Ruth: v16 Stop pleading with me to forsake you, to return away from after you

Because to wherever you walk, I will walk

Orpah can do what she wants,

I however am with you.

The only returning and the only walking I will do is with you.

Your God is my God; death alone will separate us.

What does Naomi see, 18?

That Ruth was determined to walk with her

so she ceased - the Hebrew is a bit harsher here - she ceased to speak to her.

Ruth is as stubborn in her clinging

as Elimelek was in his walking away from Judah.

The story more or less concludes with a reversal of the beginning,

look there in v 19

And they walked, the two of them, until they came to the house of bread

So that where a man walked out, a woman and two sons in tow,

now a woman returns, with only her Moabite daughter-in-law clinging to her.

As she says, she went out full, but Yhwh has returned her empty.

And here is the story formally ends,

not with walking,

but with returning.

v22 Thus Naomi returned, and Ruth of Moab her daughter-in-law was with her,

returned from the fields of Moab.

Walking out full,

returning empty

leaving for a foreign field

and returning to the barley harvest

walking out with sons and a husband

returning with a foreign daughter-in-law

It was a long way to get home

but now they are where God wants them, when God wants them,

in the state of mind where it is not a husband and sons which fills her,

but it is the surprising mercy and overflowing grace of the Almighty that will fill her up.

A lot of us have been walking more in lockdown

usually in loops - walking out and returning home.

As we reflect on the walking and returning in this first chapter of Ruth

let's remember that God has his plans

and they often come through hardship

through going in circles

and at a completely different to what we might like

but they are wiser and far more beautiful than anything we might imagine.

Review of Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs

GEORGE ATHAS, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2020) pp 400. Hardcover. $45.23.

 

 

With Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, George Athas provides his own contribution to the Story of God Bible Commentary series. Unique to this commentary is situating both Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs in the Greek era; the introductions explain why he believes Ecclesiastes was written under the hopelessness of the Ptolemaic occupation in the 220s BCE, and Song of Songs under the pressures of Hellenisation in the final days of the Seleucid occupation in the 160s BCE. The second part in each section, “Explain the Story”, both tackles important exegetical questions but also shows how the historical context shapes the text and our interpretation of it. 

Athas uses the introduction of Ecclesiastes as well as the “Listen to the Story” sections to spell out his suggestion of a Davidic descendant writing in the 220s under Ptolemaic rule in the context of the chief priest Onias II’s misjudged leveraging of the Seleucid kingdom and the devastating impacts that had on the Jewish people. Athas does not suggest an identity for Qohelet beyond a Davidic descendant, but suggests they were still aware of their royal blood and, while they were not a king, were things to have run differently they might well have been. They write as one who would be king according to God’s promise, yet with no hope of being king because of circumstance. This enables them to evaluate the foreign rulers and local leaders such as Onias and Joseph Tobias and to point out their many failures. The book’s hebel motto thus outweighs any provisional carpe diem statements as God has shown himself unwilling to intervene and help his people. 

The background to Song of Songs are the actions of Jason and Menelaus, along with Antiochus’s response in removing the special religious status of the Jews. The Solomon character represents pressures of Hellenisation, the shepherd boy Yhwh, and the woman Israel who desires to be loyal to Yhwh but is fighting a losing battle against Hellenisation. This historical specificity makes for an engaging reading of the Song as a story, situating it in a time and place of extreme pressures, and also explains the need for oblique allusions to refer to people, places and God. While not all interpreters will agree with this reading, Athas has set a new standard in suggesting and demonstrating the viability of quite a precise dating. 

When it comes to structure, I was disappointed that none of the recent advances in Ecclesiastes studies made any impression on this book (on this, see my own Seeing what Qohelet Saw). He makes brief mention of the frame, which Athas believes to be late, but in agreement with Qohelet. Otherwise he has essentially broken the book up into preaching units, suggesting instead that “[t]here is no clear literary seam between these stages. The whole movement gives a sense of uncontrolled, heavy descent into darkness and oblivion, capturing perfectly Qohelet’s sense of the fate of humanity and, more particularly, the Jewish nation.” (41) In Song of Songs he made a strong case for the different speakers throughout, but this didn’t noticeably impact the structure; the focus remained on the story. 

Evidently however, structure was not his concern; where this commentary breaks new ground is its consistent application of the historical specificity. Dating Ecclesiastes to the Ptolemaic era was foreshadowed in his 2019 Biblica article on 4:13–16, building on Barbour’s 2012 monograph, as well as Schunck’s 1959 article which suggested that it would be natural for details of the era to be hidden within the book. Athas demonstrates how an understanding of the key movers of the second half of the third century BC brings much more clarity to the otherwise ambiguous declarations and descriptions. To approach the book with such specificity is not one taken by any major commentary series I have yet come across, as most take the author and date to be unknowable beyond someone some vague time period within the second temple period, and this will be where future interaction to this book should come in response. What is unclear is whether the jury, who have essentially decided the date cannot be known, will be swayed to reconsider their agnosticism. That is, while this approach to dating seems plausible, the ambiguities and lack of any explicit referents in the text makes it doubtful whether this will be taken up beyond being referred to as a fascinating conjecture.

When it came to the “Live the Story” sections of Ecclesiastes, a dichotomy was drawn between “Qohelet liv[ing] in a ‘BC’ world” (162), and us who “live in an ‘AD’ world” (193). Now, of course this is true, but the way it was emphasised does raise some important canonical questions of what it means to read Scripture on its own terms. Again, this is not to say Christians cannot or should not read the Old Testament through the lens of Jesus, but to draw a distinction in the way Athas has diminishes the testimony of Ecclesiastes on its own. According to this pessimistic reading, Qohelet affirms that life truly is meaningless, but Jesus tells him he is wrong. The way Athas squares this circle is to insist that Qohelet views the world under the sun, whereas Jesus views the world under the heavens (under the heavens being the viewpoint only available to God); Qohelet’s view is provisional, Jesus’ is complete. If we met Qohelet today, “we might wish to point [him] to Jesus” (193). All that being said, this book is unashamedly a Christian reading of Scripture, and demonstrates one way to do so for those (probably the majority) who do read Ecclesiastes pessimistically. 

This new commentary is essential reading for anyone studying Ecclesiastes or Song of Songs as it presents and shows in practice what it looks like to read these books as from a specific time and place; Athas’s wonderful storytelling throughout reveals both Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs to be telling consistent and coherent stories. Reading this book should be an encouragement to all readers to open up Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs again and with fresh eyes.