Job 38:1-7, (34-41)

The Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind:

"Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?

Gird up your loins like a man,

I will question you, and you shall declare to me.

"Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?

Tell me, if you have understanding.

Who determined its measurements—surely you know!

Or who stretched the line upon it?

On what were its bases sunk,

or who laid its cornerstone

when the morning stars sang together

and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?

[“Can you lift up your voice to the clouds,

so that a flood of waters may cover you?

Can you send forth lightnings, so that they may go

and say to you, ‘Here we are’?

Who has put wisdom in the inward parts,

or given understanding to the mind?

Who has the wisdom to number the clouds?

Or who can tilt the waterskins of the heavens,

when the dust runs into a mass

and the clods cling together?

“Can you hunt the prey for the lion,

or satisfy the appetite of the young lions,

when they crouch in their dens,

or lie in wait in their covert?

Who provides for the raven its prey,

when its young ones cry to God,

and wander about for lack of food?”]

I hear in God’s response to Job belligerence. From God’s perspective, Job is attempting to limit God, to force him into a moral catch-22 that could set a precedent for future generations that could have an effect on their relationship with the divine; one that is more confident and predictable. God faces this limitation with boastful obfuscations that depict God as the limit-setter, the one who imposes order. He cannot be limited.

As worshippers of the Divine, we claim to honor God’s freedom, his self-described unlimitedness - God precedes all limits, he imposes limits, he qualifies the boundaries of others. There is nothing to set limits on the Prime Mover. God, however, has some shape: theology imposes limits onto God. For example, an orthodox imposition of limit may be seen in moral perfection. This is a characteristic often implied in iterations of Anselm’s Ontological Argument. With moral perfection, God is not free to be immoral or even amoral; God must do good. If a thing is ascribed to God that is perceived to be not-moral either A) God did not do that thing, or B) we cannot perceive the moral consequences because of our own limitation in perceiving the movement of the divine. Thus with Job, we dismiss the possibility that God could do wrong and understand the moral of Job to come in God’s speech to Job: “You are limited and cannot know freedom; I impose limits, you cannot limit me.”

Anselm’s principle of moral positivity is imagined and imposed on God a millennium after Job. I am thus skeptical of any retro-active imposition of definition upon a being who clearly is not this way at this time. I think God’s moral clarity is still ambiguous, that God is still “free” from any moral obligation. This may help explain why God participates in a wager with Satan, at the expense of human lives. We can hardly call God a murderer if he is not held to the same moral standards as murderers. What is death to God, who gives life and takes life on a whim? Death, pain, suffering, evil, means nothing to the God who cannot experience these things.

God’s response to Job explains God’s actions. To people, God has acted wrongly only because we are beset on all sides by moral definition. But because this is not the case for God, since God imposes order, he is not obligated to inhabit those boundaries. But explanation is not the same as justification; that is what Job needs, that is what I need. If God acknowledges Job’s pain is legitimate, if he acknowledges Job’s request for justice, God would recognize the legitimacy of Job’s moral constraint. God would have to acknowledge that wrong had been done, that he is the source of that wrong. Further, however, is the visceral visual of the consequences of God’s freedom: God’s freedom comes at the expense of relationship with his creation. God must make a choice: relinquish some of his freedom in order to establish a relationship with man, or maintain his freedom and jettison the relationship. God attempts to avoid the choice by changing the subject; but unless addressed, the choice will keep appearing.

As Christians, we may feel uneasy in Job’s attempt to limit God. We spend our religious lives looking up to God, viewing God as the ultimate perfection that we try to emulate. But this perfection does not come by unlimited use of freedom; annihilation is the only destination there. Job reveals to God God’s choices: submit yourself to moral standards or you will have nothing. God must become a little man-like in order to save himself. How absurd is the thought that God would become as a man in order to do right?

Job 23:1-9, 16-17

Job said:

"Today also my complaint is bitter;

his hand is heavy despite my groaning.

Oh, that I knew where I might find him,

that I might come even to his dwelling!

I would lay my case before him,

and fill my mouth with arguments.

I would learn what he would answer me,

and understand what he would say to me.

Would he contend with me in the greatness of his power?

No; but he would give heed to me.

There an upright person could reason with him,

and I should be acquitted forever by my judge.

"If I go forward, he is not there;

or backward, I cannot perceive him;

on the left he hides, and I cannot behold him;

I turn to the right, but I cannot see him.

God has made my heart faint;

the Almighty has terrified me;

If only I could vanish in darkness,

and thick darkness would cover my face!"

The beauty of Job’s grief would be corrupted by comment. If you wish to sit with them, feel free to stop reading and just consider his words. There is nothing I can add that would make them more powerful. Also a warning - this will be a bit bleak. If you are looking for hope, Job is not the place to find it. Job is for those who are sitting in grief, covered in ashes and demanding answers from a silent God.

As has already been read, Satan begins Job’s story by tricking God into making Job a mocking image of God’s original Man, Adam. Job's response of pain and the implied question "why," reveals that Job expects God to respond; assuming Job worships a benevolent God who operates under a mutually beneficial covenant - e.g. Deut. 6. Surely God honors his creation enough to provide a reason. But silence meets Job. The apparent indifference to the plight of his creation mocks the assumed intention of love, patience and justice, and nullifies any covenant obligation of protection and blessing that may be expected from God.

Job himself participates in a little mockery. If patient appeal cannot move God to consider his creation, perhaps an insult would. Job reverses the words of the Psalmist (Psalm 139:7-12 to be exact), mocking God's presence - everywhere Job looks, there is nothing. Actually, not nothing. God intentionally hides. God was thought to permeate everything, everywhere. He exists necessarily - God's power and presence cannot help but be perceived. This permeation is supposed to inspire awe, wonder and comfort in the righteous; dread and worry in the unrighteous. Job's mockery highlights the injustice done to him, admitting his only comfort would be the abyss that awaits the unrighteous. That is how he has been treated, so that is how he will perceive God. If God cannot be found, he will sit and wait defiantly until God proves him wrong.

For the religiously inclined, the denial of God's existence represents the epitome of impiety. God MUST exist, so we create theologies and religions that bolster that necessity. But evil, the existence of suffering, peels away the layers draped on through eons of philosophizing and speculation, taking with them the comfort of a God who plays by his own rules. We need not go further than Job - When we reach the bottom, when we have exhausted our questions, when we peer into the abyss of our existence, does anything answer, or does silence mock us to the end?

Job 1:1; 2:1-10

There was once a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job. That man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil.

One day the heavenly beings came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the Lord. The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the Lord, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.” The Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil. He still persists in his integrity, although you incited me against him, to destroy him for no reason.” Then Satan answered the Lord, “Skin for skin! All that people have they will give to save their lives. But stretch out your hand now and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face.” The Lord said to Satan, “Very well, he is in your power; only spare his life.”

So Satan went out from the presence of the Lord, and inflicted loathsome sores on Job from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head. Job took a potsherd with which to scrape himself, and sat among the ashes.

Then his wife said to him, “Do you still persist in your integrity? Curse God, and die.” But he said to her, “You speak as any foolish woman would speak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips.

Jealousy

We should remember that “Satan” is a transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning “Adversary.” We should also remember this Adversary has made a name for himself in being a trickster, wiley, and wise. His interactions expose things better left hidden, his words hint and suggest. When God asks his Adversary “Where have you come from,” the response, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it,” harkens to an earlier epoch. One where God walked among man, but no longer.

The reading this week provides the second iteration of this response, a reminder from the Accuser to the Creator: “I have a closeness to them that you do not,” the accusation being that God does not know mankind as well as he thinks. This kernel of doubt feeds insecurity, inspires a hint of jealousy. How does God prove the Devil wrong? Can God guarantee man’s devotion? Or will man deny him again?

What it cost to love God

Consider the result of this wager - death, destruction, a family gone and a life in tatters, the man at the center of the story lying in his own filth, scraping at open wounds with a shard of glass. Imagine the Adversary standing above, displaying his handiwork commissioned by God. having done what God allowed and made his exemplar a wretch. Look - look at what you have allowed. See the glory of your hand. Behold the wretch! Do you think what remains of this man will choose you?

Here is where I imagine a horrified God. This is my hope. I hope God is horrified. Could he not help but remember Adam, his first exemplar? Adam was the capstone of creation, the testament to the power and life of God, the very image of God on earth. The result of Adam’s relationship was exile and death because of a single act of disobedience. Job proved himself obedient, even righteous. But this only results in calamity. The juxtaposition of these two images make clear that the result of relationship with God could result in devastation. What did it cost Job to love God? Everything. What does it cost God to love Job? Only being required to witness the work of his hands.

What God owes us

Answers. Justice. Life. Why do the righteous suffer? Why, after a whirlwind destroys a man’s family, does God appear to that same man as a whirlwind? Is God the destroyer? Does the giver of life forsake the living? Our God, our God, have you forsaken us?

Does God regret?

Return to the image of the broken man. Grieving, sick, hopeless. Job gathers his courage and demands an answer of God - why have you done this? But God refuses to answer a righteous man. Instead, God hides in the whirlwind that, for Job, is indistinguishable from the one that claimed his family’s life. All this, caused by a foolish wager where nothing is proved other than the volatility and perfidy of God. God tries to make it right, to return to the old system of rewarding piety with riches, but the damage is done and cannot be undone. God’s final act of contrition comes later, when God lays down his own life in pursuit of those from whom he once demanded life. Therein lies the remission of sin.

Esther 7:1-6, 9-10; 9:20-22

The king and Haman went in to feast with Queen Esther. On the second day, as they were drinking wine, the king again said to Esther, “What is your petition, Queen Esther? It shall be granted you. And what is your request? Even to the half of my kingdom, it shall be fulfilled.” Then Queen Esther answered, “If I have won your favor, O king, and if it pleases the king, let my life be given me-- that is my petition-- and the lives of my people-- that is my request. For we have been sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be killed, and to be annihilated. If we had been sold merely as slaves, men and women, I would have held my peace; but no enemy can compensate for this damage to the king.” Then King Ahasuerus said to Queen Esther, “Who is he, and where is he, who has presumed to do this?” Esther said, “A foe and enemy, this wicked Haman!” Then Haman was terrified before the king and the queen.

Then Harbona, one of the eunuchs in attendance on the king, said, “Look, the very gallows that Haman has prepared for Mordecai, whose word saved the king, stands at Haman's house, fifty cubits high.” And the king said, “Hang him on that.” So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai. Then the anger of the king abated.

Mordecai recorded these things, and sent letters to all the Jews who were in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus, both near and far, enjoining them that they should keep the fourteenth day of the month Adar and also the fifteenth day of the same month, year by year, as the days on which the Jews gained relief from their enemies, and as the month that had been turned for them from sorrow into gladness and from mourning into a holiday; that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, days for sending gifts of food to one another and presents to the poor.

In this week’s Old Testament reading, we are thrust in the middle of the climactic scene of Esther. Like donning headphones without adjusting the volume, we are given no context, no time to prepare, no way to anticipate this moment; sudden, loud noises and a similar, sudden end. Esther’s request to her husband king is that she, her people and her cousin Mordecai be spared from the immanent state-sponsored genocide. Incredulous, the king learns that his vizzier, Haman, is the one responsible for the plot and that one of the potential victims, in addition to his Queen, is her cousin who saved him from assasination, Mordecai. In one of the ironic reversals in Esther’s story, Haman is promptly impaled on the stake he had especially reserved for Mordecai. The Jewish people hear of their salvation and institute a holiday - Purim, where they celebrate their deliverance from imminent extermination.

Women have made a consistent appearance in recent Old Testament readings, and here again one of the most famous Old Testament women makes hers. I am not going to focus on Esther; instead, Haman will receive our attention. Doing some very cursory research for this post I learned something. Sometimes this happens when you read a text for the first time in a while. I read that Haman is an Agagite (Esth. 3:2). Agag, we should recall, is the Amalekite king during the reign of Saul whose entire kingdom was marked by complete annihilation. King Saul, tasked with killing every man, woman and child, as well as killing all their livestock and destroying all possessions of worth, in a fit of mercy (or recklessness, who can tell with Saul?) kept the king and his family alive, along with a few choice sheep. This enraged the prophet Samuel who accused Saul of disobeying God. Samuel promptly executed Agag’s family in front of him before chopping the king to pieces himself, as any self-respecting man of God would do.

The Amalekites first appear in Exodus 17, where they attack the Israelites during their wanderings. Nothing is mentioned regarding why they attacked, but it clearly is a mistake. This attack led to a decisive defeat, guaranteed Israelite animosity, and a promise from the Israelite God that reads, “Write this down in a book as a memorial and recite it to Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven...The Lord has sworn; the Lord will have war against Amalek from generation to generation.” Israel is reminded of this promise in their Law Code of Deuteronomy, “Remember what Amalek did to you from Egypt...Therefore it will come about when the Lord your God Gives you rest...that you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven; you must not forget,” (Deut. 25:17-19).

The blood feud is generations going, with a remnant somehow resurrecting from the ashes to confront their enemies yet again. They were crushed in battle in their first meeting with the Israelites in Exodus; they survived and rebuilt their kingdom. Unprovoked, God decides that Saul should lead the extermination, fulfilling his promise. But even with Samuel’s meticulousness, one apparently got away, appearing in a similar role as his age-old enemies generations later. Only now, he has the upper hand. He legislates the genocide of the Jews, a reversal of God’s own eternal Law and sets his own date for extermination. He anxiously awaits the revenge that has long been denied. Yet, as we read, he is denied. Haman suffers the same fate as his predecessor Agag. He is killed on the gibbet he made for his enemy through the encouragement of his wife and family; they swiftly follow him. But not only is Haman and his family killed. Our reading skips the final reversal of Esther: the Israelites, not the Amalekites enact the genocide against “all that sought their harm” (Esth. 9:2). For two days, the Persian King granted the Jews immunity while they killed 75,000+ enemies in the empire.

Esther is typically interpreted in the following way: “Trust and obey and watch God’s plan unfold before you.” In this case, God’s plan includes the culmination of a promise long given: the blotting out of all memory of Amalek under heaven. Usually, this is not what we have in mind when we think of God’s promises to us. Usually, they are much more benign and personal; like, “I know the plans I have for you...plans to prosper you, etc…” We like the promises of personal safety and that’s how we think of Esther. God promised his people he would protect them and he did! Except that he did not promise them this. He promised to exterminate their enemies and he did; or at least, he gave them the legal pretense to do the job themselves.

Hopefully, any who read this should feel uncomfortable with the morality presented in this tale. The book of Esther is one of the latest additions to both the Jewish and Christian canons. Most would claim, though, this is because the book is too secular, that it never mentions God, or the Law and that the main protagonist, Esther, is hardly the devout Jew. Though the absence of God does not seem to deter most. Perhaps we should assume that God is working behind the scenes, that his plan is so infallible, his purpose so sovereign, there is no need for his explicit presence or manipulation. Just trust and obey. On the other hand, perhaps God realized he needed to stay as far away as possible. That people do not need his help to keep hurting each other. Maybe God, when he revisits this moment, regrets this promise, wishing he had said something else instead, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…”

Proverbs 31: 10-31

Proverbs 31:10-31

A capable wife who can find?
She is far more precious than jewels.
The heart of her husband trusts in her,
and he will have no lack of gain.
She does him good, and not harm,
all the days of her life.
She seeks wool and flax,
and works with willing hands.
She is like the ships of the merchant,
she brings her food from far away.
She rises while it is still night
and provides food for her household
and tasks for her servant-girls.
She considers a field and buys it;
with the fruit of her hands she plants a vineyard.
She girds herself with strength,
and makes her arms strong.
She perceives that her merchandise is profitable.
Her lamp does not go out at night.
She puts her hands to the distaff,
and her hands hold the spindle.
She opens her hand to the poor,
and reaches out her hands to the needy.
She is not afraid for her household when it snows,
for all her household are clothed in crimson.
She makes herself coverings;
her clothing is fine linen and purple.
Her husband is known in the city gates,
taking his seat among the elders of the land.
She makes linen garments and sells them;
she supplies the merchant with sashes.
Strength and dignity are her clothing,
and she laughs at the time to come.
She opens her mouth with wisdom,
and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.
She looks well to the ways of her household,
and does not eat the bread of idleness.
Her children rise up and call her happy;
her husband too, and he praises her:
“Many women have done excellently,
but you surpass them all.”
Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain,
but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
Give her a share in the fruit of her hands,
and let her works praise her in the city gates.

Cleary, what we need is another white, American, middle-class, cis-gender male waxing eloquent on the perfect woman; however, I will forbear. I have not read this passage in quite some time but now that I have, I am reminded not of the ideal Ancient Near Eastern woman (somehow I doubt I will ever meet one), but of other Old Testament women and their stories. Let us remember:

Miriam (Exodus 15)

She opens her hand to the poor,
     and reaches out her hands to the needy.
She is not afraid for her household when it snows,
     for all her household are clothed in crimson.

The first “prophet of the people,” Miriam’s prominence  is surprising in a narrative dominated by Moses and Aaron. In Hebrew her name means “bitter water,” reminding us that it was she who first appealed to the bloodied water for salvation. She first intercessed on behalf of her brother in the presence of power, and when Moses (which means “drawn from water”) ran from Egypt, she remained, the stalwart intercessor and spiritual advisor for her oppressed people. Though Aaron receives pride of place as Moses’ mouthpiece and advisor, surely Miriam instructed her brother in prayer, service, hope and fortitude.

In Egyptian her name means “beloved”; she is indeed beloved by the Israelite people. Some Jewish sources have Miriam leading her people through the Reed (Red) Sea while her brother holds the water from the shore. During their journey, she leads them in their first Song of Deliverance, though it is now ascribed to Moses. The woman who saved the one through the water now marches her many through the sea.

Her ministry continues in the wilderness, though she is rarely mentioned. We are understandably concerned about the relationship between Moses and YHWH and the practical applications of the covenant they are proposing. I imagine Miriam had an active role in disseminating information and providing services for the people, not least of which as their representative to Moses. In Numbers 12, Miriam criticizes Moses for his divorce of Zippora and marriage to another woman. She is struck by God with a skin disease (though I think this is impulsive and regrettable) and is banished from the camp. Her people take up their prophet’s protest and will not leave until God heals their liberator; he does and only then do they continue moving.

Miriam participates in one other, life-long protest. She remained childless. She witnessed the atrocities done to her people when she was young; as a result, she dedicated her life to her people. She was childless, but not without family. Israel is her children. Though she saw and participated in the liberation of her own people, she resisted adding to the number of suffering agents in this world. God rescued some, but his work is not done. While she lived, she preached hope to the oppressed, led them out of slavery, fed them in the wilderness, and even provided water to them. Like Moses, she is a water diviner; she had her own well in the wilderness that watered her people. When she died, her water dried up. She gave everything for her people and is rewarded with immortality in her name: Miriam - Mary. Moses learned from her, perhaps God did too. Her life inspired him to complete his own work so he came through the waters of birth by his own Mary, to finally liberate his people - all of them.

Tamar (Genesis 38):

She makes herself coverings;
     her clothing is fine linen and purple.
Her husband is known in the city gates,
     taking his seat among the elders of the land.
She makes linen garments and sells them;
     she supplies the merchant with sashes.

Tamar’s story is one in kind with Jacob and Joseph. She cunningly employs the use of clothing and knowledge of family history to achieve her own family. The death of her first husband, the spoiling of possible children by her brother-in-law, the denial of another husband and her indefinite languishing in widowhood with no hope for children encourage her to take matters into her own hands. She dresses as a harlot, posts in front of the city gates and lures her father-in-law to sleep with her. This is the man who refuses to provide her with a husband/children from one of his sons. This man, Judah, is a son of a deceiver, who himself had just deceived and is being now deceived. Tamar is rewarded with twins for her cunning.  

Sarah (Genesis 18:9-14; 20):

Strength and dignity are her clothing,
     and she laughs at the time to come…
Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain,
     but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
Give her a share in the fruit of her hands,
     and let her works praise her in the city gates.

The references to laughter, beauty and fruit here remind me of the first matriarch, Sarah. The first passage indicated in the heading, Gen. 18:9-14, recounts her eavesdropping on the conversation between her husband and God, where she laughs when she hears she will bear a son. God, huffy that someone would scoff at such a grandiose promise responds, “Is anything too difficult for the Lord?!” Sarah does indeed bear a son and following God’s instructions names him Isaac, which means “laughter” or “mockery” depending on your humor.

               The other reference, Genesis 20, tells of how Sarah, with the help of Abraham, forces God to open her womb and act justly.  This is a long story, so buckle up.  There’s a lot of context, subtext, and pretext to consider, as well as some ancient history, in order to understand and appreciate Sarah’s boldness in holding God to his promises.  I am also taking some liberties with interpretation, using what Wilda Gafney calls “my sanctified imagination”. 

The chapter immediately follows the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the central point in the Abraham-Sarah story. The story turns when Abraham confronts God with his accusation: “Will the God of justice not act justly?” Old Testament justice is of the type - “give what is owed,” lex talionis, an eye for an eye; a promise made, a promise fulfilled. God had arrived after “hearing the great outcry of the city,” giving to the city what is owed - destruction. But what of promises not fulfilled; what of justice deferred? In his accusation, Abraham reminds God of this. At this point, God had promised Abraham and Sarah a number of things, not least of which progeny that had been promised five times (by my count) over the span of several decades. Yet, after years of deferment and despite the obedience of Abraham and Sarah, she had not received what was owed. The God of justice has not acted justly. Sarah will have her justice.

We also need to remember the events of Genesis 12.  Genesis 20 is a repeat of Genesis 12. In the earlier narrative God appears to Abraham, a random person, offering a bargain: wealth, prosperity and so many children he will be like a great nation -  if he moves his family to an undisclosed location. Abraham complies, keeping his deal of the bargain, settling in Canaan. There is a plague in the land and Abraham is forced to flee to Egypt where Abraham pimps his beautiful wife out to the Pharaoh who gives Abraham “sheep, oxen, donkeys, male and female slaves, female donkeys and camels” (Gen. 12:16). Basically, the wealth God promised them, but not the child.

In Iron Age sexual politics, nothing excludes surrogacy; indeed, to help God fulfill his promises of children, it may be the best option, especially at their age (Abraham was 75, Sarah probably 65). What is also  included in Iron Age sexual politics is the allusion of sex to farming. The woman’s womb is the ground, the man’s sperm is the seed. If the ground is fertile, and the seed good, fruit will result. If either the ground is infertile, or the seed bad - no fruit, no children. For Abraham and Sarah, though they are old, they do not know yet which is bad: Sarah’s womb, or Abraham’s seed. We should not diminish the injustice Sarah experienced being given over to another man. The injustice is compounded when she lives with the Pharoah “as a wife” (sexual relations implied) long enough to begin suspecting that she bears the curse.

Sarah’s curse is confirmed in Genesis 16 where she tests the fertility of Abraham’s seed with her slave, Hagar.  Abraham is not shooting blanks.  Hagar bears a son, but God wants only the fruit of Sarah’s womb.  God’s refusal to cede control is confirmed when Abraham pleads to God that Ishmael, the son with Hagar, be accepted, but God refuses (Gen. 17:17-20). Three times God had promised Sarah children - what is so special about her womb that the child must originate there?

Immediately after God’s refusal to accept Ishmael as the promised child, God quickly promises Abraham and Sarah twice more a child. Abraham is now one hundred years old and Sarah ninety. Now we are ready to consider the events of Genesis 20.  Abraham and Sarah sojourn in a foreign land and Abraham again portrays his wife as his sister and she is taken by the local king. Crucially missing is Abraham’s motivation for this repeat. Before, Abraham was fearful that someone would kill him in order to take his wife. Here, no fear is mentioned. Once the king, Abimalech takes Sarah, God appears to him and rebukes him. Abimalech explains himself, “Lord, will you slay a nation, even though blameless...did she not herself say, ‘He is my brother?’” The first sentence is a reformulation of Abraham’s question at Sodom and Gomorrah, the final sentence makes Sarah an active participant in this deception.

Why would Sarah participate in this foolishness, willingly risking her body to more abuse? She is taking back control of her body; she is unwilling to be manipulated by the men in her life (Abraham and God) any longer and is making public God’s injustice. Immediately, after Sarah is taken, God appears in a dream to king Abimelech, like a jealous lover - “You are a dead man, that woman is married!” God does not say “married to a man”; should we think that God considers Sarah his wife? Sarah, willingly agreeing she is unmarried, elicits a response from God who considers himself her true husband. After all, only through his power, his initiative, his timing will Sarah conceive.

Of course, Abimalech did no wrong; neither did Sarah. She positioned herself as the victim. Abraham, perhaps, could be culpable for lying, but his lie is one of omission (Sarah really is his sister, he just failed to mention she also is his wife). No, attention is clearly directed toward God who cannot discern injustice. After Abimalech’s defense, God admits that the king had done nothing wrong, going so far as to claim responsibility for Abimalech’s restraint, “...and I also kept you from sinning against me; therefore I did not let you touch her” (Gen. 20:6). The king did no wrong; I would expect God, the judge of all the earth to act justly by telling Abimalech to give Sarah back and everything will be fine. But God qualifies his response, “Now, therefore, restore the man’s wife, for he is a prophet and he will pray for you and you will live” (Gen. 20:7).

Sarah is not done.  She needs to force her husband’s hand a little more. She whispers to Abraham to not intercede, but to force Abimalech to offer a bribe to be rid of them. The king gives Abraham everything, just like the Pharaoh before him: livestock, slaves, land (anywhere he wants) and gives Sarah 1000 pieces of silver and says to her, “It is your vindication.” Does God not hear these words?  They ironically allude to Sarah’s missing child, her only true vindication. God should speak these words, not Abimelech.For the second time in this way, God’s promises to Abraham and Sarah are partially fulfilled. Only after the bribe has been paid does Sarah have Abraham pray to God and God lifts the curse. The curse God put on Abimalech, the means of annihilation, was infertility - God closed fast their wombs. If God cannot hear the injustice, Sarah is sure he sees it. God cannot allow the innocent to suffer and call himself just. No longer can he deny Sarah, similarly innocent. The first words of the following chapter read, “Then the Lord took note of Sarah as he had said and the Lord did for Sarah as he had promised.”

Sarah was promised a child and her body was not her own. Control was shared between Abraham and God. Genesis 20 tells the story of a woman (behind the scenes as women often are) fighting for control over her body and legacy; fighting for justice denied her. She drags her family through a curse to the threshold of a promise long witheld. The victim before, she now demands the God of all justice act justly.

I know this post has been tangential at best; but “the Proverbs 31 woman” is a specter of femininity, and there are many ways to be a Biblical woman.  You can rise early and care for your household (the actual Proverbs 31 Woman, I forgot we were talking about her).  You can drive a stake through a guy’s head while he’s asleep (Deborah).  You can seduce a superhero-type dude with long hair and steal his magic powers (Delilah).  You can call out a king’s hypocrisy after he dances naked in the streets (Michal).  Maybe Ruth and I will write a Proverbs 32 woman who includes these attributes.  Anyway, read the Old Testament, it’s fun.

Proverbs 1:20-33

Wisdom cries out in the street;
in the squares she raises her voice.
At the busiest corner she cries out;
at the entrance of the city gates she
speaks:
“How long, O simple ones, will you love
being simple?
How long will scoffers delight in their
scoffing
and fools hate knowledge?
Give heed to my reproof;
I will pour out my thoughts to you;
I will make my words known to you.
Because I have called and you refused,
have stretched out my hand and no one
heeded,
and because you have ignored all my
counsel
and would have none of my reproof,
I also will laugh at your calamity;
I will mock when panic strikes you,
when panic strikes you like a storm,
and your calamity comes like a whirlwind,
when distress and anguish come upon you.
Then they will call upon me, but I will not answer;
they will seek me diligently, but will not find me.
Because they hated knowledge
and did not choose the fear of the Lord,
would have none of my counsel,
and despised all my reproof,
therefore they shall eat the fruit of their way
and be sated with their own devices.
For waywardness kills the simple,
and the complacency of fools destroys them;
but those who listen to me will be secure
and will live at ease, without dread of disaster.”

I really don’t have much to add to this passage - disappointing, I know! But, “Even fools are thought wise when they are silent.” Here then are a few short observations:

Wisdom is her own person. Of course this does not mean that Wisdom is actually a person - though some who enjoy the Gospel According to John, especially the first chapter, may disagree. The point is, we don’t find wisdom within ourselves. Others are necessary for expanding our knowledge and increasing our wisdom. Only fools are self-reliant, or think they have nothing to learn from someone else.

Wisdom is generous. If we can get over ourselves and listen, wisdom seems to be shouting at us everywhere; she also seems to get louder the more you listen. It’s like gaining any kind of knowledge - the more you learn, the more you realize your ignorance, the more you rely on others.

There may be a point of no return, which is terrifying. Ignoring wisdom becomes easier with time. Her steady shouting diminishes to a whisper then fades altogether. Then, no matter the pleading, the fool has chosen their path and will walk it. Wisdom's words sound unkind when she says she will join in the mockery, when they finally shout for help that she will not respond. Even if she mocks, the fool cannot hear it, so I suppose it doesn’t matter. Maybe the deafness is reciprocal; the fool cannot hear wisdom and wisdom cannot hear the fool.

There are two areas I think we (humanity at large and my country especially) have played the fool and are actively experiencing calamity. One is the Pandemic. Ignoring the wisdom offered in our medical and scientific professionals has resulted in one of the most successful disinformation campaigns I have ever heard of. The state of ignorance is utterly astounding. The conspiracies surrounding the vaccines that I have heard have ranged from human magnetization to people being turned into biological 5G signal boosters. This combined with the vitriol and bunk scientific theories about mask wearing makes a mockery of us. People are needlessly getting sick and dying. This is sad and tragic. Listen to the voice of wisdom - get vaccinated and please wear a mask. The second area we have played the fool is the ongoing climate crisis. We should have started doing something about this 30+ years ago. Of course, we didn’t and we really aren’t doing anything about it now. The voice of reason we have ignored is our home, Earth. She is actively crying out to us, especially now. In the United States alone, we have seen in the past five years the most powerful hurricanes on record. Temperature is on the rise across the continent (Seattle reached 112 degrees F in June). California is on fire - its second largest fire on record is currently burning now. Smoke from the fires in the west have blown across the country to Maine and New York. The Colorado river is so low, state governments have stopped drawing water from it for people. Insects are becoming extinct in the Southeast and Florida may be underwater in 100 years, Miami for sure is gone in 50. This is just the United States. There were fires within the arctic circle last year; the UAE officially reached temperatures that make human life impossible. Currents in the Atlantic Ocean are on the brink of collapse, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc…. The climate crisis means utter devastation, not just for humans, but for the planet itself and all that lives on it. We played the fool for too long and now we are destroying everything around us and we are not finished yet. I definitely don’t have an answer for something as extensive and encompassing as the climate crisis. But the first step in gaining wisdom is to listen. I’m definitely listening now, I hope we are not too late.

Proverbs 22

Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23

A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches,

and favour is better than silver or gold.

The rich and the poor have this in common:

the Lord is the maker of them all.

Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity,

and the rod of anger will fail.

Those who are generous are blessed,

for they share their bread with the poor.

Do not rob the poor because they are poor,

or crush the afflicted at the gate;

for the Lord pleads their cause

and despoils of life those who despoil them.

Truism as a genre is difficult to expound. The innocence and idealism necessary for these words jettison any nuance or practical application.  I read a proverb like this and think, “Well that’s nice, I wish the world actually worked like that.” Our task may be easier if we add a dose of reality to these too-perfect lines.

A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches

A name bestowed with currency is better than obscurity

And favor is better than silver or gold

For the  patrician has both favor and money

The rich and poor have this in common:

the Lord is the maker of them all

The rich and the poor have the following NOT in common:

money, time, social support, education, food, water, leisure, housing, health, etc.

but the Lord is not responsible for these things

Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity

Unless you are Job who reaped both injustice and calamity

And the rod of anger will fail

….and God’s anger, which did not fail

Those who are generous are blessed

for they share their bread with the poor

The one who gives is the one in need

but he who gives not, wants not

Do not rob the poor because they are poor

or crush the afflicted at the gate

for the Lord pleads their cause

and despoils of life those that despoil them

“...listen to the words of the Lord. ‘I will punish Amelek for what he did to Israel...Now go and strike Amelek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

I am being facetious...maybe. 

Song of Solomon 2:8-13

Song of Solomon 2:8-13

The voice of my beloved!
Look, he comes,

leaping upon the mountains,
bounding over the hills.

My beloved is like a gazelle
or a young stag.

Look, there he stands
behind our wall,

gazing in at the windows,
looking through the lattice.

My beloved speaks and says to me:

"Arise, my love, my fair one,
and come away;

for now the winter is past,
the rain is over and gone.

The flowers appear on the earth;
the time of singing has come,

and the voice of the turtledove
is heard in our land.

The fig tree puts forth its figs,
and the vines are in blossom;
they give forth fragrance.

Arise, my love, my fair one,
and come away."

I am pleasantly surprised that my Old Testament notes begin with a passage from Song of Solomon. Though it is included in our religious canon, there are no references to God or covenant or Torah; filled instead with carnal cravings, the entire work is an ode to intimacy between two people that would make God himself sweat with unrequited passion. The book is included because it has historically been interpreted as a metaphor representing God’s relationship with Israel and/or the Christian Church; though the book has largely been ignored for me, both in my childhood spiritual development and in adulthood. In the first case, the book is much too promiscuous for children; in the second case, people are generally agreed that an abstinent relationship with God is preferable – Mary being the sole exception and we are happy to keep it this way.

But Song of Solomon is more than a vaudeville of physical pleasures, as this passage testifies. Here is the expression of relief, of escape, of beauty and contentment in the presence of their person. We all have these people in our lives, people for whom we wait expectantly at window or door. I remember being a child, asking my mother incessantly when my dad would be home for work. I could pick out the sound of his truck a mile down the street and would run to meet him, throwing my arms around his waist. Hugging him, the scents of familiarity would cover me – metallic sharp of metal, the cool of Winterfresh gum, and the warm musk of his work clothes and leather boots. It is nice to have your people return to you. No doubt my own kids will have similar memories. No matter what we are doing, everything is dropped at 4:00 pm when they hear the door open, squealing with delight and relief that their beloved has returned. I also await anxiously the return of my beloved, but descriptions of my love for her is for her ears alone, though I am sure you are familiar with similar feelings.

The point of Song of Solomon is to affirm relationships between people. A person needs another, which is why God said, “It is not good for man to be alone.” Curiously, God did not solve the problem of loneliness by providing himself to the earthling as a relationship partner; instead, God formed a person from his side. The earthling recognized himself in this other and exclaimed, “Now this truly is bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh.” People share an intimacy with each other that is exclusive; not even God could fulfill the need for the other.

This is a short post but I hope that you, and I, find solace in the people around us, especially when a pandemic makes gathering together much more difficult. If anything, remember pleasant memories with beloveds of the past and enjoy the time given with current loved ones. If you are a person who feels they typically occupy the window, I offer encouragement to wait patiently and expectantly. If you are one who is returning to their beloved, do not tarry, fly swiftly to the one who makes you whole.