TromboneChat

Quote from: MoominDave on May 11, 2016, 03:34AM
Questions and Observations

1) A new book, and a change of gear here - brutal tales of political infighting are put on hold for a brief (only 4 chapters) calmer interlude of domestic stuff.

As you say there's a change of gear.  I would say its a huge contrast!  The behaviour of the people are completely different.  Everyone being nice and being concerned for the other.  This is the ideal of christian (and Jewish I expect) love.

I like the wikipedia description about 'Hesed' at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ruth#Hesed "loving kindness and implying loyalty"

Quote2) We are explicitly told that this was "In the days when the judges ruled", which is presumably what this slightly unexpected book is doing here in the Biblical sequence. I see that the Jewish canon places it elsewhere, where it is perhaps more naturally located.

I wonder how close this story was to the time of Ehud the left handed, who killed the Moabite king Eglon and led an Israelite army against the Moabites at a ford of the Jordan river, killing many of them.  Was it before or after?


Quote3) Authorship: Anonymous, with the historical attribution to Samuel not considered supportable.

I expect it was later than Samuel.


                     -----------------

The big highlight for me is how much of a contrast this is to the stories in Judges.  Naomi, Ruth and Orpah are all presented in a very positive light.  Even Orpah who leaves Naomi, has to be persuaded to go back to her mothers home.

I think in that culture there was no support for widows so the younger women would need to get married to survive.  I guess that they would not expect to be marriage material for an Israelite given the antipathy between Moab and Israel.  Wasn't there a ban on marrying Moabites in Deuteronomy?

Ruth and Naomi are excellent examples of Hesed.  vv16,17 seems to be what its all about.

I think its significant to that Ruth who is a Moabitess and thus an enemy of Israel is spoken of in such a high regard, and as we later see, is recorded as an ancestor of King David and Jesus.  Its similar to Rahab "the harlot" who even though she was a Canaanite, was an hero for Israel and an ancestor of David.  The writer/s were obviously making a point about this.

Ruth 2 text

Highlights

 - Ruth comes into the favour of Boaz

Summary

 - Ruth goes out to gather leftover grain from the harvest.
 - She finds herself in the field of Boaz, who is a relative of Elimelech
 - Boaz offers her favour, protecting her and feeding her, because he has heard of her kindness to Naomi, his relative's widow
 - When Ruth returns home, she is told by Naomi who Boaz is

Questions and Observations

1) Quite straightforward stuff, this?

Quote from: drizabone on May 11, 2016, 08:11PMAs you say there's a change of gear.  I would say its a huge contrast!  The behaviour of the people are completely different.  Everyone being nice and being concerned for the other.  This is the ideal of christian (and Jewish I expect) love.

I like the wikipedia description about 'Hesed' at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ruth#Hesed "loving kindness and implying loyalty"
It's refreshing, isn't it? After all the bad behaviour in previous books, it's quite relaxing... Hesed is a nice concept as shown here, yes. I might use it as a word some time. Definitely the 'light side of the force'.

Quote from: drizabone on May 11, 2016, 08:11PMI wonder how close this story was to the time of Ehud the left handed, who killed the Moabite king Eglon and led an Israelite army against the Moabites at a ford of the Jordan river, killing many of them.  Was it before or after?
And back to the hooliganism! By legend, Ruth was the daughter of Eglon, which would make the stories relatable - but there seems nothing to support this bar that single strand. And when one considers that there are mutually contradictory elements of that same legendary strand, it starts to seem something not worth taking account of.

Quote from: MoominDave on May 12, 2016, 08:07AMRuth 2 text

Highlights

 - Ruth comes into the favour of Boaz

Summary

 - Ruth goes out to gather leftover grain from the harvest.
 - She finds herself in the field of Boaz, who is a relative of Elimelech
 - Boaz offers her favour, protecting her and feeding her, because he has heard of her kindness to Naomi, his relative's widow
 - When Ruth returns home, she is told by Naomi who Boaz is

Questions and Observations

1) Quite straightforward stuff, this?

There is stuff happening in the background that I think are significant. A couple of things:

- have you noticed the way the writer emphasises how careful Ruth and Boaz are to make sure everything is done properly and morally?
- the idea of the Kinsman-Redeemer (Goel in Hebrew) is pretty important concept in this story.  This role goes back to Leviticus where a close family member was expected to :
     - bail out someone if they have to sell their property or themselves because they become poor.
     - avenge them if they were killed (called the Avenger of Blood)
     - (if they died childless) they were expected to marry the widow and sire a child which would be officially the dead brothers child rather than theirs.
 - This could be costly for the Goel but if the Goel didn't carry out their responsibility they were shamed.
 - This had a community purpose in sustaining the families but was also meant to remind the Israelites of God who had redeemed them.  Is was also used of Jesus in the NT as our Kinsman-Redeemer.

Ruth 3 text


Highlights -

 - Naomi the matchmaker
 - Boaz the Goel

Summary

 - Naomi tells Ruth that she wants to make it well for Ruth, that Boaz is their relative, and that she is to lie down at his feet tonight.
 - Ruth does this, and when Boaz wakes up in the middle of the night Ruth tells him that he is a Goel (Kinsman-Redeemer)
 - Boaz accepts the obligation and tells Ruth not to worry but there is Redeemer that is nearer and he has first claim . 
 - He sends Ruth away before anyone realises that there is a women there so that there is no hint of naughty things happening.
 - Ruth reports back to Naomi who tells her to wait for Boaz to sort things out.

Questions and Observations

1) Once again the writer makes it clear that all the legal and moral niceties are being followed.

2) Apparently there are those that think that Ruth uncovered more that Boaz's feet at night.  They've been watching to much American TV I think.  I can't see much evidence for the language to be used that way and its out of character with Ruth and Boaz and the way they do everything the right way.  Ruth lying at Boaz's feet is submissive and fits her character of doing everything the right way.

3) I think that Ruth and Naomi are going after Boaz because (he is a nice guy and) so that he will buy the field from Naomi and thus give her money to survive, and also to provide heirs.

4) What Ruth is asking for and Boaz agrees to, is for Boaz to accept the role of Goel (Kinsman-Redeemer) for Elimilech's family. This would involve the purchase of Elimilech's land and providing and supporting an heir for him.  He get's Ruth as a bonus but its not really a true romance story.

5) The kindnesses that Boaz refers to in v10 seem to me to be Ruth's kindness to Naomi: first when she comes back to Israel to care for Naomi, and then now as she is prepared to marry an old guy so that Naomi's long term future is provided for.

Ruth 4 text

Highlights

 - Ruth and Boaz marry, and everyone lives happily ever after

Summary

 - Boaz seeks out the person who has a prior right of redemption over Elimelech's estate, and offers him it.
 - The potential redeemer is willing to redeem the estate, but not once he realises that Ruth is included, citing inheritance issues.
 - He freely offers Boaz the chance to redeem, and they seal the deal.
 - Boaz officially redeems Naomi's property, including Ruth to be his wife, witnessed by the elders of the tribe.
 - Ruth and Boaz marry.
 - Ruth bears a son, Obed, who is treated as Naomi's.
 - Brief genealogy - Obed -> Jesse -> King David

Questions and Observations

1) Why would the inclusion of Ruth have placed the potential redeemer's own inheritance in jeopardy?
2) The elders cite a historical example of wives coming in to the tribe - Leah and Rachel for Jacob (although they were cousins of Jacob).
3) They also honour the memory of Perez as an upstanding example - which is nice to see, because he had a distinctly rocky start in life.
4) The genealogy is (I read) thought to be a later insertion to tie the narrative in with the overall OT historical story.
5) But (if we could trust it) here we have a listed connection from ancient back to super-ancient - David <- Jesse <- Obed <- Boaz <- Salmon <- Nahshon <- Amminadab <- Ram <- Hezron <- Perez <- Judah <- Jacob <- Isaac <- Abraham. The Book of Chronicles will list these more explicitly.
6) So if King David is generally accepted at about 1000 BC, 13 generations back at 25 years a generation (say) makes for ~1300 BC for Abraham. Heading back further, there are 11 listed generations to Noah, and 9 more to Adam, making Noah ~1600 BC and Adam ~1800 BC. These are assuming modern life lengths, and these years do not match at all with the usually ascribed Bible-based dates for these figures.
7) There's something a little peculiar personally in debating the Book of Ruth with someone called Martin, as those are the names of my mother and father...

Dave asks

1) Why would the inclusion of Ruth have placed the potential redeemer's own inheritance in jeopardy?

Possibly that he was promised to another through an arranged amarriage as part of t5he conditions to do with family fortunes?

In preface, the earlier summaries:
Quote from: MoominDave on May 11, 2016, 03:12AMQuote from: MoominDave on Apr 19, 2016, 03:39AMCondensed Pentateuch:
Quote from: MoominDave on Apr 06, 2016, 02:58PMGenesis

• [li]Big picture stuff
  • [li]Creation; Adam & Eve[/li][li]Humans, take 1; Cain & Abel, Noah[/li][li]The Flood; Wash everything away, start again[/li][li]Humans, take 2[/li]
  [/li][li]Abraham; extensive travels, original covenant, Lot, not sacrificing Isaac[/li][li]Jacob; conflict with twin Esau, banishment, wives, 12 sons[/li][li]Joseph; betrayal to Egypt, rise, saving of family, supposed origins of 12 tribes[/li]

Exodus

• [li]New scene, three generations on - Israelites now of low status in Egypt[/li][li]Moses grows up, fights battle of wills with Pharoah over plagues, leads Israelites to depart[/li][li]Wandering, take 1; through the desert to Mt. Sinai, where they make a long camp and...[/li]

Leviticus

• [li]...many laws are given[/li]

Numbers

• [li]Wandering, take 2; they reach their destination, but are too weak to attempt the task, and so...[/li][li]Wandering, take 3; more pootling around, building up military prowess over the years in the preparation for invasion; new leaders emerge, and they finish on the brink of their destination again[/li]

Deuteronomy

• [li]Moses orates; recap of terms and conditions, forward planning[/li][li]Moses dies[/li]

Joshua

• [li]Conquest
  • [li]Joshua appointed leader, to cross Jordan, conquer Canaan[/li][li]Spies report back that the time is ripe[/li][li]Jericho is the first city to fall. Then Ai, at the second attempt.[/li][li]The Gibeonites talk them into an alliance.[/li][li]Southern Canaan all conquered (sudden shift of narrative gear)[/li][li]Ditto the North[/li]
  [/li][li]Division of conquered land between the tribes
  • [li]The East bank land that Moses took[/li][li]West bank land[/li][li]Remaining land[/li][li]Cities of refuge and Levite cities nominated[/li]
  [/li][li]Joshua dies[/li]

Judges

• [li]Prologue: Messy details of attempted not-always-successful conquest[/li][li]An intermittent sequence of Judges leads:
  • [li]Othniel - defeated Mesopotamia[/li][li]Ehud - kills Eglon[/li][li]Shamgar - killed 600 Philistines with an ox-goad[/li][li]Deborah - defeated Jabin of Hazor[/li][li]Gideon - defeated Midian[/li][li]Tola, then Jair[/li][li]Jephthah - defeated the Ammonites[/li][li]Ibzan, then Elon, then Abdon[/li][li]Samson - killed Philistines, made trouble[/li]
  [/li][li]The Dan tribe take territory in the North[/li][li]The Benjamin tribe are defeated by the other tribes[/li]

Ruth

• [li]Intermezzo: Heartwarming tale of a family coming through hard times[/li]

Quote from: vegasbound on May 13, 2016, 03:15AMDave asks

1) Why would the inclusion of Ruth have placed the potential redeemer's own inheritance in jeopardy?

Possibly that he was promised to another through an arranged amarriage as part of t5he conditions to do with family fortunes?

Sounds plausible to me

1 Samuel 1 text

Highlights

 - Birth and dedication of Samuel

Summary

 - Elkanah lives in the hill country of Ephraim. He has two wives, Hannah and Peninnah, and children by Peninnah, but Hannah is apparently infertile.
 - Annually the family travel to Shiloh, to make offerings. Hannah vows that if she has a son, she will make him a Nazirite
 - When they return home, Hannah becomes pregnant.
 - Once he is weaned, he is taken to Shiloh and given to the priest Eli that earlier blessed Hannah after her vow. His mother dedicates him to religious service for life.

Questions and Observations

1) The historical sweep is set to resume shortly, I think.
2) The hill country of Ephraim again, the birthplace of both of the final gory tales of Judges. Was this a region of troublemakers / movers / shakers, do we perhaps think?
3) I've inferred that Samuel is to be a Nazirite, in the fashion of Samson. But it seems that there is not agreement that this is the case.
4) Elkanah does not seem very concerned about what Hannah does with her son.

Quote from: vegasbound on May 13, 2016, 03:15AMDave asks

1) Why would the inclusion of Ruth have placed the potential redeemer's own inheritance in jeopardy?

Possibly that he was promised to another through an arranged a marriage as part of the conditions to do with family fortunes?

In other versions (eg the NIV) it has estate rather than inheritance.  So if that's correct his concern is that if he marries Ruth and has her kids (which would be officially Elimilech's kids) then it will affect what he can give as an inheritance to his "own" kids rather than what he might get.

1 Samuel 2 text

Highlights

 - Hannah sings a song of praise
 - Eli's family is compared to Samuel and found wanting.

Summary

 - Hannah prays (or sings) thanks to the Lord because she is feeling so good. She says:
   - How good the Lord is
   - How he will looks after his faithful ones
   - and punish the wicked
   - and give strength to his annointed king
 - they left Samuel serving the Lord with Eli the priest
 - Eli's son's were a couple of wicked crooks and treated the Lord's offerings with contempt
 - But Samuel grew in the presence of the Lord, Hannah visited him every year, and she had more babies
 - Eli grew old and heard of what his son's were doing. He told them off but they ignored them
 - And Samuel grew in stature and in favour with God and men.
 - A man of God tells Eli that God has rejected him because they despise him.  His son's will die on the same day and all his descendants except one will die by the sword.  He will raise up a faith priest who does what God wants serve before God forever.
 

Questions and Observations

1) So obviously there is a contrast between Eli's son's and Samuel.
2) God promises a priest who will "go in and out before my anointed forever".  Who do you think this might be referring to?

1 Samuel 3 text

Highlights

 - The rise of Samuel

Summary

 - One night when he was in bed Samuel heard a voice calling his name. Samuel went to Eli to find out what he wanted.  Eli said "It wasn't me, go back to bed"
 - This happened twice more before Eli realised that it was God calling Samuel.  He told Samuel to answer the voice.
 - God  tells Samuel that he is going to punish Eli's house for the bad things that they have done.
 - The next morning Eli asks Samuel what God said.  Samuel understandably doesn't want to say, but eventuelly Eli gets him to tell.  Eli simply says that God will do what he wants.
 - And Samuel grew, and the Lord was with him, and all Israel knew that Samuel was a real prophet.

Questions and Observations

1) Samuel isn't expecting to hear voices from thin air is he?

2) It seems that during Judges, the Lord didn't appear or talk much, but that this is about to change.  God's got a new prophet.

1 Samuel 4 text

Highlights

 - The Ark of the Covenant is lost, and Eli and his family are destroyed

Summary

 - Israelites and Philistines fight and Philistines win.
 - Israel return, with Eli's two sons Hophni and Phinehas bearing the Ark of the Covenant as a good luck token.
 - Israelites and Philistines fight again, and Philistines win again, seizing the AotC and killing Eli's sons.
 - The news reaches Eli, who falls off his seat, and, old and heavy, breaks his neck and dies.
 - The news reaches Phinehas's pregnant wife, who goes into labour and dies delivering the child; the child is however healthy, and named Ichabod.

Questions and Observations

1) Hophni and Phinehas died on the same day, as promised in the previous chapter.
2) Eli was 98 and in extreme old age. It's starting to become possible to think about believing the age numbers... 98 still seems pretty optimistic for even a man of privileged lifestyle in that time and place though - and wouldn't that have made his fornicating fighting sons old men too? We're not quite there yet, I think.
3) Eli is described as a Judge of Israel for 40 years, though he was not mentioned in the Book of Judges. There were presumably large numbers more leaders that would qualify for the 'Judge' epithet that were listed?
4) Ichabod's name means 'inglorious', which clearly has narrative significance, though it isn't so clear exactly what it referred to. Perhaps a general sense that things had all gone to pot.

1 Samuel 5 text

Highlights

 - God does nasty things to the Philistines that hold the AotC

Summary

 - AotC taken to Ashdod, where it is displayed in the temple to Dagon, next to an icon of Dagon
 - Overnight Dagon falls over; they replace him
 - The next morning he is fallen over again, in front of the AotC, but this time with his head and hands cut off and placed on the threshold.
 - Ashdodians are afflicted with tumours, and they arrange to have the AotC taken away to Gath
 - Gathians ditto, and they arrange to send it to Ekron
 - Ekronians do not want tumours and they arrange to send it back to the Israelites...
 - ...but too late, they get tumours anyway

Questions and Observations

1) Ashdod is in modern Israel, but was clearly a Philistine city at this era.
2) Dagon is treated as the major Philistine god here, originally a god of fertility. Interesting that it is conjectured that in that pantheon one of his parents was El, one of the god concepts that got rolled together to create Yahweh.
3) A chapter to show that the Israelite god was better than another local god. This is much more clearly shown than the sun and moon episode of Joshua 10.
4) Was there a significance to the placement of the Dagon idol's body parts on the threshold?

Quote from: MoominDave on May 15, 2016, 03:18AM
 - Israel return, with Eli's two sons Hophni and Phinehas bearing the Ark of the Covenant as a good luck token.

I agree that that's how they treated the AotC,  But it didn't work very well did it.  I expect that God didn't like being treated as a good luck token.

Quote4) Ichabod's name means 'inglorious', which clearly has narrative significance, though it isn't so clear exactly what it referred to. Perhaps a general sense that things had all gone to pot.

Verse 21 is "And she named the child Ichabod, saying, “The glory has departed from Israel!” because the ark of God had been captured and because of her father-in-law and her husband."  which seems to explain what it meant.  Its "inglorious" as in the glory (of God) has gone.

Quote from: MoominDave on May 15, 2016, 03:33AM[2) Dagon is treated as the major Philistine god here, originally a god of fertility. Interesting that it is conjectured that in that pantheon one of his parents was El, one of the god concepts that got rolled together to create Yahweh.

I think El was the word for god, and that was common across a number of Semitic languages. JHWH was the personal name of God the Hebrew God.  I guess Dagan was the name of one of their gods.

Quote from: drizabone on May 15, 2016, 05:09AMI think El was the word for god, and that was common across a number of Semitic languages. JHWH was the personal name of God the Hebrew God.  I guess Dagan was the name of one of their gods.

Martin, you are correct in what you said here.  JHWH was not only the personal name for God, it was the covenantal name as well and its use signifies that those who use it are in a covenant relationship with God.  Hence the commandment against flippant usage of that name.

1 Samuel 6 text
1 Samuel 7 text

Highlights

 - The Philistines return the Ark of the Covenant
 - The Israelites repent and God defeats the Philistines for them

Summary

 - The Philistines decide that keeping the AotL isn't a good idea so they send it back to Israel by remote control with some expesive quilt offerings
 - The AotL lands at Beth-shemesh and the people their rejoice and make offerings to the Lord.
 - But some of the Beth-shemeshites uncovered the AotL and looked at it.  They died, so the Beth-shemeshites sent a message to Kiriath-jearim offering the Ark to them

 - The men of Kiriath-jearim came and got the Ark.
 - Samuel tells the people that if they want to return to the Lord to get their acts together
 - The people repented and asked Samuel to be there leader. Samuel made a burnt offering to the Lord for them.
 - At the time the Philistines attacked but the Lord confused them, and the Israelites attacked and subdued them, and retook their cities.  They also had peace with the Amorites.
 - Samuel judged Israel for the rest of his life.

Questions and Observations

1) Both Eli and Samuel were judges and priests.  I don't think it matters that they are not included in the book of Judges, but there may have been other judges that weren't mentioned I guess. I think that Eli was probably the High Priest, but not sure about that. 

Quote from: drizabone on May 14, 2016, 02:39PM
1) Samuel isn't expecting to hear voices from thin air is he?



I believe it was Lily Tomlin who said, "When we talk to God, we call it prayer.  When God talks to us, we call it schizophrenia."

Quote from: robcat2075 on May 15, 2016, 08:43PM
I believe it was Lily Tomlin who said, "When we talk to God, we call it prayer.  When God talks to us, we call it schizophrenia."

I take it she's an actor, ie someone who is good at saying things that aren't necessarily true in a way that we makes us believe that they are true.

So yes, I agree that what Lily says sounds believable, but does this really match the symptoms of schizophrenia?

Quote from: drizabone on May 15, 2016, 10:53PMI take it she's an actor, ie someone who is good at saying things that aren't necessarily true in a way that we makes us believe that they are true.
 
So yes, I agree that what Lily says sounds believable, but does this really match the symptoms of schizophrenia?
Auditory hallucinations are in fact a symptom of schizophrenia.
 
You've got to have a few more before it can be diagnosed, of course.
 
Lily Tomlin was making a humorous point, or maybe just a joke (she's a comedian/comedic actor). From what little I know of her I'd guess she was actually making a point. It's odd that in certain paradigms most of us completely ignore the more obvious and more likely answer in favor of one that's more in-line with our ideas about the given paradigm--especially if they're important to us/we're invested in them, or if we've been primed to see it that way. The vagaries of being a human brain owner ...

It's nothing more than a fool making fun of Christianity.

Quote from: ddickerson on May 16, 2016, 05:29AMIt's nothing more than a fool making fun of Christianity.

I disagree, todays society does question someone's mental health if they say God has told them to do something, the only exception to that seems to be if someone is called to fulltime ministry....anything else certainly raises eyebrows!

Quote from: vegasbound on May 16, 2016, 05:36AMQuote from: ddickerson on May 16, 2016, 05:29AMIt's nothing more than a fool making fun of Christianity.I disagree ...
To borrow from Maxwell Smart;
 
That's easy for you to say--you're not terrified of your own ideological shadow!

Quote from: Baron von Bone on May 16, 2016, 05:49AMI disagree ...
To borrow from Maxwell Smart;
 
That's easy for you to say--you're not terrified of your own ideological shadow!

Thank you!

When my aunt started hearing voices, they didn't wait for more symptoms to diagnose her. They got her a pill and the voices stopped.

Quote from: vegasbound on May 16, 2016, 05:36AMI disagree, todays society does question someone's mental health if they say God has told them to do something,
It depends on what God told them to do. I don't know very many Christians running around babbling about what God told them. I do see a lot of others just plain babbling.

Quote from: vegasbound on May 16, 2016, 06:00AMThank you!
De nada.

Hi guy's, nice of you to drop in.

1 Samuel 8 text
1 Samuel 9 text
1 Samuel 10 text

Highlights

 - Israel wants a King
 - Saul is chosen.

Summary

 - Samuel got old and made his sons judges.  They were corrupt.
 - The elders of Israel asked for a king just "like all the nations"
 - Samuel takes it personally, but God says not to worry cause they have rejected him.
 - Samuel warns the elders of the costs of having a King, but the people ignore him and call out for a king.

 - there was this really tall good looking guy call Saul from the tribe of Benjamin.
 - his Dad sent him out to find their missing donkey's.  He couldn't find them so he decides to ask Samuel the Seer if he knows where they are.
 - The day before Saul came to see Samuel, God told Samuel to anoint Saul as King.
 - When Saul arrives, Samuel treats Saul like royalty. Saul can't understand why?

 - Samuel anoint Saul and tells him that God has chosen him to be Prince over his people, and not to worry about the donkeys.  He tells him what will happen to Saul over the next few days.
 - The things happened as Samuel said.
 -  Samuel gathers the people together and tells them that even though God brought Israel up out of Egypt they have rejected him.
 - Samuel uses lots to find out who God has chosen as the new King and surprise surprise, its Saul, who was hiding in the baggage.
 - Then Samuel told everyone the rights and duties of kingship and sent everyone home. 
 - Most people were happy with the decision but some despised Saul.

Questions and Observations

1) Samuel and his family weren't perfect.
2) Do Samuel's predictions coming correct sound like schizophrenia?
3) God chooses a person who is outwardly impressive. But will he be a good King.
4) Do you remember that God made provision for the People to have a King back in the wilderness.
Was their a difference between the type of king that God had proposed and the ones that the nations had.
5) ISTM The writer depicts the people's desire is for a king that is like the ones that nations have and recognises this as a rejection of God as their King.

Quote from: robcat2075 on May 16, 2016, 08:23AMWhen my aunt started hearing voices, they didn't wait for more symptoms to diagnose her. They got her a pill and the voices stopped.

Yeah, the voices stopped and probably so did most of her brain function.

Quote from: drizabone on May 16, 2016, 02:02PMHi guy's, nice of you to drop in.

Yeah, it's nice to see some more people interested. Now if everyone was talking about the topic material, that would be great...

Quote from: drizabone on May 16, 2016, 02:35PM - Israel wants a King
 - Saul is chosen.

And just like that, Judges give way to Kings. Bit short of time to comment right now, will come back later.

Quote from: MoominDave on May 17, 2016, 03:55AM
And just like that, Judges give way to Kings. Bit short of time to comment right now, will come back later.

Just like that. The people of Israel looking around them noticing the other tribes and nations had Kings while they had Judges. Wishing to be more like the world they wanted Kings.

Quote from: drizabone on May 16, 2016, 02:35PM1 Samuel 8 text
1 Samuel 9 text
1 Samuel 10 text
A power struggle going on here. Samuel wants to consolidate his power in hereditary fashion, but his sons don't inspire confidence. The elders want an alternative power structure, and Samuel chooses someone to fulfil that role, someone outwardly impressive - but perhaps somebody that he feels he can control?

Interesting to realise that the book portrays God as down on kings - I had forgotten that info. Does that attitude persist on to David and Solomon? I suppose we'll find out as we read...

1 Samuel 11 text

Highlights

 - Saul's military triumph

Summary

 - Nahash the Ammonite besieges Jabesh in Gilead.
 - The Jabeshites offer him surrender and service. But he wants more - he wants to gouge out their eyes too.
 - The Jabeshites send out messengers to other Israelites, pleading for help.
 - Saul hears the news, raises an army, and destroys the Ammonites.
 - The people acclaim him as a king.
 - He gives mercy to the captured Ammonites, and he is crowned.

Questions and Observations

1) Nahash means 'Serpent' - again a description rather than a name.
2) Nahash's demand seems excessively cruel. Interesting to read that there is a 'director's cut' version of the Book of Samuel in the Dead Sea Scrolls, that also includes the text: N]ahash, king of the children of Ammon, sorely oppressed the children of Gad and the children of Reuben, and he gouged out a[ll] their right eyes and struck ter[ror and dread] in Israel. There was not left one among the children of Israel bey[ond the Jordan who]se right eye was no[t put o]ut by Naha[sh king] of the children of Ammon; except that seven thousand men [fled from] the children of [A]mmon and entered [J]abesh-Gilead. About a month later Nahash the Ammonite went up and besieged Jabesh-Gilead. This puts the start of this episode into a little context.
3) The difference between a Judge and a King is not entirely clearly defined. Broadly, the King seems to me to represent an officially sanctioned ongoing power structure with wider authority than a Judge, whereas a Judge was a more temporary kind of institution that commanded more localised kinds of respect. But still, it's made clear that some Judges were interested in passing on their power to their children, and that they were very powerful individuals. The notion of a King seems a natural evolution from the notion of a Judge.

Quote from: MoominDave on May 17, 2016, 12:59PM
1) Nahash means 'Serpent' - again a description rather than a name.

It could be his name too?

Quote2) Nahash's demand seems excessively cruel. Interesting to read that there is a 'director's cut' version of the Book of Samuel in the Dead Sea Scrolls, that also includes the text: N]ahash, king of the children of Ammon, sorely oppressed the children of Gad and the children of Reuben, and he gouged out a[ll] their right eyes and struck ter[ror and dread] in Israel. There was not left one among the children of Israel bey[ond the Jordan who]se right eye was no[t put o]ut by Naha[sh king] of the children of Ammon; except that seven thousand men [fled from] the children of [A]mmon and entered [J]abesh-Gilead. About a month later Nahash the Ammonite went up and besieged Jabesh-Gilead. This puts the start of this episode into a little context.

That's interesting.

Quote3) The difference between a Judge and a King is not entirely clearly defined. Broadly, the King seems to me to represent an officially sanctioned ongoing power structure with wider authority than a Judge, whereas a Judge was a more temporary kind of institution that commanded more localised kinds of respect. But still, it's made clear that some Judges were interested in passing on their power to their children, and that they were very powerful individuals. The notion of a King seems a natural evolution from the notion of a Judge.

If its natural and caused by evolution it must be bad

I'd think that any human institution is going to be imperfect: power and corruption tend to be roughly proportional over time. 

Did you think that Saul has not really established his kingship or Israel its nationality yet? 
- Jabesh is acting like it is independent and can sign its own treaties.
- they don't send to Saul the king for help, but to anyone that can help.
- Saul has to convince Israel to follow him.

Quote from: drizabone on May 17, 2016, 02:32PMIt could be his name too?
"Mm, dear, that's a handsome baby boy you've produced; what shall we call him?"
"Well, I've always thought that snakes get an undeserved bad rep"
"That could work... Any snake in particular?"
"No, just general snakes"
"Okay, how about 'Serpent'?"
"Sounds good to me..."

I think it's of a piece with all the other names we've seen in these texts that are actually descriptions of the character's narrative function (e.g. Naomi's sons 'Wasting' and 'Sickness').

Quote from: drizabone on May 17, 2016, 02:32PMDid you think that Saul has not really established his kingship or Israel its nationality yet? 
- Jabesh is acting like it is independent and can sign its own treaties.
- they don't send to Saul the king for help, but to anyone that can help.
- Saul has to convince Israel to follow him.

Absolutely. It's all coming together little by little - which doesn't match how the storyteller calls it overall.

Ok, calling your baby snake at birth does sound a bit silly.

Although we call our daughter monkey (as a nickname) and that is apt.  So maybe it was a nickname that stuck. Maybe

And if its coming together bit by bit in the story, isn't that they way the story teller is telling it?

1 Samuel 12 text

Highlights

 - Samuel warns Israel of their sin and its consequences

Summary

 - Samuel addresses Israel: they agree that he has been a good leader
 - Samuel reminds them of the pattern:
    - they forget God,
    - they get oppressed
    - the repent and call to God
    - he saves them
 - and then says that this time instead of calling for God they want a king to save them, when the Lord was already their king
 - So now if you and the king obey God it will be well with you, but if you don't then it won't
 - Samuel establishes he's saying what the Lord wants and not just hearing voices by saying that its going to rain and thunder in the middle of the wheat harvest.  It does.
 - The people admit their sin and ask for Samuel to pray to the Lord for them. Samuel tells them that if they do the right things it will be well with them, but if not then they and the king will be swept away. 

Questions and Observations

1) Power may have been a temptation for Samuel, but in this chapter he's more concerned about how wanting a king reflects Israel's lack of trust in God and the affect that his could have on them.
2) I'd reckon that if it was going to thunder and rain soon then it would be cloudy and humid, in which case even the weather bureau could have made an accurate prediction.  So for Samuel's prediciton to be convincing it probably didn't look as though it was going to storm.
3) I don't know that the book portrays God as being "down" on kings, just down on people doing the wrong thing.  And as another actor said "Power corrupts..."  We'll see how this plays out when the humble Saul gets power.

Quote from: drizabone on May 17, 2016, 02:56PMOk, calling your baby snake at birth does sound a bit silly.

Although we call our daughter monkey (as a nickname) and that is apt.  So maybe it was a nickname that stuck. Maybe
A friend calls their infant son 'Chicken-lizard'...

Quote from: drizabone on May 17, 2016, 02:56PMAnd if its coming together bit by bit in the story, isn't that they way the story teller is telling it?

I mean that the storyteller likes to wrap things up in neat explicit packages - "So-and-so judged all of Israel" in all of the cases we've seen, when the actual text they write down in the story doesn't describe such a straightforward situation.

I suppose this text is down on the creation of the kingship because it reflects a move away from the theocracy that we've previously seen unchallenged. A parallel power structure within Israelite society, one that deals respectfully with the priests and their domains, but is nevertheless not entirely subject to their whims.

1 Samuel 13 text
1 Samuel 14 text

Highlights

 - Saul defeats the Philistines and more

Summary

Ch 13
 - A year passes; Saul becomes king.
 - Two years more pass; Saul raises an army to attack the Philistines.
 - Saul's son Jonathan inflicts a minor defeat on the Philistines with a partial force at Geba.
 - As Saul waits for his appointment with Samuel at Gilgal, the Philistine forces mass.
 - Samuel does not arrive within the appointed 7-day period, and Saul grows impatient.
 - He performs the sacrifice instead of Samuel, but as he finishes Samuel arrives.
 - Samuel is aghast; he scolds Saul for his presumption, and gives him notice of withdrawal of divine sanction.
 - The Israelites do not have the means to sharpen their weapons, so they go to the Philistines to get them sharpened, paying a price for the service.
 - The Philistines go to the Pass of Michmash.
Ch 14
 - Jonathan and his group launch an unsanctioned sneak attack on the Philistines.
 - This works well.
 - Saul sees what is happening and joins in with the rest. It is a rout.
 - Saul demands that no Israelite eat that day - there is routing to be done.
 - Routing is duly done, though Israelite hunger makes it less effective than normal.
 - Philistine animals are looted, and eaten by the hungry Israelites carelessly, mixing in the forbidden blood with the permitted flesh.
 - Saul makes an altar for the Israelites to sacrifice at to atone for this.
 - Saul proposes chasing the Philistines further, but asks God for guidance.
 - He gets no reply, and interprets this as a judgement for sin.
 - A sequence of Q and no As leads Saul to identify Jonathan as the source of the sin.
 - Jonathan confesses to eating honey in defiance of Saul's command/vow that the Israelites will not eat while pursuing.
 - Saul reckons Jonathan ought to die, but the people acclaim him for his military actions, and he isn't put to death.
 - The Philistine pursuit is abandoned.
 - Saul also defeats other enemies of the Israelites.
 - Saul's family and associates are named.

Questions and Observations

1) Slightly odd that Saul becomes king after a year here, but was also made king in the previous chapter.
2) Who is Jonathan? Where has he come from? I see he was Saul's son, but an introduction to him is omitted here, where we first meet him.
3) We see later that Saul's dynasty does not last as kings, as promised.
4) What army in history would accept money to improve the weapons of an opposing army? This seems bonkers.
5) Was it theologically permitted for Saul to build an altar?
6) How did Saul ask God? Was he a prophet?
7) Saul asks God to give Urim or Thummim to identify guilt. These seem rather obscure.

Quote from: MoominDave on May 17, 2016, 03:37PM
Questions and Observations

1) Slightly odd that Saul becomes king after a year here, but was also made king in the previous chapter.

I'm not sure that the author is concerned about chronological neatness.  He seems to leave blanks in time and doesn't let us know that time has passed or repeats events from different perspectives so that he can emphasise different things.

Did you notice that in ch 9 Saul is described as a handsome young man, and then with the apparent passage of only 3 years we are introduced to his son who is a warrior in his own right so you would expect him to be at least in his mid teens but probably older.

Quote2) Who is Jonathan? Where has he come from? I see he was Saul's son, but an introduction to him is omitted here, where we first meet him.

He was born as a fully formed warrior. see above.  Either that or the author is skipping out a lot of info.

Quote3) We see later that Saul's dynasty does not last as kings, as promised.

Spoilers!

Quote4) What army in history would accept money to improve the weapons of an opposing army? This seems bonkers.

I thought that the only reason the Philistines would sharpen the implements were that they new that they were not really weapons and not nearly as good as real weapons, so it was safe for them and they got money.

Quote5) Was it theologically permitted for Saul to build an altar?

In Leviticus it was the Levites who built the altar, and it had to be consecrated by the high priest.  So I'm guessing that it wasn't permitted and wouldn't have been effective, even if there was no law prohibiting it.  But I'm pretty sure that priests had to make the sacrifice, although there are some exceptions.

Quote6) How did Saul ask God? Was he a prophet?

I think that he was a de facto prophet by virtue of being king.  This meant that God would talk to him, although he wasn't talking to Saul here.

Its interesting that God provided prophets to critique the kings.  Its not surprising that they were often not appreciated. 

Its also interesting to compare the Hebrew idea of kingship with the kings of european christendom.  They didn't adopted the idea that they should be critiqued did they.

Quote7) Saul asks God to give Urim or Thummim to identify guilt. These seem rather obscure.

Yeah, although using lots are mentioned lots in the Pentateuch and Judges too as a means of asking God to indicate what choice to make (and it seems that "Thummin" was implemented in this case using lots).  It seems a lot less efficient than just asking God so I guess there was a ulterior reason for using them.  I suppose in this case the reason was that God wasn't talking to Saul.

1 Samuel 15 text

Highlights

 - Samuel and Saul fall out

Summary

 - Samuel gives Saul a divinely-sanctioned command to attack the Amalekites, supposedly in retribution for Exodus-era past grievances. He orders him to spare nothing and nobody.
 - Saul crushes the Amalekites militarily. But he spares the Kenites from among them for Exodus-era help, and also some of their livestock and their king Agag.
 - God (i.e. Samuel) is unhappy that Saul did not obey the brutal instructions to the letter.
 - Saul asks for forgiveness for this, but Samuel will not grant it, and goes so far as to tell Saul that he is no longer king, with the kingship granted to another ("a neighbour of yours").
 - Saul accepts this with contrite speech (although ripping Samuel's skirt seems less contrite).
 - Samuel has Saul bring him Agag, who is under the impression that he has been saved from death.
 - Samuel hacks Agag to death with a sword.
 - Samuel and Saul go their separate ways.

Questions and Observations

1) I wonder if what was going on with the creation of kings was that Samuel was the political leader, but he didn't wish to command militarily. He is giving Saul direction here, but the whole military job is delegated to him.
2) The Exodus would have been ancient history (centuries) by this point. Seems a bit of a stretch of a motive. Samuel just wanted to sanction an act of aggression, it seems to me.
3) Absolute obedience the thing once again, even though deviation from it seemed both more moral and reasonable.
4) Samuel is a vicious one, isn't he?
5) It seems that the power struggle between the two of them has reached some kind of resolution, with Saul set to retire from the field.
6) There's a lot of content in each of these chapters of the Book of Samuel. More so than earlier books - each chapter takes a bit of squinting at to fully understand.
7) Names as description rather than literal label again: "Saul" = "asked for, prayed for".

Quote from: MoominDave on May 18, 2016, 08:27AM - Saul crushes the Amalekites militarily. But he spares the Kenites from among them for Exodus-era help, and also some of their livestock and their king Agag.

Questions and Observations

2) The Exodus would have been ancient history (centuries) by this point. Seems a bit of a stretch of a motive. Samuel just wanted to sanction an act of aggression, it seems to me.
...
4) Samuel is a vicious one, isn't he?


The Amaletites had been fighting Israel lots of times, not just in the Wilderness
- The Amalekites were descendants of Esau and not Canaanites so were not under threat from Israel when they arrived from Egypt. But they refused to allow Israel to pass through their land and attacked them without provocation. Ex 17
- They attack them again in Numbers 14
- In Judges 6:3, they invade Israel "whenever the Israelites planted their crops", and together with the Midianites "devour the produce of the land… and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey" (6:4)
- In Judges 6 and 7 they invade again and are fought off by Gideon.
 
I guess the specified reason for attacking them was like saying they have been attacking us since the time in the Wilderness.  It seems like the Amelakites were traditional enemies of Israel and dealing with them was necessary. So it was brutal and barbaric but I think the motivation was reasonable.
 
Quote1) I wonder if what was going on with the creation of kings was that Samuel was the political leader, but he didn't wish to command militarily. He is giving Saul direction here, but the whole military job is delegated to him.

I hadn't noticed that, but it sounds reasonable.

oops, I mean
1 Samuel 16


Highlights -

 - Introducing David

Summary

 - God tells Samuel to get over Saul and to go and to Jesse's to anoint one of his sons as king. Samuel is worried about what Saul will think of this so God tells him how to do it on the quiet.
- Samuel sees the eldest and thinks he should be king but God says that outward appearances don't count, God can see what's in a mans heart.
- After all Jesse's son's are rejected Samuel says "is that all?" Jesse says that the youngest is out looking after the sheep. Samuel says to get him straight away.  When he come's Samuel notices that he is ruddy, has beautiful eyes and is handsome.  God says to get up and anoint him.
- the Spirit of the Lord comes onto David.  The Spirit leaves Saul who is not tormented by a harmful spirit that God sent.
- Saul's servants suggest that Saul gets someone to play music for him to make him better and suggests David.
- David joins Saul's court and helps Saul so much that he asks Jesse to let him stay.  David also becomes Saul's armour bearer

Questions and Observations

1) Its unexpected that Samuel is upset over Saul's dismissal, don't you think?
2) God tell's Samuel to reject Eliab, because looks aren't important and then picks David who is is ruddy, has beautiful eyes and is handsome.  Gingers Rule. Sounds like good looks aren't important but they don't hurt.
3) Rachel was the last person described as ruddy
4) So why would Saul make a musician his armour bearer?  I think the author is not being neat with chronology again and that David became armour bearer after his fight with Goliath.

Quote from: drizabone on May 19, 2016, 12:34AMJudges 17 text
I think you mean 1 Samuel 16...

Quote from: drizabone on May 19, 2016, 12:34AM - Introducing David

Another descriptive name? Hebrew for "Beloved", one I don't have to look up. Could well be a given name though.

Quote from: drizabone on May 19, 2016, 12:34AM1) Its unexpected that Samuel is upset over Saul's dismissal, don't you think?
Yes and no. They've had a turbulent power-sharing relationship, but there seemed some hints of genuine affection between them - not least in the fact that the physically powerful and sometimes impetuous Saul never simply killed Samuel with a sword when vexed with him... Two people who liked each other despite their differences of opinion and approach, mourning the failure of a professional/personal relationship that had initially seemed so promising - I can see why both of them would have been sad over it.

Quote from: drizabone on May 19, 2016, 12:34AM2) God tell's Samuel to reject Eliab, because looks aren't important and then picks David who is is ruddy, has beautiful eyes and is handsome.  Gingers Rule. Sounds like good looks aren't important but they don't hurt.
It is an odd emphasis to place, definitely.

Quote from: drizabone on May 19, 2016, 12:34AM4) So why would Saul make a musician his armour bearer?  I think the author is not being neat with chronology again and that David became armour bearer after his fight with Goliath.
Yes, some of this has the air of later-on rationalisation - a more natural progression would have been for David to enter Saul's service earlier than suggested, where he would have more easily come to the attention of Samuel. Perhaps becoming armour-bearer and volunteering his musical skills when he saw the opportunity to soothe Saul with them. Hard to know really.

Quote from: drizabone on May 18, 2016, 02:24PMThe Amaletites had been fighting Israel lots of times, not just in the Wilderness
- The Amalekites were descendants of Esau and not Canaanites so were not under threat from Israel when they arrived from Egypt. But they refused to allow Israel to pass through their land and attacked them without provocation. Ex 17
- They attack them again in Numbers 14
- In Judges 6:3, they invade Israel "whenever the Israelites planted their crops", and together with the Midianites "devour the produce of the land… and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey" (6:4)
- In Judges 6 and 7 they invade again and are fought off by Gideon.
 
I guess the specified reason for attacking them was like saying they have been attacking us since the time in the Wilderness.  It seems like the Amelakites were traditional enemies of Israel and dealing with them was necessary. So it was brutal and barbaric but I think the motivation was reasonable.

As the late lamented Terry Pratchett wrote in Thief of Time:

"Every society needs a cry like ["Remember Koom Valley!"], but only in a very few do they come out with the complete, unvarnished version, which is "Remember-The-Atrocity-Committed-Against-Us-Last-Time-That-Will-Excuse-The-Atrocity-That-We're-About-To-Commit-Today! And So On! Hurrah!"

Ah yes, the Koom Valley, I remember it well...  But they started it.

An on a slightly different note (according to wikipedia's history of history) Thucydides (ca. 460 BC – ca. 400 BC) is "credited with having first approached history with a well-developed historical method in his work the History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides, regarded history as being the product of the choices and actions of human beings, and looked at cause and effect, rather than as the result of divine intervention.[27] In his historical method, Thucydides emphasized chronology, a neutral point of view, and that the human world was the result of the actions of human beings. Greek historians also viewed history as cyclical, with events regularly recurring.

So we probably shouldn't be surprised when earlier writers aren't so concerned with chronology and don't mind attributing events to God.