We are at Hebrews 12:14. My bible has an added heading for the coming passage, "Warning against refusing god." Uh oh. It starts by telling the reader to "Make every effort to live in peace with all men." Nothing wrong with that. The author adds, "and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the lord." A command and a threat. But what exactly is holiness? How do I know if I don't have it? The reader is also to take care not to "miss the grace of god." What exactly is the grace of god? How do I miss it? The reader is also not permitted to allow a "bitter root" to grow up and cause trouble. Um, you guessed it, what in the world is he talking about? My guess is the author expects the reader to understand because they have a similar knowledge and experience that I don't have. It's 2000 year old insider language.
In verse 16, we are given more specifics. No one is allowed to be sexually immoral, probably as defined in the Old Testament. I don't think Jesus actually said a word about sex in the gospels. Also, no one is permitted to be "godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son." That is an example of godlessness? What about his brother, who took advantage of a hungry man for personal gain? Victim blaming at its finest. Even worse, according to the author, Esau tearfully begged for his blessing back. Shame on him. Heathen.
The author goes on to tell the reader that they are so fortunate that they don't have to approach a physical burning mountain, covered with stormy dark clouds, with a loud and threatening voice issuing from it, like Moses did. That was terrifying. No, instead, they get to come to the "heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living god." (Isn't it the same terrifying god that was on Moses's mountain?) The reader also gets to come to "thousands upon thousands of heavenly angels in joyful assembly." And that's not terrifying?
The reader also comes to the "church of the first born, whose names are written in heaven." I don't think the author means literal first born children here, but metaphorical first born "children of god." They also have come to "god, the judge of all men and the spirits of righteous men made perfect." Not women. They are not made perfect. (Sarcasm) They also come to "Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood (eww) that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel." What is the reality behind all this metaphor, anyway?
You know Jesus's speaking blood? The author says it better not be disobeyed. Those of the past, who were warned on earth, did not escape when they were disobedient. (See the story of Moses and the people at the mountain.) Does the reader think he will escape a warning from heaven? Gasp! There were only earthquakes at that mountain of old. God has promised that, "once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens." This is sort of a piece of a quote from Haggai 2:6. It's context is the building of the second temple, greater than the first, a purely physical building, not some heavenly temple. The author goes on to say that the words "once more" in the Haggai quote "indicate the removing of what can be shaken--that is created things--so that what cannot be shaken may remain." How in the world did he come to that conclusion?
Chapter twelve ends by telling the readers they need to be thankful because they are getting a kingdom that can't be shaken. "So, worship god acceptably with reverence and awe, for our god is a consuming fire." Is that a physical fire or a metaphorical fire?
Till next time.
Showing posts with label Haggai. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Haggai. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 15, 2019
Friday, April 20, 2018
High priest Joshua, wrap up
We will not move on in the book of Zechariah. Chapters 9-14 are completely different and seem to have no connection to the previous chapters in style or content. In chapters 1-8, we saw two different types of text, one first person, one third person point of view. The portions of the text written in third person are harsher in tone and do not flow with the rest of the text. If I was to guess, I would assume the first person portions of the text to be authentic. It seems to have been written just before the building of the second temple. It also appears to be predicting a wonderful future for the Israelites returning to their homeland. God will return to them, everyone will prosper, the nations around will be envious.
The high priest Joshua will be given a supreme position of honor and authority, for god will have cleansed him of any sin that he incurred before he arrived in Jerusalem. He will be responsible for the construction of the new temple, with the help of other returning exiles, after Zerubbabel has laid the foundation. When it is finished, Zerubbabel will set in the capstone. All the sin present in Jerusalem will be packed up and carried off to Babylonia. Exiles from the four corners of the earth will return. People will live to old age, and children will play safely in the streets. Yahweh will save them and make them a blessing. It's a very pleasant and optimistic prophecy, very much like a pep talk for the first waves of returning exiles.
We know that optimism was misplaced. Ezra-Nehemiah, writing later and looking back, outlined the many troubles the exiles had rebuilding the temple and the city walls. It also details the poor relations the Jews maintained with the locals, which was the cause of most of the trouble. No wonder. We are told that the Jews refused their help in rebuilding the temple, scorned their worship of yahweh, and eventually instituted a policy of separation and segregation. They even insisted on divorcing wives who were locals, and what became of their children? Can we blame the locals for sabotage and enmity in those circumstances?
Just as the book of Haggai does not mention Zechariah, Zechariah does not mention Haggai. Zechariah's tone is gentler and more optimistic than book of Haggai. Zechariah was also far more inclusive and ecumenical. I imagine that first half of the book of Zechariah could have formed the basis of a hope for the Jews after the destruction of the second temple and the new diaspora that resulted. Maybe there would be another High Priest Joshua to rebuild the temple. It happened before, why not again?
If we look back at the book of Jude, it does not use Zechariah as a basis for optimism. Jude cherry picks verses from Zechariah 3 and other old testament books to prove his own point, which appears to be that he thinks ungodly men are trying to corrupt Judaism (Christianity, if you believe Jude is a christian book). Jude sounds very much like a fundamentalist sounds today. He sees people of his tribe doing and saying non-traditional things. He is throwing up his hands in horror at their audacity and proclaiming them condemned men. He is telling his friends to strengthen their faith and remain loyal to it.
Someone very likely did not like the name Joshua/Jesus included in the passage about the archangel and Satan, in Jude 1:9. So, they changed Joshua to Moses. If it had remained Joshua, it would automatically have been associated with the high priest Joshua, who was proclaimed The Branch by Zechariah. This may have thrown doubt on the christian claim that a first century Jesus/Joshua was the one the branch the prophesies of old were referring to, not a post exile high priest.
The high priest Joshua will be given a supreme position of honor and authority, for god will have cleansed him of any sin that he incurred before he arrived in Jerusalem. He will be responsible for the construction of the new temple, with the help of other returning exiles, after Zerubbabel has laid the foundation. When it is finished, Zerubbabel will set in the capstone. All the sin present in Jerusalem will be packed up and carried off to Babylonia. Exiles from the four corners of the earth will return. People will live to old age, and children will play safely in the streets. Yahweh will save them and make them a blessing. It's a very pleasant and optimistic prophecy, very much like a pep talk for the first waves of returning exiles.
We know that optimism was misplaced. Ezra-Nehemiah, writing later and looking back, outlined the many troubles the exiles had rebuilding the temple and the city walls. It also details the poor relations the Jews maintained with the locals, which was the cause of most of the trouble. No wonder. We are told that the Jews refused their help in rebuilding the temple, scorned their worship of yahweh, and eventually instituted a policy of separation and segregation. They even insisted on divorcing wives who were locals, and what became of their children? Can we blame the locals for sabotage and enmity in those circumstances?
Just as the book of Haggai does not mention Zechariah, Zechariah does not mention Haggai. Zechariah's tone is gentler and more optimistic than book of Haggai. Zechariah was also far more inclusive and ecumenical. I imagine that first half of the book of Zechariah could have formed the basis of a hope for the Jews after the destruction of the second temple and the new diaspora that resulted. Maybe there would be another High Priest Joshua to rebuild the temple. It happened before, why not again?
If we look back at the book of Jude, it does not use Zechariah as a basis for optimism. Jude cherry picks verses from Zechariah 3 and other old testament books to prove his own point, which appears to be that he thinks ungodly men are trying to corrupt Judaism (Christianity, if you believe Jude is a christian book). Jude sounds very much like a fundamentalist sounds today. He sees people of his tribe doing and saying non-traditional things. He is throwing up his hands in horror at their audacity and proclaiming them condemned men. He is telling his friends to strengthen their faith and remain loyal to it.
Someone very likely did not like the name Joshua/Jesus included in the passage about the archangel and Satan, in Jude 1:9. So, they changed Joshua to Moses. If it had remained Joshua, it would automatically have been associated with the high priest Joshua, who was proclaimed The Branch by Zechariah. This may have thrown doubt on the christian claim that a first century Jesus/Joshua was the one the branch the prophesies of old were referring to, not a post exile high priest.
Saturday, April 14, 2018
The High Priest Joshua, part 2
Now let us look at what Haggai and Zechariah have to say about the priest Joshua/Jeshua. They were supposedly present at the rebuilding of the second temple in Jerusalem.
Haggai 1:1 tells us Joshua, the son of Jehozadak, was the high priest in the second year of King Darius. At that Time, Haggai was prophet to Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah. The book speaks of Haggai completely in third person but its authorship is traditionally ascribed to Haggai. This seems to be a common practice in the Bible. To me it is clear that the true author/authors are unknown, especially when the book itself makes no authorship claims. The time period that the events are to have taken place is fairly easy to figure out because there is secular history of Darius and the Persian Empire.
In verses 1:12&14, we are told that the high priest Joshua and the governor Zerubbabel listened to and obeyed Haggai because he was god's messenger and delivered "the voice of the lord." So Haggai was kind of telling everyone what to do and claiming it was god's will. Haggai's message from the Lord was "I am with you." This made them all anxious to build god a house, the temple.
In chapter 2, Haggai continues to tell Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel the governor what god is saying. Why can't god speak to them directly? That is so weird, and suspicious. Anyway, they are told god's spirit will stay with them and they are not to be afraid. The new temple they build for him will be greater than the previous one. "The silver and the gold is mine," declares the lord. Ha! Even more suspicious. Then god tells them that they were defiled before, now they will be blessed. Plus, Zerubbabel will be like god's chosen king. That's pretty much it. Nothing different or earth shattering. The word of the lord came from Haggai in the second year of Darius, on the sixth, seventh and ninth months. He does not mention Zechariah.
Let's look at Zechariah. This book begins in third person with a kind of introduction. It says the word of the lord came to Zechariah in the second year, on the eighth and eleventh months. How convenient, another mouthpiece of god, one who can speak for god on the months when Haggai doesn't. The word of the lord is a little more harsh in tone coming from the introduction to Zechariah. He tells the people they need to turn from their evil ways and repent. If they return to him, he will return to them.
Starting in verse 1:8, the narrative switches to first person and appears to be coming directly from Zechariah. He is having visions. These visions have elements and symbols that are common to other apocalyptic writings. You've got horsemen on horses of different colors riding through the earth, and angels talking with "the lord" and Zechariah. (Move over Revelation.) But these horsemen said they rode through the earth and found peace. When does Jerusalem get a piece of it? The lord says he is going to return to Jerusalem. His house will be rebuilt and prosperity will return. Then he speaks of four horns that scattered Judah and four craftsmen who will throw down the horns. This predicts a defeat of Israel's enemies.
In chapter two we read Zechariah's continuing vision of the coming glory of the new Jerusalem. It won't have exterior walls because the lord himself will be a wall of fire around it. Well. That didn't happen. According to Ezra-Nehemiah, walls were built. Zechariah continues with a theme of the Jews returning to Jerusalem and "the lord" returning to live with them. There is something going on in this 2nd chapter that I want to explore next time. Till then.
Haggai 1:1 tells us Joshua, the son of Jehozadak, was the high priest in the second year of King Darius. At that Time, Haggai was prophet to Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah. The book speaks of Haggai completely in third person but its authorship is traditionally ascribed to Haggai. This seems to be a common practice in the Bible. To me it is clear that the true author/authors are unknown, especially when the book itself makes no authorship claims. The time period that the events are to have taken place is fairly easy to figure out because there is secular history of Darius and the Persian Empire.
In verses 1:12&14, we are told that the high priest Joshua and the governor Zerubbabel listened to and obeyed Haggai because he was god's messenger and delivered "the voice of the lord." So Haggai was kind of telling everyone what to do and claiming it was god's will. Haggai's message from the Lord was "I am with you." This made them all anxious to build god a house, the temple.
In chapter 2, Haggai continues to tell Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel the governor what god is saying. Why can't god speak to them directly? That is so weird, and suspicious. Anyway, they are told god's spirit will stay with them and they are not to be afraid. The new temple they build for him will be greater than the previous one. "The silver and the gold is mine," declares the lord. Ha! Even more suspicious. Then god tells them that they were defiled before, now they will be blessed. Plus, Zerubbabel will be like god's chosen king. That's pretty much it. Nothing different or earth shattering. The word of the lord came from Haggai in the second year of Darius, on the sixth, seventh and ninth months. He does not mention Zechariah.
Let's look at Zechariah. This book begins in third person with a kind of introduction. It says the word of the lord came to Zechariah in the second year, on the eighth and eleventh months. How convenient, another mouthpiece of god, one who can speak for god on the months when Haggai doesn't. The word of the lord is a little more harsh in tone coming from the introduction to Zechariah. He tells the people they need to turn from their evil ways and repent. If they return to him, he will return to them.
Starting in verse 1:8, the narrative switches to first person and appears to be coming directly from Zechariah. He is having visions. These visions have elements and symbols that are common to other apocalyptic writings. You've got horsemen on horses of different colors riding through the earth, and angels talking with "the lord" and Zechariah. (Move over Revelation.) But these horsemen said they rode through the earth and found peace. When does Jerusalem get a piece of it? The lord says he is going to return to Jerusalem. His house will be rebuilt and prosperity will return. Then he speaks of four horns that scattered Judah and four craftsmen who will throw down the horns. This predicts a defeat of Israel's enemies.
In chapter two we read Zechariah's continuing vision of the coming glory of the new Jerusalem. It won't have exterior walls because the lord himself will be a wall of fire around it. Well. That didn't happen. According to Ezra-Nehemiah, walls were built. Zechariah continues with a theme of the Jews returning to Jerusalem and "the lord" returning to live with them. There is something going on in this 2nd chapter that I want to explore next time. Till then.
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
Jude afterthoughts, the High Priest Joshua
I got to thinking about that High Priest Joshua guy from Zecariah 3 and I thought it would be a shame
not to explore who he was while he was fresh in our minds. First of all, let's remember that the name Joshua = Yeshua= Jesus. It's the same name, but not necessarily the same person. However, I would like to consider the possibility that the myth and cult surrounding Jesus might have had an origin in the mythic tradition surrounding the high priest Joshua that Jude was probably referring to. In fact one possibility is that the only word in Jude that was changed is the word Jesus (Yeshua) into the word Moses in verse 9. The other Jesus phrases may have been in the original text, actually referring to the high priest of Zechariah, not the Jesus of Nazareth. There is no way to know, but, to me, these speculations make more sense than that Jude was written by a christian worshipper of the New Testament Jesus. That Jesus can't be found in the book of Jude.
First let's note that the high priest Joshua is called Jeshua the son of Jozadak in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. He is called Joshua son of Josedech in Haggai and Zechariah. They are considered the same person.
In Ezra 2:2, we see Jeshua was a Babylonian exile, returning to Jerusalem. In Ezra 3:2, we see Jeshua is a priest. Seven months after the return, Jeshua and his fellow priests build the altar of god to burn sacrifices. In Ezra 3:8, two years after the return, Jeshua and his fellow priests and Levites supervise the building of the new temple. In Ezra 4:3, the people who were living in the land when the exiles returned wanted to help build the new temple because they had also been worshipping Yahweh. Jeshua and the rest of the heads of the families of Israel refused their help. The locals resented that and set about trying to sabatoge the building. Eventually, after multiple complications, the building came to a stop. In Ezra 5:2, Haggai and Zechariah were prophets, the ones who later supposedly wrote about Joshua/Jeshua. They were helping Jeshua try to rebuild the temple. They finished the temple in Ezra 6. In Ezra 7, many more exiles returned to Jerusalem from Babylon, including Ezra, supposedly the writer of this book, even though it refers to him in the third person. They brought many levites and lots of treasure for the temple with them. When the new group got to Jerusalem, they had a great sacrifice to god. Later, they were told that the previous group of returned exiles had intermarried with the locals. Ezra was appalled. After a lot of weeping, wailing, and repenting, all the men who had married "foreign" women were required to "put away" their wives, which probably meant to divorce them. Then they had to each sacrifice a ram as a guilt offering. This included descendants in Jeshua's family.
I always think its funny how the bible calls the locals of that land foreigners. Technically, the returning Israelites themselves were the foreigners by that time.
In Nehemiah, we have an account of later events. Ezra had left Babylon for Jerusalem in Artaxerxes 7th year. Nehemiah left Babylon in the 20th year. He left because he heard that the wall of Jerusalem was broken down and its gates burnt. He wants to help rebuild. After the walls have been rebuilt and guards appointed, Nehemiah wants to register everyone. He finds the genealogical records of the first group of returned exiles. Jeshua's name is included in Nehemial 7:7, 12:1, 7, 10 (there we learn names of one of Jeshua's sons and some of his grandsons.) In this book Jeshua's son is called Joiakim. Joiakim served "in the days of Nehemiah the governor and Ezra the priest and scribe." The name Jeshua is repeated a few times in the book of Nehemiah, but it is unclear if it always the same Jeshua.
That's pretty much it for Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. The only definite claim to fame in these books is that he was a levite priest and one of the first exiles to return. He was supposed to be instrumental in building the new temple, aka "the house of god."
Next we look at what the books of Haggai and Zechariah have to say about him.
not to explore who he was while he was fresh in our minds. First of all, let's remember that the name Joshua = Yeshua= Jesus. It's the same name, but not necessarily the same person. However, I would like to consider the possibility that the myth and cult surrounding Jesus might have had an origin in the mythic tradition surrounding the high priest Joshua that Jude was probably referring to. In fact one possibility is that the only word in Jude that was changed is the word Jesus (Yeshua) into the word Moses in verse 9. The other Jesus phrases may have been in the original text, actually referring to the high priest of Zechariah, not the Jesus of Nazareth. There is no way to know, but, to me, these speculations make more sense than that Jude was written by a christian worshipper of the New Testament Jesus. That Jesus can't be found in the book of Jude.
First let's note that the high priest Joshua is called Jeshua the son of Jozadak in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. He is called Joshua son of Josedech in Haggai and Zechariah. They are considered the same person.
In Ezra 2:2, we see Jeshua was a Babylonian exile, returning to Jerusalem. In Ezra 3:2, we see Jeshua is a priest. Seven months after the return, Jeshua and his fellow priests build the altar of god to burn sacrifices. In Ezra 3:8, two years after the return, Jeshua and his fellow priests and Levites supervise the building of the new temple. In Ezra 4:3, the people who were living in the land when the exiles returned wanted to help build the new temple because they had also been worshipping Yahweh. Jeshua and the rest of the heads of the families of Israel refused their help. The locals resented that and set about trying to sabatoge the building. Eventually, after multiple complications, the building came to a stop. In Ezra 5:2, Haggai and Zechariah were prophets, the ones who later supposedly wrote about Joshua/Jeshua. They were helping Jeshua try to rebuild the temple. They finished the temple in Ezra 6. In Ezra 7, many more exiles returned to Jerusalem from Babylon, including Ezra, supposedly the writer of this book, even though it refers to him in the third person. They brought many levites and lots of treasure for the temple with them. When the new group got to Jerusalem, they had a great sacrifice to god. Later, they were told that the previous group of returned exiles had intermarried with the locals. Ezra was appalled. After a lot of weeping, wailing, and repenting, all the men who had married "foreign" women were required to "put away" their wives, which probably meant to divorce them. Then they had to each sacrifice a ram as a guilt offering. This included descendants in Jeshua's family.
I always think its funny how the bible calls the locals of that land foreigners. Technically, the returning Israelites themselves were the foreigners by that time.
In Nehemiah, we have an account of later events. Ezra had left Babylon for Jerusalem in Artaxerxes 7th year. Nehemiah left Babylon in the 20th year. He left because he heard that the wall of Jerusalem was broken down and its gates burnt. He wants to help rebuild. After the walls have been rebuilt and guards appointed, Nehemiah wants to register everyone. He finds the genealogical records of the first group of returned exiles. Jeshua's name is included in Nehemial 7:7, 12:1, 7, 10 (there we learn names of one of Jeshua's sons and some of his grandsons.) In this book Jeshua's son is called Joiakim. Joiakim served "in the days of Nehemiah the governor and Ezra the priest and scribe." The name Jeshua is repeated a few times in the book of Nehemiah, but it is unclear if it always the same Jeshua.
That's pretty much it for Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. The only definite claim to fame in these books is that he was a levite priest and one of the first exiles to return. He was supposed to be instrumental in building the new temple, aka "the house of god."
Next we look at what the books of Haggai and Zechariah have to say about him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)