Response to David Plotz I think that is not a lack in faith in God that the Israelites would lose without a leader like Moses, but the loss of a mediator would result in the loss of connection between that of God and the people. Because man is unable to see God’s face he must get creative in ways of communicating with us. God seeks out Moses to act as the communicator between God and the Israelites. God first builds up Moses’ faith so that he will be fit to spread God’s word. While God is able to show himself through nature such as the dark cloud in which the people learn to follow, without Moses they would interpret God’s purposes incorrectly. So it is not that the people would not believe in God without Moses, but there would be a lack in communication without a mediator. God would test the people through Moses: “I will test the people them and see whether they will follow my instructions” (ex 16.41). The were faithful under Moses, but when he is on the mountain, Aaron misleads them. They fear that their God has forgotten them. Aaron falsely leads them, saying “These are your Gods”. (Ex 32.3) The people may have misinterpreted Moses being gone as lacking faith in them from their own God. No longer having a mediator causes them to question. The people need a connection with God in order to remain faithful, but without Moses as their mediator, they fail to understand that they can still communicate with God. Therefore they foolishly lose faith and think that Aaron is worthy of following. After studying the Bible thus far, we have come to discover that God favors the less perfect and more dishonorable and corrupt beings. I think that God works in a cycle. In all his work, he creates and destroys. Everything seems to be about rebirth and a cyclic flow of events. In Job, God seems almost intimidated by Job when we see his reaction in the whirlwind; he avoids Job's question of why he had been punished and instead lists off his great powers and accomplishments in a way that seems he lacks self-confidence but feels the need to impress Job. I wonder if it is then a connection to that side of God that causes him to favor men like Jacob, who deceives both his brother and father. Although Jacob is deceitful and tricks his father and robs his brother Esau of the blessing, God still showers him with a wealth of land, livestock and family, One would think God would go to Esau who is gypped by the entire situation, but I think he instead responds to this situation by recognizing Jacob’s imperfections and realize they both need a relationship with one another. God recognizes that he will not be threatened by Jacob because of his sinfulness, and also that Jacob is in need of direction from God. This enables God to form a relationship in which he is in control of, rather than with Job who had actually questioned God and started to catch onto his impurity. This thought also leads me to the question, what if God hadn’t brought his son as a sacrifice? I think God would be threatened by this too, because he does not want man to question his actions and or authority/power. One questioning their faith and idea of God may potentially destroy both God and Man. Continuing with the idea that God needs man to understand/see himself if there is no faith, then there is no room for relationship, and God is then unable to see himself through man. Abraham trusting God and listening and obeying him shows he has faith and trust in God, but if you take that away, Abraham and God can have no real relationship. Also returning to one of my earlier thoughts that God works in a cyclic flow of events, it seem he favors one person such as Rachel by making her the beautiful loved sister, and poor Leah to be the outcast. He favors Rachel for a while, but then makes her unable to have children and gives Leah six, because she is now the underdog. I think it is interesting to see how God does not equally in matter of time periods treat each person the same, but over a length of time, the treatment is cycled around so that one is constantly being favored more that the other. How to Destroy the Ego In class we talked about how could Saul destroy his ego? When he is stabbed by his own sword I don’t think that this would kill his ego, it merely physically kills him but his spirit still remains. So I ask myself, how would the act of physically killing him, kill something that is spiritual? I think that the isolation from his friends and family and society would more likely start to destroy his ego. If to kill your ego you must learn to become one with God, what not a better way than to isolate yourself from all human beings. You no longer have anyone to compare yourself to or compete with, therefore destroying this measure of greatness we have developed for ourselves. I think that by isolation Saul would be more likely to kill his ego, but then Mr. Shaffner responded with the idea that its about you! So clearly this may be how I could destroy my ego…but to Saul it could be something completely different. Whatever he measures his own greatness off of must be destroyed so that his ego can begin to deteriorate. Jealousy The God who we see in the 10 commandments is a lot like the God we see in Job. He identifies himself as jealous here and shows himself to also be jealous of Job’s perfection. This is not how I typically picture or imagine God to act like. I picture the perfect and powerful God, with the long white beard etc. But throughout the Bible he seems to continually put on act to scare people and use his power against us, whether we are deserving of it or not. So it seems that his use of power is for his own ego, so that man will fear him and therefore listen to him. But it seems that it is hypocritical of him that he would use his own power and strengths to build up his ego, because he is so fearful of Job being better than him. So is God being hypocritical, or am I merely being ignorant? Is Saul a Good Leader? In the beginning of Samuel I think that Saul proves himself to God. Gods intends on punishing the Israelites by giving them a horrible leader since they continually ask for a king, rather than accepting God as their only king. So he gives them Saul who is a terrible leader. Saul’s first attempts as King are a bit sad and pathetic. He tries to hide himself in the bags, but isn’t covered because he is too tall- Fail. He then just shows himself to be a weak leader and even more of a push over. The people reject him and fail to listen to him. Saul is clearly not prepare to have such authority. The people are given a king who is completely incapable of accomplishing anything, which they could have avoided by accepting God. But Saul is meanwhile learning how to become a leader. He is able to form his men to fight against the ammonites. Saul at this moment proves himself and gains the trust of the people, who begin to chant he is the king. While this shows his growth in character, I think this moment is most important because Saul does not try to overpower God now that he has gained the respect of the people. After starting off as a weak ruler he finally has the faith of his own people. But he still remains humble as he is first introduced to us. He is a good leader because he continues to allow God to work through him to rule and lead the people. Saul proves himself to be capable to rule and even maintains his humble characteristics. We later see Saul change more, but only due to the fact that God has put evil spirits on him. So to say the least Saul begins as a poor leader, but learns how to become a king, maybe not the best, but he is no longer a failure. |
|
Hebrew Bible as Literature > Midrash >
Margaret Parkinson |