2. I made Challah bread again tonight, just for the staff. I know it's not Shabbat, but they really enjoyed it last time...and they get a little tired of chicken nuggets and tater tots, so I figured it would be a nice treat. It was quite tasty.
3. We went to the Big Timber Rodeo last night. It was fun. :) The Wild Cow Race was hilarious, as usual. Our teams did fairly well, both of them managing to at least get into the saddle a couple times, but were unable to place.
4. This is the first time that I've shared an actual room with people other than myself (for an extended time) in...well...years. I've shared a cabin or a 'room' but our beds have always been separated by a wall of some sort. I rather miss having a place that I can go to be alone, but only on occasion. I rather enjoy being around people. It's fun to talk and laugh and plot mischief with my roommates before we go to sleep - which is about the only time we are all in the cabin at the same time. Most of my time is spent in the dining hall...with the food...
5. I finally finished one book on my reading list: The End of Days: Fundamentalism and the Struggle for the Temple Mount. It was interesting at least. If nothing else, I have a better understanding of the recent history of Israel in general and the Temple Mount in specific. He seemed to repeat himself a good bit, and I didn't agree fully with his analysis of some of the fundamentalists, but he did make some interesting points. None of which strike me at the moment, but maybe I'll incorporate them into future postings.
6. I've now started reading The Lemon Tree. It's also about Israel and the Middle East...it was recommended by a friend, so we'll see how it goes.
7. I've recently started occasionally glancing at the blog of an orthodox priest (as another friend mentioned him in her blog). Today's post struck me as rather interesting: You Are Not A Bible Character. I will quote part of it here and then take a tangential trail off of it.
The pilgrim fathers who came to America read their situation into the Bible (or the Bible into their situation) with the result that white pilgrims were seen as fulfilling the role of the Israelites in this, the Promised Land, while native Americans were cast in the role of Canaanites. Thus generations of Joshuas arose feeling Biblically justified in the genocide of America’s native population. Some of that Biblical reading continues to echo in the popular imagination to this day. It was Bad theology in the 17th century and it is bad theology today. Stated in a fundamental way: you are not a Bible character.
Disclaimer: I know relatively little about American history, but I am fairly certain that not all "pilgrim fathers" were guilty of this incorrect application of the Bible. However, as that is not to be the object of my post, I beg that you would overlook this statement and take it up with the original poster if you feel so inclined.
To the subject at hand, when the phrase "You are not a Bible character" is used, numerous thoughts pop into my head, including "Jerusalem Syndrome." However, I think it has a broader application to how we, as "evangelical Christians" interpret the Bible. So often we are quick to read a story about a Bible character and leap to an application: "God did such-and-such for them, so surely He will do the same for me." At times that may be an application that can be legitimately made. Other times, it might be wiser to reconsider. After all, we are not Bible Characters. We do serve the same God, but He does not always work in the same ways.
On a slightly different tangent, his talk of the "pilgrim father" interpretation of the Bible reminded me of the Israeli settlers' interpretation. In their view, all Palestinians are the Canaanites to be driven out. As Bible-believing Christians, we often find it easier to support them in their efforts because they are, as far as we can tell, actual decedents of the Israelites and they are actually trying to take the historic land of Israel. But in reality, they are no more Bible characters than we are. They do not have direct revelation from God, as Joshua did; no divine commands to conquer the land. Some of you may bring up the New Testament: doesn't Romans (and other books) clearly state that God still has a plan for Israel? Couldn't these settlers be those new Bible characters? I don't want to give a categorical "No" to that question, though I am tempted. Even assuming that God does still have a plan for the literal nation of Israel (which I'm sure some of you reading this would disagree with that interpretation), defining "Israel" is still a problem. It is the secular state of Israel? It is all Jews? Is it all Messianic Jews? Is it all Zionistic Jews? None of these definitions quite fit what Israel was in Bible times, which makes it difficult to draw any further conclusions. To take it even farther, even if the settlers are included in "Biblical Israel" (whatever that is), many of their tactics and attitudes directly defy God's commandments and how He told Israel to behave to foreigners and strangers.
8. To stop you before you start thinking I'm "anti-Israel" let me just say that many of my teachers are settlers themselves, or are at least sympathetic, and that I like them all quite a lot. I also understand some of their passion and drive to create and protect a Jewish homeland. However, I am striving to see both sides fairly, which means that I see the wrong done by both sides, and settlers are not exempt. Kicking a Palestinian off his land and then waving a Bible in his face saying that it is your deed to his land is definitely an improper use of the Bible.
9. I should go to bed. I have about 220 people here and they'll all be hungry tomorrow morning.
No comments:
Post a Comment