Category: Scripture


God’s Goodness Specified

September 16th, 2009 — 6:43pm

During the past year I’ve spent in exile, I’ve dreamed of what will be when …

…when we are in different surroundings, or

…when we get back on our feet, or

…when I start (and hopefully complete) my PhD work, or

…when, when, when

Each time that sense of longing for a different future arises, the Spirit has a way of directing me back to the present.  And I’m blessed to remember (again) that God’s goodness is not out there somewhere, but right here, right now.

Continue reading »

Comment » | Discipleship, Faith, Scripture, Triune God

On Reading the Hebrew Scripture — Part 2

September 17th, 2008 — 9:22am

WARNING:  Theological content straight ahead …

This is Part 2 of an ongoing post.  Read Part 1 here.

There are three seemingly simple, yet particularly interesting, characteristics of God’s creative revelation–all introduced in the first three verses of Genesis–that fuel the imagination concerning the context of the “source and foundation of the meaning discerned within Israel’s history.”[1] The introductory phrase, the tohu webohu –the emptiness, shapelessness–and God’s first creative acts of speaking things into existence are remarkable and distinctive features of this narrative that creates meaning for all existence.  We will take a systems approach with these three aspects: looking at the whole and then moving to the parts.

The widely held translation of the opening phrase of Genesis–”In the beginning, God created”–along with a largely superficial understanding of the “formless void” of verse 1 and that we are told God created the heavens in the earth in verse 1 has yielded the theological concept creatio ex nihilo, that is the doctrine that states the world was created out of nothing.  A close reading of the text casts doubt on this doctrine.  In fact, it is unlikely such an idea occurs anywhere in the Old Testament.[2]

The challenge is: how could God create out of nothing if something–the “formless void”–was there?   The ‘nothing’ might be a void or chaos.  If a void, this would have affinities with theologies that emphasize grace, but “have the indirect effect of denying the moral and interactive character of God’s grace.”[3] Such theologies would rather have the nothingness be chaos, and attempts to find distinct and striking parallels between the Genesis creation story and the Enuma Elish.[4] The Enuma Elish, the Babylonian creation epic, bears similarities in Near Eastern language and comprehension–i.e., Tiamat (sea) and tehom (the deep)–to the Genesis account, but these similarities are suggestive of a Near Eastern cultural understanding of the world and not of an account that is quite close to the Enuma elish.

The opening chapters of the Hebrew Bible evidence a difference in philosophy of language.  We see a juxtaposition of culturally scientific language and poetically expressive language, or what has been called mythopoeic language.  It is with this expressive language of mystery that the poet of Genesis tells a story of the Creator-God who does not struggle with the pre-existent chaos.  Rather, his ordering of the heavens and the earth–of reality–is done at first with words.  God speaks, and it is.  The chaos is ordered.

For the Hebrew people, a narrative of the first things would include elements of the present and the future, laced with the understanding of what life is like at present and musings on what humanity will do with this life.  Always in the forefront of Hebraic thought would be the participation of God in the people’s doing of life.

This yields a beautiful coherency that is absurdly interrupted by any traditional understanding of creation ex nihilo.  Chaos exists; it simply is.  As it was at the first, so it is now.  Something of present life for the poet is reflected back into the Genesis account.

The nothingness of the tohu webohu is not the only substantive that is, however.  There is something behind the nothing.  That something speaks light into the darkness of the nothingness.  That something speaks separation of the chaos and orders the chaotic waters.  That something speaks stable dry land into existence, and life to cover the land, and varying lights for seasons, and living beings to be co-participants in the creation process within the created order.  Then God finally creates his own image–one of diversity within unity–as minister to this created order: a risky venture indeed.  The entire unfolding of this creation narrative, though bearing some affinities to other Near Eastern creation accounts, is marked with newness and imagination.

The idea of newness can be further illuminated by a closer reading of the opening line in Genesis:

With first things God created the heavens and the earth. (Gen. 1.1 orig. trans.)

Unlike Marduk who must struggle with Tiamat–and that only after many lesser gods have battled and failed miserably against her– the Creator-God of Genesis simply speaks the nothingness into order.  There is no epic struggle, nor is there any weakening of the chaos from lesser Gods.  This is indeed a ‘first thing;’ a first of many acts this God performs that are new.  The prophet of 2 Isaiah notices this pattern of newness in YHWH God:

As of now, I announce to you new things,

Well-guarded secrets you did not now.

Only now are they created, and not of old;

Before today you had not heard of them.

(Isaiah 48.6b-7a)

Likewise the prophet of tearing down and building up wildly–and truthfully–imagined when declaring to the harlot Israel whom God had just declared a virgin anew:

How long will you waver, O faithless daughter?  For the LORD has created a new thing on the earth: a virgin births a man.  (Jeremiah 31.22 orig. trans.)

In this creation, God has not annihilated the primordial chaos.  Rather he has transformed it.  Out of nothing, something emerges.  This word-fulfilling action is worthy of Israel’s praise.  This is why YHWH’s historical deeds are regarded as creative acts. YHWH creates a people out of slavery and out of exile.

The coherency of thought that has its genesis in Genesis ties together the often segregated theological categories of creation, redemption, and transformation.  Violence of a categorical kind must occur to some degree in order to grasp the nuance of these activities of our God who is always ‘beyond.’  Yet, there flows a river of cogency that washes away our conceptions of sterile classification when we see this Creator-God YHWH ever moving those who respond to his grace from creation to new creation.  This fluency melts the dividing lines of the God who creates from the God who redeems from the God who transforms.


[1] Bernard W. Anderson, From Creation to New Creation: Old Testament Perspectives (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 4.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), xxvii.

[4] Here, the Genesis creation story referred to is that of Genesis 1.1-2.3.  Though some scholars understand the opening chapters of Genesis to be comprised of separate creation stories, I find them to be one coherent creation story, expounding or showing us new angles of only one account.

[5] The preposition bĕ is just this: a porous Hebrew preposition.  Scholarship takes the translation of bĕ to be determined by grammatical context.  Since it could be translated “with, to, in, about” or as a number of other prepositional possibilities, strict adherence to “in” is unnecessary and misleading.

SO TELL ME SOMETHING:
What’s your take on creation ex nihilo?

——

Brian Niece
www.brianniece.com
If you enjoyed this post, get free updates by email or RSS.

1 comment » | Biblical Studies, Scripture, Theology

On Reading the Hebrew Scripture — Part 1

September 14th, 2008 — 7:57pm

A comprehensive Old Testament theology will include and be influenced by several prevailing methods.  My own proposal for reading the Old Testament would have as its locus a theology of imagination and incorporate perspectives of (at least) creation, canon, tradition/recital, narrative, linguistic, and history.

My own inclusion of this last category is intriguing.  Historical-critical perspectives that dissolve the normative claims of the biblical text have rarely held my interest.  The questions “What happened?” and “When was the text written?” as isolated inquiries proffer little illuminative potential.  The dissolution of this phase of Old Testament scholarship is testament to a greater disinterest with the approach.  Yet, I have discovered a certain validity to events that are in some sense formative to Christian faith.  So long as the events are assessed intertextually–i.e., canonically–and are rehearsed as traditioning and re-traditioning confessions in the life of the community, they become powerful witness to formation of present and future believers.

The Old Testament has been, and is being read, in several major ways.[1] First, theology as event has been a predominant trajectory for Old Testament study during the past century.  Faith is born from God’s acts and the event roots the believing community in the past.

Second, theology as tradition engenders a faith born from the gathered community and its practices.  This enables the ekklesia to form an environment for the question “Why do we do this?” to be asked.  We then respond with the stories that speak formatively in the faith.

Third, looking for God’s economy within the Old Testament cannon is fueled by several voices–most prominently Deuteronomy and Proverbs.  This involves blessing and curse, insiders and outsiders, and themes of social justice.  Relationship here is formative.  Blessing is life, and curse is a form of judgment wherein death is the point of revelation.  Alternately, blessing may simply be the gift of life, or the ability to recognize the persistent presence of God in life.

As for the perplexing problem in the Hebrew canon of social justice, the monarchical view keeps the rich being rich and the poor being poor as long as all the people’s basic needs are being met.  The same people are always caring for the poor, and keeping them poor.  In some sense then, the laws were given to privileged people.  This also incorporates Jubilee thought that yields a giving away of power and richness so that there is a cycle of need and gift.  The New Testament answer to this is that the king must die.

For the Christian community, these three trajectories lead to Christ’s effective killing of the monarchy as it has always been understood: exaltation only comes on a cross.  Jeremiah, the forerunner of Christ in this trajectory, was the ultimate deconstructionist.  By the 8th and 7th centuries BC, Yahwehism had become the religion of the people behind the wall of the city.  When you live behind the wall you are unable to really see how the church is prone to become and be.

Fourth, canonical theology gives due weight to every canonical voice.  Each text dialogues with each other text resulting in an intra-textual dialogue.  Texts cannot be isolated.  Indeed, this is the point of theology: dialogue which becomes God-talk.  Functionally, the church goes to scripture for dialogue partners, and from this dialogue emerges the point of revelation.

Springing from, and closely connected to, canonical theology are metaphorical, narrative, and imaginative theology.  These three trajectories hold a unique interplay of thought.  The notion of the word–dabar–yields an imaging of the Word.

Finally, creation theology is quite able to incorporate and blend the previous approaches while introducing fresh nuance and perspective.  We are still living in God’s story of creation and participating with God in creation–we are co-creators.  What if the entire Old Testament–and Bible–is the story of creation?  God’s concern is not just with the particular, but extends to the universal: God desires to reconcile all of creation–not just humanity.  To create means to make room for the other.  God is sharing creation with others.  Thus, co-creators open up to share creation with others.  God has taken great risk and made himself vulnerable in doing this.

Any thorough Old Testament reading will account for the various Old Testament canons.  Particularly, the narrative flow of the canons is informative when dealing with Old Testament.  Hebrew Scripture moves from Torah, to Prophets, to Writings.  The final movement of this triptych is a journey of creation to new creation with emphasis on sapiential literature and a re-historicizing for Israel and all of creation.

The Protestant Old Testament Canon, which is identical in content to Hebrew Scripture, reorders the format thus concluding with the twelve minor prophets.  These prophets–in the Jewish Canon filling one scroll and thus contained within one book entitled The Twelve–point toward a newness, are ripe with a theology of hope, and are consistent with the move from creation to new creation.

The overarching narrative in both canons is of a creator-God who creates order out of chaos, shapes life out of the dust of the earth, and then engages with that creation still having dirt on his hands working toward God’s own creative purpose in surprising, dynamic, and relational ways.

To view the whole of Old Testament narrative through this lens will eschew placing primacy on salvation history synthesized from the pens of the Yahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and Priestly writers at the expense of the soulful stories such as, for instance, those told in the Megilloth.  Indeed, to conclude that the entire Tanakh and Christian Old Testament are concerned with God’s creative activity through a particular people with the whole of creation will draw the believing community’s attention now sometimes to the major works comprising the Pentateuch, now sometimes to the often-perceived obscure works in the Ketuvim.

To say that God has created, has interacted with his creation, and is continuing to interact with that creation supposes that history, in some sense, is significant.  So Genesis is the obvious starting point for theological reflection.  Life is not imposed on the created order, nor inherent in the chaos as it stood.  Rather, life was and is given as gift, and the gifting is contingent on the interplay of two wills: God’s and creation’s (particularly, humanity’s).

Interpretation of Old Testament begins then with following this creator-God’s interplay with creation: the relationship of the two wills and the dance of giving, receiving, and returning life.  This hermeneutic will allow for the dialogue of canonical voices to be heard, explored, and interpreted.  Study will examine even the styles of reporting God’s activity in creation, the rehearsals of worship, the agony and joy of divine-human struggle, and so forth.

For example, what causes salvation history to be told in the fashion of 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings then re-traditioned in the telling of 1 & 2 Chronicles?  How does the drama that unfolds in Song of Songs–much like a Greek play from antiquity, with lead characters, chorus, and all–illuminate the relationship of creator, co-creators, and creation?

When dealing with the biblical text, meaning emerges as something other than fact-based deductions defined by contemporary standards.  There is something of mystery with equal part poetry.

Nor is meaning gleaned in isolation.

Any cursory study of the pre- or post-exilic Hebraic people yields an atmosphere of communal worship, indeed community life.  This side of the text, meaning holistically arises in communal diachronic reading, speaking, and interpretation.  What is being described is a process of the imagination.  It is the imagination that is the touchstone for meaning; the matter that is ordered into coherent meaning.

Part 2 to follow …


[1] For more on the following trajectories, see Leo G. Perdue, The Collapse of History: Reconstructing Old Testament Theology (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1994), 29.

SO TELL ME SOMETHING:
What is your hermeneutical lens for reading the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)?

——

Brian Niece
www.brianniece.com
If you enjoyed this post, get free updates by email or RSS.

1 comment » | Scripture

Back to top