Bible study 8/1/2019

                I have been contemplating ideas about what I want to do regarding devotions and study. Retirement would seem to open up time to do things you have always wanted to do and to some extant that has been true. There have been a number of things that I am doing that provide enjoyment. Yet, there are still times that I seem to waste time. So, I have decided to try something ambitious and hopefully will stimulate me to not only study, but to share some of my opinions and thoughts. Don’t worry this will not be a political rant, but there are some things that we need to reflect on regarding our communities, nation, and world.

                So what is this project. I plan to read a couple of chapters from scripture and then comment on them. Most of the commentaries, I have either given away or turned in to outlets to sell. I have kept some that I have in the past enjoyed and hope to continue to study those. My first thoughts about reading the chapters was to start with the gospels. I have re-thought that. The scripture that informs our beliefs as Christians and certainly of Jesus was not those scriptures but the Hebrew scriptures. So, I plan to start there. As I do that, I will be using not the traditional Christian translation but from the Jewish Study Bible, the Tanakh published by the Jewish Publication Society 2004. The Tanakh is composed of the Torah, History, and Wisdom literature. These contain the same books that appear in the Christian bibles but are not in the same order. I will be using some of the information from that and my own opinion. A disclaimer, what I write is my opinion and my insights. Feel free to disagree. The spirit of Wisdom moves all of us to differing understandings, which in my opinion, are what we need for our journey. I am more progressive in my understanding of God (I might even say though I am more informed by liberation theologians, I am also informed by process theology) and thus may have a bias to the way I understand scripture. Be warned.

                I plan to start with the Torah or the first five books of both the Hebrew and Christian scriptures. While I was in seminary, I have a rabbi teach us about the Torah and presenting some of the differences between Jewish reflections as compared to Christian. So what is the Torah and what does that mean? Torah has been interpreted in many ways. Some have seen these books about being the law despite the amount of narrative found in all five books. Some have seen these books as teachings and instructions. The root of Torah in Hebrew is y-r-h which means to shoot ( an arrow.) the Torah hits the mark. There are likely many authors that have contributed to the thoughts and writings. Likely, the books came together from a variety of scrolls to form one large scroll during the Babylonian exile. So the books came to be all of the above, law, narrations, teachings, and instructions. Proverbs 1.8 “My son heed the discipline of your father and do not forsake the instructions [Heb torah] of your mother.”

                As you read through the Tanakh, you will notice particularly in the Torah several duplicates of the narrative. It has long been believed that there are several different sources that have contributed which have been identified as the JEPD. The J source earliest connection was to David and Solomon around 10 BCE. It is translated in scripture as Lord. In reading, it presents a highly anthropomorphic God who has a close and intimate relationship with humankind. The E source connection was to the Northern kingdom and is translated as God or Elohim. This view of God is more distant and speaks through dreams or messengers, angels. The P is for the priestly voice that likely came together during the exile. It has a strong interest in order and boundaries. The D is the Deuteronomist and likely came about during King Josiah’s reform. This was likely the scroll of Deuteronomy. Recently there has been suggestion of yet another source the R for the redaction source which integrated all the variant sources into one scroll during the exile.

Be that as it may be, it can be helpful to have some understanding of why the differing sources and to what purpose might be had because of that. If you want to follow along choose your favorite translation while I will be using the translation of the Tanakh. I wanted to start first at the beginning. So I will be diving into Genesis chps 1-2. When people talk about literally that God made the world in seven days, I asked which creation story are they talking about as there are two very distinct narratives. First, let me back up to Genesis which is Greek. In Hebrew, the title translated is in the beginning. Genesis is a book of beginnings that are broken up in four major arcs, primeval history, Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph.      We are going to start with the primeval history and with the creation stories. Read Genesis chapters 1-2. These creations stories have some affinity with Babylonian myth of Marduk in the Enuma Elish. The main difference is that it was not done through killing but through the work of God. The first creation story, which lays out the creation occurring in seven days, is likely from the P source. On page 12 of the Jewish Study Bible had a diagram like the following:

                Day 1 light                                                                           Day 4 lights (sun, moon, stars)    

                Day 2 Sky (separating waters)                                     Day 5 fish and birds

                Day 3 Land and plants                                                    Day 6 land animals and humans

                                                                Day 7 Sabbath

This starts with generalities and pairs with the specifics, accumulating with the sabbath. The number 7 has often been interpreted literally. 7 has significance throughout the middle east as a symbolic number of completion. I believe that it was never meant to be taken literally but is seen as completion. Also, I like that way the Tanakh starts with verse one “when God began to create heaven and earth”. In many of our bibles, Genesis begins with God created out of nothing. Somehow that idea of something already existing seems more troublesome that there was a moment of nothingness. Yet, for many in the middles east nothingness was not as frightening as the concept of chaos. God brought order to chaos. The other thing about the first creation story that stands out for me is that God created humans, both male and female, in God’s image. Another part of the creation that appears, is the command to be fruitful. And what they could eat was the fruit of the trees to eat and the animals all that is green plants. Not even vegans or carnivores.

The second creation story begins with 2.4b. There is no seven day sequence. There is no water but the earth was dry. Here the Lord God created man from the dust of the earth. The Lord planted the garden and Adam (a play on the Hebrew word Adamah or dirt) was to tend it. This is likely from the J source as God creates Adam and blows into him the breath of life. Notice Adam is not made in God’s image. With the creation of Eve, has led to centuries and millenniums of the notion that women are supposed to be submissive to men. To me this is a complete misinterpretation of these scriptures. God created Eve to be equal to caring for the creation.

So, what should we take from the beginnings? What would this say to us in the 21^st century about the environmental crisis we live in? If we are created in God’s image, should we not be concerned about tending what God did and is doing in creation? I believe the continued destruction of our planet is not a political problem but is a theological problem. We are called to action more than just words but also in deeds.

Eldon                

                               

Tuesday Musings May 29 2019

                I know that I haven’t been good about writing my musings. There are no excuses. Nancy and I are in the process of packing readying ourselves to move. Jenny mentioned the fact as an active pastor the number of times we have moved seemed to be continuing even in retirement. There have been many factors that have led us to seek a new apartment and we found one near Tranquility Park here in Omaha. So once again we are in the process of downsizing and stacking boxes throughout our apartment. I do hope that we don’t have to do this annually.

                On another note, this is the first annual conference that I am not attending. I have attended AC every year for the last 18 years. There are parts of AC I loved and there were parts that I wondered if this was a colossal waste. The time that we spend is more efficient lately which is an improvement. I have enjoyed the plenary sessions with the opportunity to learn. I also enjoyed the time of meeting with my colleagues. The special services especially the ordination service were spiritually uplifting as was the times of the youth worship service (more so in the past when they actually planned the service during YAC.)

                What held me back from this AC, was the fallout of the special called general conference. I know that we would be electing delegates to attend General Conference in 2020 and I will miss voting for those clergy that would be willing to advocate to undo what was decided. If one thought that what happened in St. Louis would end the debate on inclusion, I would guarantee they are wrong. We will continue to debate whether we are a church with open minds and open doors to all of God’s children. I hope that what some of the leadership of churches who came together to discuss #UMNext might prevail or do we look at the reorganization of the church in three, conservative, progressive, or centralists. Maybe now is the time to seriously look at the splits of the church and instead of the continuous fighting over who is right or not, we accept that an amiable separation may be in the best interests of not just the church but also in the Great Commission. For me, the arguing on who is in and who isn’t, distracts us from the why of church. I feel that the church that I pastored in for the last 18 years and continue to be active in the church has lost its way.

                I needed a break from listening to the same arguments presented to justify their beliefs. There has been no change except the fear of change. Any wonder we are a dying church. And when I say that I know that there is hope as I see churches like the one Nancy and I belong continue to grow and flourish. My fear is that the continued bickering can eventually affect the church distracting it from fulfilling God’s vision of loving. Maybe I am just tired and want to see something else that is worthwhile in living out my faith. I have stated that I worship the Triune God who is living and continuing to call us to God’s purpose. I try not to get up in the legalistic interpretation of the bible which was similar to the Pharisees of old. Rather, using scripture as a guide to God’s Will, I choose to try to live in love that we are all the adopted children of our Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer.

                For my brothers and sisters in Christ who are attending AC, I will be praying for you. May the Spirit guide you beyond ourselves, to be instruments of love and peace in this world which is in desperate need.

Shalom

Eldon

Musings May 2 2019

                It has been awhile since I have written in my blog. It seems that time even when retired gets away from one. There have been lots happening with Nancy and me. With Easter coming and now in the season of Easter, there have been a number of thoughts I have been having regarding the dilemma of the church especially the United Methodist Church.

                I remember when I was in seminary and I was completing a paper for one of my classes there was a typo that I caught before handing in the paper. As I look back at that time, that typo might have been more prophetic than I first thought. The typo was instead of the United Methodist Church, I had written the Untied Methodist church. I was writing in a hurry and transposed the d and e. Yet today, the statement of being untied may have more significance. Following the special called general conference and the subsequent judicial ruling, the church I have come to love feels more untied and unraveling than it did back in 2002. I hear and read the anguish of those who have continued to be marginalized and hurt by a church that used to say Open hearts, Open doors, and Open minds. Following what has happened, I believe that motto is no longer true. We have seen closed hearts, closed doors, and closed minds. I read about comments that were made at general conference that were hurtful and aimed at those who were willing to look for some sort of coming together. We have not only closed doors but seem to have slam those doors to a segment of our congregations and with clergy. I have also seen people who hide behind proof texting to keep closed minds and not even deal with dialog. I have marveled that all the focus has been on sexual orientation and nothing said about what Jesus (who never directly said one way or another about sexual orientation) said about divorce. I do not see the church dividing on whether or not divorce should be acceptable. (which I believe is a non-issue.) I also do not see people abiding about the other legal holy laws of Leviticus and nor should we. This debate has been going on for over 40 years and there appears to be no end in sight.

                When the bishops proposed a possible means of moving forward, flawed as it was in its scope, it at least offered a way of continuing to seek a way of staying united. That approach, known as the one church approach which was generally accepted by the delegates from the US, was rejected by the fundamentalists and the churches in Africa, Korea, and the Philippines. I must say I was not surprised by the vote but was disappointed by those who seem more concerned about having their own way rather than looking at ways the church could remain faithful to their beliefs. For some of those who voted not only at not changing the Book of Discipline but also in punishing those who might dissent, the issue has not had anything to do with biblical authority, but with power and control.

                This issue of power and control should not be a surprise. When I was appointed to Paxton, I somehow received the Good News magazine. This was in 2004. The magazine was supposed to be aimed at evangelists. What I found was that a majority of the magazine articles dealt with how awful same sex relationships was and even proposing a split in the church. I found no good news in any of the articles. The same ones who published the magazine have led to this outcome for the church. I have felt that they would say that if you don’t want to abide by the ruling leave as they have threatened to do since I became aware of their beliefs. Now they appear to have a majority, it will be difficult for me to believe in open hearts, open doors and open minds. They say they are welcoming to the LGBTQIA+ community but it is only to a point. They will not allow full participation in all aspects of the church. They have also worked to silence voices and actions of dissent, much like the efforts of the far right in our country.

                So where do we go and most importantly where do I go in this new Untied Methodist Church? There continues to be efforts to somehow honor all of God’s children and be the church. Efforts are being sought that would possibly restructure the church. Where that will lead, who knows? Will there be three differing churches in the future? I know that when one looks at populations, statistics use a bell curve to explain diversity. This looks at the standard deviation of any given issue. It states without going into the math behind this that for most populations there are about 16% that is one standard deviation from the left and 16% from the right. The majority is often 68%. From a church point view, that would be 16% fundamentalists and 16% for the sake of conversation reconciling. The majority at least in the US is the 68%. Within that population are those who may lean to fundamentalism and those who lean toward reconciling. The efforts I am seeing try to reach those of the 68%.

                Do I see three different Methodist churches in the future? Does the term untied apply to what is happening? The General Conference of 2020 will be interesting. There will continue to be efforts to undo what happened in 2019. The debate will continue to focus on sexual orientation rather than what the church is doing. The outcome will likely continue to lead to decline in many churches, especially in the Western world. It may be beneficial for the churches to divide on the perceived differences rather than continue the endless debates that violate John Wesley’s three laws that first being Do NO Harm.  Maybe by having three churches, we can recapture Jesus’ message of Good News and mean it. I know that I struggle with the decisions that were made. What I choose to do in the future may will be where the church continues to abide by the commands of Love God and Love your neighbor.

Shalom

Eldon