Commencing Day 106 editorial comment

In 1 Samuel we continue with the saga of Israel’s transition from a confederation of tribes into a kingdom. Israel is in continual warfare with the Philistines. Samuel the last of the Judges, against his will, anoints Saul as the first king. But things don’t go well with Saul and so a substitute needs to be found. Read on to find out more.

Up to this point in the New Testament we have been reading through the four Gospels. We now transition from John into the Acts of the Apostles. Acts is a New Testament equivalent to the history tradition of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles in the Old Testament. Luke writes his Gospel of the life of Jesus and then writes a history of the early days of the Church following the Day of Pentecost. So in a way, Acts might more properly follow on from the end of Luke’s Gospel, and should be read as such. The missionary work of Paul is the focus of much of Luke’s writing in Acts. Lukes account is often rather glowing and the events he records provide a counterpoint to Paul’s own accounts in his epistles or letters to the new churches springing up around the Mediterranean World.

The Bible can be found at the heart of much American political discourse. It’s important for mainline Christians, like Episcopalians, to reclaim our relationship with the Bible in order to be in a better position to identify and challenge the frequency with which the Bible is appropriated and misused by factions within the larger body politic. The daily reading program presented by the Bible Challenge is challenging. We find ourselves continually confronting our received misunderstandings of how to interpret the texts. Visit sermons to see how we are handling the Bible experience in greater depth.

Days 94-100 Editorial Comment

Reading the last three chapters of the book of judges is a sobering experience. Here, we are presented with the graphic details of violence against women, reading like an editorial from ISIS held territory. We also learn of inter-Israelite civil conflict every bit a brutal as the Israelite treatment of the Canaanites depicted in Joshua.

It’s a huge relief to move onto the book of Ruth. Ruth is only four chapters long. Ruth is a tender and intimate story notable for the way it portrays the intimacy of loyalty between Ruth and her mother-in-law Naomi – a beautiful portrayal of female solidarity in a patriarchal world. The book is also notable for the way it presents the acceptance of a foreigner and refugee into Hebrew familial structures. The style of writing presents the participants in the story in a way that is completely familiar to our modern sensibilities.

The book of Ruth marks a transition point. Genesis to Judges presents a prehistory out of which the Hebrew people emerge as a tribal nation. Ruth marks the beginning of a new story about the Kingdom of Israel. From I Samuel to II Kings is the story of the creation of Israel as a nation with a King. These books also relate the sorry tale of monarchy leading to the ultimate division of David’s kingdom into two the kingdoms of Isreal, and Judah after the death of Solomon.

Ruth sets the scene for David and establishes his genealogy. In this sense Ruth is important for us also, for as David’s great grandmother, she features at the beginning of a line of descent the ends with Jesus. With Samuel begins the age of the great prophets of Israel. More about that in due course.

Commentary approaching Day 101

Musings on the experience of reading the Bible

I find the Bible a tough read, even the good bits. So there I’ve said it. To say this makes me feel bad, especially when I am insisting that my community engages with The Bible Challenge, a 360-day reading program encompassing the entire Bible. But I will get back to why this is also important, later.


I feel guilty about finding the Bible a tough read because at the edge of my conscious awareness I fear my attitude damages my relationship with the God I deeply love. I’ve been taught that this makes me bad, and punishment is what awaits bad boys and girls.

I want a nice God, a God who is forgiving but gentle with it. So when I turn to the pages of the Bible I am confronted with a not nice God. I find there a God who does not easily fit with my expectations and this leaves me feeling guilty – after all, it’s not meant to be this way, surely I must have misunderstood. Maybe this explains my attraction to traditions that sit lightly to Bible reading outside of the weekly liturgy. The fact is that reading the Bible is the fastest way to really challenge one’s own self-projection onto God. Throughout the pages of the Bible God simply refuses to act according to my expectations and play nice.

Maybe this explains my attraction to traditions that sit lightly to Bible reading outside of the weekly liturgy. The fact is that reading the Bible is the fastest way to really challenge one’s own self-projection onto God. Throughout the pages of the Bible God simply refuses to act according to our expectations and play nice.

Those of us at St Martin’s, who have been persevering with The Bible Challenge, will on Monday arrive at day 93. Along the way, we have waded through some pretty tedious and gruesome stuff. Recently in the Bible, the book of Joshua’s depiction of Israel’s genocide of the Canaanites as God’s chosen instrument gives way to the same storylines, now retold through the lens of the book of Judges. If we detect Judges retelling the Joshua story let’s not be too hasty and skip over. If we do we will miss noting that the two books tell two different versions of the same story of the settlement of the Promised Land. Joshua presents it as a blitzkrieg campaign during which no quarter is given to the poor old Canaanites. However, Judges presents it as a long process of gradual infiltration with the Israelites winning some and losing some. The end result is a picture of assimilation, with Canaanites living cheek by jowl with Israelites.

The book of Joshua’s unremitting chronicle of slaughter, worthy of a Viking Saga or from the Game of Thrones gives way to a more complex picture in which the tensions of fidelity to the old ways and assimilation into newfangled ones – an age-old story, forms the central narrative. It’s interesting to note that modern archaeology tends to confirm the Judges version.

Here is an interesting thing about the Bible. When we read through the lens of modern expectations of reading either descriptive truth or even reliable history, we get bogged down at the level of the words on the page. Read as descriptive truth or somewhat vague yet reliable history the words describe events that outrage our modern expectations of a loving God, gentle in all his ways. Yet, if we raise our eyes from the words on the page and pay attention to the directional flow of the narrative, e.g. take-in the story flow from Joshua to Judges, we begin to catch a glimpse of the shape of the forest above the tree line, a forest stretching towards the horizon.

It’s something of an overstatement, but not much of one to say that the consistent directional narrative of the Bible concerns the keeping of promises. The repeating plot line is one of the covenant -the reciprocity of promise keeping. The ups and downs in the relationship between God and the Chosen People chronicle the repetitive cycles of remembering and forgetting promises. Things go well when the people remember their promise to worship the Lord. Things go badly when they forget God and stray into worshiping other gods. All the while the long epic of the relationship is moving towards greater inclusion under laws of justice and mercy, thus bending the arc of the universe towards justice.


The text is always written by the authors for those of the generation who first read what is written.

Why read the Bible, especially the early books of the Torah? In them, we read page after page of the violent practices of tribal exclusion. We read about an image of God that we vehemently protest is not our image of God. But me think we protesteth too much. As current events swirl around us, the surfacing of tribal memories assail us. Animosities we thought long since transcended raise their ugly heads again. White tribalism, racism, and anti-Semitism dare to speak their names once again upon the civic stage.

The text is always written by the authors and those of the generation who first read what is written. There are three contextual aspects to keep in mind as we read Scripture. The first is the context described in the text itself. The second is the context within which the text is actually written. The third is our contemporary context readers. Scripture is written for the writers and their context. The original context described is a fiction constructed to confront the generation who author and first read the text. Whatever mythological events described, and whatever the authors of the text intended to convey, we read from within our own context. How does the text inform us about ourselves and our unacknowledged projections into God?

Context 1. The books of Joshua and Judges describe the conquest of the Promised Land, now shrouded in the mists of time. Primitive tribal nomads, as a rule, do not write down their experience. At best, they record their experience in oral stories, repeated by word of mouth. All generations project themselves onto the blank canvas presented by God. So we should not be surprised that Moses and Joshua’s God is remarkably like them.

Context 2. Scholarship now indicates that the books of Joshua and Judges were written down during the period after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 during the prolonged experience of captivity in Babylon and Persia. Joshua and Judges make their appeal to a captive people who are struggling to hold onto their identity after the destruction of nation and Temple. The message is, don’t lose faith, do to not forget their glorious past. God’s faithfulness and Israel’s unfaithfulness are incisions that cut to the heart of the experience of captivity. The books encourage a people at the darkest point to remember how in the past God has blessed them. This is a call to turn away from disobedience and return to God as their ancestors did.

Context 3. As we read the history of the Israelites and their struggles with God, let’s not be too hasty to rush to judgment. Do we not see more of ourselves in these pages than we might care to admit? Are we not a people with genocide in our history? Does not our history of the institution of slavery continue to disturb and disrupt the security of our identity as a people? As the greatest military superpower, is there not a deep contradiction between how we see ourselves and the perception other nations have of us?

The text is often an uncomfortable mirror.

Reading Joshua and Judges provides us with a larger context that aids our introspection so that better prepared and forewarned, our own primitive Israelite likeness, lurking just beyond sight, will not so easily ambush the unwary.