Week 10 lecture notes

Week 10
Interpretation: Literal or Allegorical?
1. Literal: it is about human love and sexual intimacy
2. Allegorical: it uses the language of human love and intimacy to speak of something else (e.g., the relationship of God and the Church)
· Both interpretations go back to the 200's AD or earlier; the oldest evidence we have is from people objecting to a literal interpretation.
· the Council of Constantinople (550 AD) outlawed the literal reading of the Song.
Is the Song obscene if interpreted literally?
· Many have thought the Song would be obscene if interpreted literally.
· Why should a description of human love and sexuality be a problem?
In teams, read "The Philosopher Ruler" (by Plato) and "Interpretations of the Sublime Song" (by Marvin Pope), then discuss the following questions:
· Which do you think Socrates considered "real": the Ideal or the the realization of that ideal in practice?
· Which did Plato think is superior: abstract ideas or physical substance?
· How did early interpreters of the Song prefer to interpret it: abstractly (spiritually) or physically?
o In Greek thinking, one's physical nature must be overcome by the mind/spirit.
o The church developed in this Greco-Roman culture assuming a world view influenced by Plato, with his idea that mind is superior to matter; that one's physical nature must be overcome by the mind and spirit.
o The church did not question this view of the physical nature, so celibacy was thought to be spiritual.
· But the view of the Bible is that creation is good, and sexuality is one aspect of that goodness (Genesis 1). (for example, resurrection is always resurrection of the body.)
Discussion
In teams, discuss the following question:
What seems to be the intention of the original author: Was it expected to be read Allegorically or Literally?
· Early Jews and Christians alike (from the second century AD on) interpreted it allegorically; they only disagreed about what the allegory represented.
· If allegory was intended, we have no evidence in the Song itself, and so much would be inexplicable. (E.g., the woman (=the people of God) takes the initiative in "rousing" the man (=God).)
· The author did not think erotic love was a problem.
Egyptian love songs
Read Egyptian Love Songs # 3, 9, 31–34.
In teams, discuss the following question:
What similarities and differences do you see between these Egyptian love songs and the biblical Song of Songs?
· The woman is called "sister" (chapter 4; #9)
· They compliment each other: "most" beautiful, perfect (1:8; #31; 5:2)
· They describe anatomy with metaphors (#3; 5:13; #31; 5:11; 7:3–4)
· No dialogue in the Egyptian songs. They are not in each others' presence.
Human Sexuality
· God created the world good, and sexual activity is a part of that good creation (Genesis 1).. Yet it has come to be treated as a commodity, bought & sold, or used to exert power, manipulate, and control.
· Some consider it dirty, others (who treat it as a leisure activity) almost holy. We must not act as if it is the church's job to legitimate the fallen world.
· The gospel is about expressing our humanity, not repressing major parts of it. If one puts faith and humanness in conflict, humans will be unable to handle the conflict and choose humanness. If we think of God as a God of unreasonable prohibitions, we have bought the serpent's lie (Genesis 3:1), not the freedom granted by God (2:16).
· That said, certain types of sexual activity are not good for us. Consider the question in the light of the worldview of wisdom literature, as seen in Proverbs.
The person who will do well in this life is one who recognizes that someone besides himself created the world (3:14; 11:5; 7:14), and who observes the world around him to learn how it works (8:16–17) and how he can live in harmony with the way God made it (8:12–13).
· A wise relationship is one where you know your place and don't pretend you're an exception to the rule. Just as there is appropriate behaviour, there is appropriate sexual activity. Inappropriate activity will only end up hurting yourself. It goes against the way things are.
· Title
Song of Songs = the best song. is about the love of a man and a woman. Implication: sex and all that goes with it are good things, and its ok to talk about them without shame.
The woman resists being considered the property of males. She is not passive and receptive; she initiates.
Outline (10)
A tale of fidelity to love in the face of power and coercion.
1–2: The woman, a member of the king's harem, expresses love for her lover, not for the king. The man reciprocates.
3: The woman is determined to overcome threats to her relationship with the man.
4–5: the threats are again resisted, and the depth of the relationship seems very committed.
6–7: more graphic descriptions of the relationship
8: declaration of woman's passion and resistance to other males who claim possession of her (brothers, the king).
· The woman is a more prominent character than the man; she speaks more and takes more initiative.
· She is devoted to a faithful, monogamous, intimate relationship, and refuses to be a pawn in a male game of legal contracts, money, and objectification.
· She struggles for fidelity to her lover when confronted with the king.
For Next Week:
· Song 6:11–8:14
· Provan 348–378
Your paper.

Week 9 lecture notes

Week 9
Quiz
Reading Song of Songs 5–8
As we read the text, what questions arise?
What do you wonder about?
Song of Songs: Date, Authorship: Solomon or later?
"The Song of Songs which is to Solomon": By? For? About?
The author is not Solomon:
1. Solomon never speaks; he is only spoken about.
2. The references to Solomon are mostly negative (more on this later).
3. Solomon's relationships with women are the opposite of what the Song teaches (more on this later).
4. The Hebrew is late, with Persian loanwords, so probably from after the Babylonian exile, like Ecclesiastes.
Interpretation: Literal or Allegorical?
1. Literal: it is about human love and sexual intimacy
2. Allegorical: it uses the language of human love and intimacy to speak of something else (e.g., the relationship of God and the Church)
· Both interpretations go back to the 200's AD or earlier; the oldest evidence we have is from people objecting to a literal interpretation.
· the Council of Constantinople (550 AD) outlawed the literal reading of the Song.
Is the Song obscene if interpreted literally?
· Many have thought the Song would be obscene if interpreted literally.
· Why should a description of human love and sexuality be a problem?
o In Greek thinking, one's physical nature must be overcome by the mind/spirit.
o The church developed in this Greco-Roman culture assuming a world view influenced by Plato, with his idea that mind is superior to matter; that one's physical nature must be overcome by the mind and spirit.
o The church did not question this view of the physical nature, so celibacy was thought to be spiritual.
· But the view of the Bible is that creation is good, and sexuality is one aspect of that goodness (Genesis 1). (for example, resurrection is always resurrection of the body.)
Discussion
In teams, discuss the following question:
What seems to be the intention of the original author: Was is expected to be read Allegorically or Literally?
· Early Jews and Christians alike (from the second century AD on) interpreted it allegorically; they only disagreed about what the allegory represented.
· If allegory was intended, we have no evidence in the Song itself, and so much would be inexplicable. (E.g., the woman (=the people of God) takes the initiative in "rousing" the man (=God).)
· The author did not think erotic love was a problem.
Break
Men in the Song: One or two? Positive or Negative?
· Two main characters, one male and one female. Hebrew, the verb and noun suffixes help distinguish the speakers.
Is the man Solomon and the woman his bride? I doubt it.
1. He is young (black hair; leaping like a young stag).
2. 3:6–11 and 8:10–12 do not present Solomon positively, in contrast to the woman's lover.
Egyptian love songs
Read Egyptian Love Songs # 3, 9, 31–34.
In teams, discuss the following question:
What similarities and differences do you see between these Egyptian love songs and the biblical Song of Songs?
· The woman is called "sister" (chapter 4; #9)
· They compliment each other: "most" beautiful, perfect (1:8; #31; 5:2)
· They describe anatomy with metaphors (#3; 5:13; #31; 5:11; 7:3–4)
· No dialogue in the Egyptian songs. They are not in each others' presence.
Human Sexuality
· God created the world good, and sexual activity is a part of that good creation (Genesis 1).. Yet it has come to be treated as a commodity, bought & sold, or used to exert power, manipulate, and control.
· Some consider it dirty, others (who treat it as a leisure activity) almost holy. We must not act as if it is the church's job to legitimate the fallen world.
· The gospel is about expressing our humanity, not repressing major parts of it. If one puts faith and humanness in conflict, humans will be unable to handle the conflict and choose humanness. If we think of God as a God of unreasonable prohibitions, we have bought the serpent's lie (Genesis 3:1), not the freedom granted by God (2:16).
· That said, certain types of sexual activity are not good for us. Consider the question in the light of the worldview of wisdom literature, as seen in Proverbs.
The person who will do well in this life is one who recognizes that someone besides himself created the world (3:14; 11:5; 7:14), and who observes the world around him to learn how it works (8:16–17) and how he can live in harmony with the way God made it (8:12–13).
· A wise relationship is one where you know your place and don't pretend you're an exception to the rule. Just as there is appropriate behaviour, there is appropriate sexual activity. Inappropriate activity will only end up hurting yourself. It goes against the way things are.
· Title
Song of Songs = the best song. is about the love of a man and a woman. Implication: sex and all that goes with it are good things, and its ok to talk about them without shame.
The woman resists being considered the property of males. She is not passive and receptive; she initiates.
For Next Week:
· Song 3:1–6:10
· Provan 297–347
Not to be handed in; simply recommended for a good paper:
Write an abstract of your paper.

Week 8 lecture notes

Week 8

Midterm Test

Marriage and faithfulness in Proverbs

• The teaching on marriage and adultery (chapter 7) is in a section about competing discourses.
• Choosing one’s life path (choosing wisdom or folly) is compared to choosing one’s life mate.
• Wisdom is living life in a way that corresponds with to the way things actually are, recognizing one’s place: we are not the creators of our world or of the rules under which it operates.
• Likewise, a wise relationship is one where you recognize your place and do not try to pretend you are an exception to the rule. Just as there is appropriate behaviour, there is appropriate sexual activity. Inappropriate activity will only end up hurting yourself. It goes against the way things are.

Reading Song of Songs
As we read the text, what questions arise?
What do you wonder about?
Song of Songs: Date, Authorship: Solomon or later?
"The Song of Songs which is to Solomon": By? For? About?
The author is not Solomon:
1. Solomon never speaks; he is only spoken about.
2. The references to Solomon are mostly negative (more on this later).
3. Solomon's relationships with women are the opposite of what the Song teaches (more on this later).
4. The Hebrew is late, with Persian loanwords, so probably from after the Babylonian exile, like Ecclesiastes.
Interpretation: Literal or Allegorical?
1. Literal: it is about human love and sexual intimacy
2. Allegorical: it uses the language of human love and intimacy to speak of something else (e.g., the relationship of God and the Church)
· Both interpretations go back to the 200's AD or earlier; the oldest evidence we have is from people objecting to a literal interpretation.
· the Council of Constantinople (550 AD) outlawed the literal reading of the Song.
Is the Song obscene if interpreted literally?
· Many have thought the Song would be obscene if interpreted literally.
· Why should a description of human love and sexuality be a problem?
o In Greek thinking, one's physical nature must be overcome by the mind/spirit.
o The church developed in this Greco-Roman culture assuming a world view influenced by Plato, with his idea that mind is superior to matter; that one's physical nature must be overcome by the mind and spirit.
o The church did not question this view of the physical nature, so celibacy was thought to be spiritual.
· But the view of the Bible is that creation is good, and sexuality is one aspect of that goodness (Genesis 1). (for example, resurrection is always resurrection of the body.)
What was the intention of the original author?
· Early Jews and Christians alike (from the second century AD on) interpreted it allegorically; they only disagreed about what the allegory represented.
· If allegory was intended, we have no evidence in the Song itself, and so much would be inexplicable. (E.g., the woman (=the people of God) takes the initiative in "rousing" the man (=God).)
· The author did not think erotic love was a problem.
For Next Week:
· Read Song 1–2
· Read Provan 263–296
Not to be handed in; simply recommended for a good paper:
· Review a book or article that is important for your paper.

Week 7 lecture notes unformatted

Week 7
Quiz
Message of Ecclesiastes 7-12
o Don’t think that being perfect is the answer. That’s no guarantee (7:16); rather, fear God: recognize his sovereignty and that He is in control (7:18).
o Don’t think that being perfectly wise is the answer, either: You’ll never be wise enough to figure it all out (7:23–29; 8:16–17). God made us.
o Life is full of things we don’t control: Kings, winds, death, conscription (8:2–9); battles, food, riches, favor, disaster (9:11–12). Time and chance happen to us all.
o Still, do what you can. In general, it helps to be wise, be calm, be kind, be generous, work hard (10–11). Just don’t place your trust in your own self and what you do (11:6).
Ecclesiastes as God’s Word
· What do we mean by “God’s Word”?
· In what way can we think of Ecclesiastes as God’s Word?
· EBC Tenet of Faith #1:
“The Holy Scriptures as originally given by God, divinely inspired, infallible, entirely trustworthy and the only supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct.”
· Core Values #1:
“Our core values stem from the conviction that God has graciously revealed Himself in time and space, through His Son Jesus Christ and by His Holy Spirit. The inspired Christian Scriptures awaken and attune humankind to the past, present and future work of God. All aspects of our institutional life are to be shaped by and measured against biblical revelation.”
Revelation, Inspiration, Authority, and Canon
By “Revelation” and “Inspiration” do we mean:
· Verbal Inspiration: God dictated Ecclesiastes to someone who wrote about Qohelet (in Hebrew)?
· God placed the ideas into the author's mind, and let him choose the words?
· God’s spirit is in every person committed to following Him, and therefore the author was inspired as they tried to express the things in Ecclesiastes?
· Natural Revelation: God revealed things about Himself in creation, and the author recognized these and expressed them in Ecclesiastes?
· God inspires the text as we read it, if we try to hear His voice in the text?
By “infallible”, “trustworthy”, and “authority” do we mean:
· Ecclesiastes has guarantees from God?
· Ecclesiastes never says anything contradictory?
· We should obey Ecclesiastes’ advice literally?
· The point behind each proverb and poem is true?
· The overall worldview of Ecclesiastes is correct?
· We give Ecclesiastes authority when we guide our lives by something we read in it?
Limitations of the sage
· Proverbs can seem optimistic (3:11–12)
· The reader recognizes that life isn’t so predictable. Job and Ecclesiastes question the predictability directly. (So does Proverbs, in 16:9; 21:30; 30:2–3)
· Ecclesiastes seems to like pointing out ambiguities
· Wisdom sayings, by nature, are not final; they prod one to further thought (Ecclesiastes 12:11).
· Wisdom literature conceals as much as it reveals. A saying can only be a partial truth, and other sayings are needed to complement it. “He who hesitates is lost” / “Look before you leap”
Break
Paper proposal due.
Qohelet and his contradictions: unorthodox, foil or complex?
What does Qohelet say that makes his theology suspect?
1. Life is a miserable evil (4:2), yet we should enjoy life (9:4)
2. Life is vanity, yet it matters how we act (2:13)
3. Life is unfair (2:14), yet God will reward and punish righteously
How can we explain the apparent contradictions?
1. Is Qohelet's teaching presented as an example of incorrect thinking, which was edited later to correct it (e.g., by adding the last chapter)?
· If so, the editor did not do a good job of removing the unorthodox statements or counter-balancing them.
· The last chapter says the same things Qohelet has been saying all along
· The last chapter commends Qohelet; saying only good things about him and his teaching.
2. Is Ecclesiastes written in the form of a dialogue between someone who is right and someone who is wrong?
· We see no indication of dialogue or changes of characters.
· The autobiographical parts in chapters 1 and 2 cannot be dialogues, yet they contain the same apparent contradictions.
3. Is Qohelet talking only about life "without God" when he speaks pessimistically? Is this what "under the sun" means?
· Life "under the sun" does not mean life "without God" (5:18; 9:9, 11), though it may mean this life "on earth" as opposed to what may happen after death (about which Qohelet is vague).
4. Does Qohelet seem to contradict himself because life is not always consistent and there are no pat answers?
· Proverbs does this, in e.g., 26:4–5.
5. Is Qohelet really contradicting himself?
· A few times, technically yes, e.g., whether it's better to be dead or alive.
· But these apparent contradictions must be read in their contexts, in light of the point Qohelet is trying to make.
· A proper understanding of hebel makes a huge difference. He is not saying everything is totally "meaningless;" he is saying everything is not to be "grasped" (i.e., controlled, considered permanent or substantial or even predictable).
Review of Ecclesiastes.
Points to remember:
· Ecclesiastes is not empty, nor is it complete.
· Wisdom has two branches: practical (Proverbs) and speculative (Job, Ecclesiastes).
· Proverbs focuses on the typical, Ecclesiastes on the atypical.
· The Hebrew word translated “evil” does not always carry moral connotations (a natural disaster is an “evil”).
· Qohelet says contradictory things (4:2 vs. 9:4). Why?
o Later editors tried to correct his unorthodoxy? No: they didn’t do a good job.
o Qohelet quoted his opponents’ viewpoints in order to refute them? No: there are no indications of quoting.
o He expresses things that are partially true (like Proverbs does). Yes. This means the danger of taking a verse out of context is especially high!
· Structure
o attempts have been made to find a structure
o none are really convincing
o Better: just follow the flow of the book, with its repetitive cycles.
· Forms:
o “Better than” 7:1–11; 9:16–10:1
o Royal Testament (like Egypt)
o rhetorical questions
· Poetry:
o Most can be divided into poetic, parallel, lines with some rhythm
o However, other characteristics of poetry (lack of particles, terseness) are absent.
· Narrative: For example, “I hated life” (7:17) does not mean life is hateful.
· Addressees: Male (9:9); young (11:9); some wealth.
· Theology:
o God is never called Yahweh; only Elohim.
o not atheist or agnostic
o God is in control
o Life goes better for those who please God
o God is transcendent and incomprehensible but reasonable and trustworthy.
· Relevance: Like today, Ecclesiastes deals with:
o Responding to tradition
o Relationship of individual to community
o faithful living even when God is problematic
o Greed (work as toil rather than calling); the rat-race.
o Human limitations (vs. post-modernism, which promotes create our own reality).
For Next Quiz:
Fee & Stuart 226–230Provan 235–256

Possible Midterm Questions

Question 1

How does the worldview of Ecclesiastes compare with that of Proverbs? To what extent are they in agreement or conflict?

Question 2

What does Ecclesiastes mean by the word translated “vanity”? Summarize some differing views, and indicate how these explanations are helpful or inadequate.

Question 3

Describe the overall message of Ecclesiastes. What points is the author trying to make, and how does he go about making them?

Question 4

What can we know about when Ecclesiastes was written, and by whom? What evidence can we base this on?

Question 5

What are some of the ways people have tried to explain the contradictions in Ecclesiastes? Which explanation do you prefer and why?

Question 6

Was Qohelet's view of life basically optimistic or pessimistic? What kinds of things was he optimistic or pessimistic about?