Some things of interest over the weekend
Dr. Bauder's weekly missive (a must read for me) details how hyperfundamentalism doesn't just attack Christian growth. Rather, by attaching extraBiblical teachings to the requirements for orthodoxy, it imperils the Gospel itself just as certainly as liberal theology does.
Also, while reading Genesis 34, I noted that while most see the episode of "Dinah and the Shechemites" as simply Jacob's sons administering a bit of vigilante justice, Hamor and Shechem noted in their speech to their fellow citizens that (1) Jacob and the Shechemites would become one people and (2) all that belonged to Jacob would then belong to their city. In other words, the plan of Hamor and Shechem was the destruction of Israel as a unique people and the pillaging of their God-given resources. It was already well underway, as Jacob had to tell his sons to get rid of their idols (35:1-2), and it would have been the end of God's promises to Abraham if it had succeeded.
As such, it seems that what really went on was that the rape of Dinah (a common act among the pagans of that time, remember Genesis 19 and Judges 19) became the "wake-up call" for Jacob and his sons to come back to God--and the means by which (through the anger of Simeon and Levi) God preserved His people.
Not a bad deal for all of us, really.
Podcast #1047: The Roman Caesars’ Guide to Ruling
-
The Roman caesars were the rulers of the Roman Empire, beginning in 27 BC
with Julius Caesar’s heir Augustus, from whom subsequent caesars took their
nam...
9 hours ago
2 comments:
I consider this story as providing evidence that "an eye for an eye, etc." was an advancement, putting an upper bound on revenge. But yes, what you said.
Agreed--but it is yet fascinating to me how God used this rough justice to keep His promise to Abraham--and us through Adam. If it were simply an eye for an eye--or even the Mosaic prescription of death for the offender--Jacob and his sons could have stayed there.
Not this way.
Post a Comment