New Year, Same schtick:
Sunday!
28 September 14
Hi Troy & Mia; David & Marie!
Just checked the date of the Day of the
Flies -- Father's Day, June 15 -- did so because it repeated itself on Thursday
September 15. Four flies in succession
-- no sooner killed one than another presented him or her self in the second
floor office where I do all of my office work.
First flies in evidence here SINCE June 15…
(except for microscopic flies which had
been arriving at the drawing board at the rate of about one a week. I should point out that I was taking a shower
on September 27 and, looking up, saw a very tiny spider on the back wall just
about an arm's length over my head so I reached up -- yes, exactly an arm's and
extended fingers' length -- and crushed it.
Then shampooed my hair, closing my eyes.
Opened my eyes and there was an ENORMOUS Daddy Long Legs perched on the
shower ceiling. Knocked that one off
with a stick I keep handy for such occasions -- used to be millipedes -- after
my shower and then picked it up with a Kleenex)
…so made a note to remark upon that to
you. This was followed by Day of the
Flies III, yesterday, when I must have killed (I lost track around 8) more than
a dozen of them in the studio. Two
occasions when there were two on the glass front door, the rest of the time
singles in succession. Not obedient of
regular fly rules: I open the front door because on a sunny day (which it was)
that becomes the brightest spot and Magnetic North for flies. MOST of these buzzed around pretty much
everywhere else besides the front door.
So, Day of the Flies I just about a week before summer and Day of the
Flies II just about a week after summer.
Make of that what you will.
Ezekiel 36
Also thou son of man, prophecy unto the
mountains of Israel and say Ye mountains of Israel, Hear the word of the YHWH
It's a very potent question/prompt to God
since only God and YHWH know that the YHWH IS the mountains of Israel
(mountains and the earth generally, so it's a regionally limited
prompt/question -- limited to Israel itself -- but it is self-inclusive on the
part of the YHWH which is a pretty unique circumstance in Scriptural terms: the
YHWH asking for God's judgement UPON the YHWH).
God obliges:
Thus saith the Lord GOD, Because the enemy
had said against you, Aha, even the ancient high places are ours in possession
That is, God asserts what I would assume
was the YHWH's primary concern: there was no way to lose Jerusalem and Israel
without also losing the high places which were dedicated both to the YHWH and
Baal (basically two forms of the YHWH, in monotheistic form and in pagan
fertility form) and (more problematic for the YHWH, I would guess) the Really
Ancient high places which pre-existed even the names of YHWH and Baal.
Therefore prophecy and say thus saith the
Lord GOD, Because for because they have made you desolate and swallowed you up
on every side, that ye might be a possession unto the residue of the heathen
and ye are taken up in the lips of talkers and an infamy of the people
Because for because", the original
Hebrew, suggests that God is addressing the all-encompassing form of the YHWH's
question/prompt.
Basically, God is saying, "This
assertion goes WAY back and covers the Really Ancient high places": that
the "residue of the heathen" which still existed at the time that
this epoch began with A Dam and Chauah and the Garden of Eden HAVE made the
YHWH a possession and (of more actual interest to the YHWH, as presumably only
the omniscient God would know) have made the general perception of the YHWH to
be that of a failed deity (of which I'm sure there was never a shortage in the
region) on the part of "talkers" and a source of "infamy"
for those still worshipping the YHWH.
Therefore ye mountains of Israel, hear the
word of the Lord GOD, thus saith the Lord GOD to the mountains and to the
hills, to the rivers and to the valleys, to the desolate wastes and to the
cities that are forsaken, which became a prey and derision to the residue of
the heathen that round about:
It's an attention-getting way of putting
it: God is including His own context and
media -- the rivers which are made up of water, God's medium, and the cities
which were founded by Cain, the "God loyalist" (he was obedient in
making his sacrifice vegetation, which had the imprimatur of God as man's
source of nourishment) -- essentially reinforcing His central point: here at the apex of the Judaic Revelation,
God and YHWH are "in this" together.
And, the even Larger Point, scaling things up from "the mountains
of Israel" prompt. The revelation
includes the mountains of Israel but actually refers to the YHWH in the same
sense that the revelation includes the rivers but actually refers to God.
Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Surely
in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen,
against all Idumea, which have appointed my land into their possession, with
the joy of all heart, with despiteful minds to cast it out for a prey.
It wasn't God, but rather the YHWH that
spoke that way at the end of the previous chapter. But God is intentionally including Himself in
what he knows are the central concerns of "the mountains of Israel"
-- jealousy, bitterness at the joy the heathen are experiencing and the victory
of their "despiteful minds".
Just so there's no mistake, God again
includes Himself metaphorically as "the rivers" in the pronouncement:
Prophecy therefore concerning the land of
Israel and say unto the mountains and to the hills, to the rivers and to the
valleys, Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold I have spoken in my jealousy and in my
fury because ye have borne the shame of the heathen,
As I read it, it's "He and
he/she/it" -- God is the rivers, the mountains are he-YHWH, the hills are
she-YHWH and the valleys it-YHWH
Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, I have
lifted up My Hand, Surely the heathen that about you, they shall bear their
shame.
That is, God is pledging -- "lifted up My Hand" -- that the
"jealousy" and
"bitterness" the YHWH is experiencing are temporary. Even going so far as to adopt the YHWH's
misapprehension regarding trees as YHWH metaphors, when they're actually
metaphors of God, an unprecedented instance of unanimity between the Divine and
His creation -- God really stretching a point for the YHWH's sake:
But ye, O mountains of Israel, ye shall
shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Israel, for
they are at hand to come.
For behold, I for you, and I will turn unto
you, and ye shall be tilled and sown.
Again an example of God's omniscience and
knowledge of the nature of the YHWH which we only glimpse in Scripture in the
YHWH's version of the creation story: "there was not yet a man to till the
ground". For the YHWH, that was --
and is -- one of the few redeeming facets of men: they tilled the ground, essentially grooming
the YHWH.
And I will multiply men upon you, all the
house of Israel, all of it, and the cities shall be inhabited, and the wastes
shall be builded.
That is, God isn't abandoning Cain's
cities. The promised restoration
includes the cities AND the "wastes".
This serves to incite the YHWH's own qualified concurrence:
And I will multiply upon you man and beast,
and they shall increase and bring fruit and I will settle you after your old
estates: and will do better unto you, than at your beginnings and ye shall know
that I, the YHWH.
To which God amends:
Yea, I will cause men to walk upon you, my
people, Israel, and they shall possess thee, and thou shalt be their
inheritance, and thou shalt no more henceforth bereave them.
It can be read a couple of different
ways: "I will cause men to walk
upon you, my people" with the assertions then addressed to
"Israel" OR "I will cause men to walk upon you, my people, Israel". Which is a good way of putting it, since the
YHWH has brought up "beginnings" and the chapter begins with the
address/prompt to "the mountains of Israel". The YHWH is allowed to infer it either
way: where do the mountains of Israel
begin, exclusive of men? How much of
Israel is men and how much of Israel is the YHWH? "And they shall possess thee". Do the mountains of Israel possess men or do
men possess the mountains of Israel?
Thus saith the Lord GOD, Because they say
unto you, Thou devourest up men and hast bereaved thy nations
As I read it, the "you" is quite
specifically directed at the YHWH centring on the YHWH's
"appearances" concern: how the YHWH is perceived "in the lips
of talkers and an infamy of the people".
It's a Reality Check. God can
-- and does -- address "the mountains of Israel" and "the
rivers", but there is a Larger Context that the YHWH is fully aware
of. "The mountains of Israel"
are a lesser context of the YHWH as is any pagan context which has a fertility
god or goddess or earth god or earth goddess.
"THOU devourest up men and hast bereaved THY nations".
Therefore thou shalt devour men no more,
neither [cause
to fall/bereave] thy nations any more saith the Lord GOD.
Neither will I cause men to hear in thee
the shame of the heathen any more, neither shalt thou bear the reproach of the
people any more, neither shalt thou cause the nations to fall any more, saith
the Lord GOD.
It's expressed in absolutist terms which I
would infer is an exaggeration, but only a marginal one. What God is addressing is the YHWH's concerns
about perception -- what are people GENERALLY saying and going to be saying
about the YHWH when the Babylonian Conquest is completely effected and the Jews
have been dispersed throughout the goyim?
At the moment? Nothing good.
In
the fullness of time? The worship of the heathen that is nearly universal in
Ezekiel's time -- a hundred different names for basically the same fertility
goddesses and gods spanning the known world -- will become a "rounding
error" percentage-wise. But God
doesn't sugar-coat it: "Neither
shalt THOU cause the nations to fall any more". It's the YHWH who is behind all of the
paganism and heathen beliefs, attempting to play both ends against the
middle. It's quickly reaching its
"best before" date, historically speaking.
It provokes a defensive response from the
YHWH, basically saying that the YHWH didn't do anything. The house of Israel is to blame for their own
bad choices and actions:
Moreover, the word of the YHWH came unto
me, saying.
Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt
in their own land, they defiled it by their own way, and by their doings: their
way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.
Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for
the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols they had
polluted it.
And I scattered them among the heathen, and
they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according
to their doings I judged them.
And when they entered unto the heathen
whither they went, they profaned my holy name, when they said to them, These
the people of the YHWH, and are gone forth out of his land.
But I had pity for my holy name, which the
house of Israel had profaned among the heathen, whither they went.
It's an interesting argument, based in monotheism
and free will -- both provinces of God and the worship of God. The house of Israel was presented, not only with the choice between God and YHWH
but between God and YHWH and a hundred different forms of paganism. THAT they chose WHAT they chose, bespeaks
their own culpability, not the YHWH's (says the YHWH). And the suggestion of a "HOLY name"
is a good one in the midst of a sharply cut forensic argument with God. The YHWH isn't suggesting having pity for the
name of Baal, but only for the HOLY name of the entity in question, the YHWH.
Instead of trying to even more finely split
the presented hair, God appears to acquiesce:
Therefore say unto the house of Israel,
Thus saith the Lord GOD, I do not for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for my
holy Name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen whither ye
went.
And I will sanctify my Great Name which was
profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them, and
the heathen shall know that I the YHWH, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be
sanctified in you before [their/your]
eyes.
It, in one sense, just follows the drift of
the argument to that point: the
unanimity between God and YHWH at the apex of the Judaic Revelation. But, in another sense, it's a real jaw-dropper: God is acknowledging that God IS YHWH? Well, not really. What God is actually saying is that the HOLY
name and the Great Name have, indeed, taken quite a beating, are taking quite a
beating and will take quite a beating.
But God will be sanctified IN the YHWH, ultimately (before both their
eyes -- the heathen and Israel -- and your eyes -- the YHWH's).
For I will take you from among the heathen
and gather you out of all countries and will bring you into your own land.
"Oh, you WILL, WILL you?" the
YHWH must have been thinking. While also
getting the frisson of horror that only comes when God says what He's going to
do since God never says He's going to do anything that He doesn't do. And the idea of God being sanctified IN the
YHWH would not be a pleasant one for the YHWH.
It's a ways off in the future. A good five hundred plus years just before
the Babylonian Conquest and sacking of
Jerusalem is about to reiterate itself with the Roman Conquest and sacking of
Jerusalem. Unimaginable in Ezekiel's
time and context, but familiar to any reader of the Christian gospels:
Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you,
and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness and from all your idols will I
cleanse you.
A new heart also will I give you, and a new
spirit will I put within you, and I will take away the stoney heart out of your
flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.
And I will put My Spirit within you, and
cause you to walk in my Statutes, and ye shall keep my judgements and do them.
That spreads outwards, but it doesn't
happen overnight, either. It's almost
two thousand years, but God doesn't fail His promise to Israel:
And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave
to your fathers, and ye shall be my people and I will be your God.
I will also save you from all your
uncleanness and I will call for the corn and will increase it and lay no famine
upon you.
And I will multiply the fruit of the tree
and the increase of the field, that ye shall receive no more reproach of famine
among the heathen.
Certainly the history of the state of
Israel indicates the fulfillment of that promise -- with some qualification
centring on free will. God acknowledging
that the YHWH is exactly right in suggesting that Israel and Israelis made --
and make -- their own choices and suffer the resulting consequences and/or
benefits.
Then shall ye remember your own evil ways,
and your doings that not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight
for your iniquities and for your abominations.
Not for your sakes do I this, saith the
Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O
house of Israel.
But that in no way diminishes God's
promise:
Thus saith the Lord GOD, In the day that I
shall have cleansed you from all your iniquities, I will also cause to dwell in
the cities and the wastes shall be builded.
And the desolate land shall be tilled,
whereas it lay desolate in the sight of all that passed by.
And they shall say, This land that was
desolate, is become like the Garden of Eden, and the waste and desolate and
ruined cities, fenced, are inhabited.
There really isn't much there with which
the YHWH can disagree:
Then the heathen that are left round about
you, shall know that I, the YHWH, build the ruined places, plant that that was
desolate: I the YHWH have spoken and I will do.
The "heathen" won't really be an
issue when God's fulfillment comes to pass.
The adversarial presence "round about you" when Israel is
restored will be MOSTLY either other monotheists, Muslims. If there are any Baal worshippers they amount
to a rounding error. Secularists and
atheists. That's another question. How many ACTUAL secularists and atheists ARE
there -- and will there be -- in the Levant as history continues to unfold?
God -- as I read it -- acknowledges these
facts. It won't be quite as cut and
dried as a perfect restoration of absolute monotheism centred on God:
Thus saith the Lord GOD, I will yet for this
be inquired of by the house of Israel, to do for them:
God knows what He's doing and He will
fulfill His promise. But -- particularly
in the time of Ezekiel -- that didn't, doesn't and won't mean an end of
questions posed to God by men and the YHWH.
Far from it. However:
I will increase them with men like a flock.
"Be fruitful and multiply". God's instruction to man and mankind was a
simple one from the beginning. "Be
fruitful and multiply" and apart from that do what you think is right and
your children will do what they think is right and -- thousands and thousands
of generations up ahead -- everything will get figured out and everything will
be good and in conformity with God's plan which has been unchanged from the
beginning.
Not having any clear vision of how all this
is going to unfold -- God fulfilling Himself IN the YHWH (the Synoptic Jesus)
and a universal cleansing (the Johannine Jesus and John's baptism), the YHWH
definitely wants to be at the head of that parade as well:
As the flock of holy things, as the flock
of Jerusalem in her solemn feasts, so shall the waste cities be filled with
flocks of men, and they shall know I, the YHWH.
Next week, God willing, on to Chapter 37!
Best,
Dave
Next Time: Hey, it's 2019, we got Replicants yet? -"Past" Matt
9 comments:
I'm sure we're all grateful that we have Dave to tell us "what god was really saying".
-- Damian
Well, he's got pleeeeeeeenty of company - like, every televangelist huckster since Elmer Gantry (OK, he wasn't on TV, but only because he's fictional, and TV hadn't been invented yet).
I'm pretty sure Dave has said elsewhere that all this is just his opinion and interpretation, and that he's not speaking for God. Although, if any of the Sunday Commentary Haters have a better interpretation of the Scripture passage Dave's commenting on, this would probably be a good place to post it. Who knows, you may provide something of actual value!
Gosh! I can think of few worse places to post it. Guess we have a disagreement.
-- Damian
Again, because the Sunday Commentary posts seem to engender a lot of ... not so favorable comments, and because I really don't have a dog in this fight, I am waiting until the end to read all of it. Girding my loins, as it were.
I don't think that it's a bad suggestion that y'all do the same. Just one "religious Dave Sim" fan's opinion.
But, I gotta say, $10,000 gets ya a lotta religious Genesis Commentary.
Wow. And, I think, we're not even close to closing in on the end.
That's my "buddy", Dave, who is the only person that I've ever spent time with who is more vociferously vocal and verbal than am I.
Can't wait, Dave, 'til you get to the end and I can start reading. Another new binder volume! Keep up the ... um ... deep(?) ... (good?) ... (intense?)... (?) ..(I dunno; smart?) work.
Good on yer.
"Basically, God is saying..."
"the YHWH must have been thinking..."
These Sunday posts are rife with these kinds of phrases. To Dave, there's this "conversation" going on between God and YHWH which only he can see. In reality, this conversation is only going on in Dave's head. That would be fine, but Dave, of course, sees this as the Unified Theory which Einstein spent his intellectual life pursuing when it is, of course, a load of complete and utter nonsense.
Anon (and as someone else pointed out and I am reiterating, if you're going to criticize someone, anyone, you should have and show the moral rectitude to identify yourself), I'm pretty sure that nearly all Torah/Bible/Koran interpreters use the kind of language that Dave is utilizing here. It's a kind of shorthand; if you say at the beginning of your commentary that this is your opinion, and if you repeat that periodically throughout, then (and, as a former copy editor and proofreader, I can say this) it's okay to use phrases like "What God is saying here is ..."
Criticize, if you must, but, please, not in such a cowardly manner.
Cowardly like ... oh, your country's founding fathers, Jeff? Remind me again who wrote the Federalist Papers?
-- Damian
Well, of course we now know it was (mostly) John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison - but that wasn't your point, was it?
Post a Comment