Peter's Professional Postings

Notes from the margins: systems of exclusion

2011-12-28T19:47:00.008+08:00

Just as the Jewish religious system in Jesus’ day was an order of exclusion – so society in Australia has promoted exclusion. Fortification and ghetto-isation are profoundly disturbing communities. Suburbs with high walls, gates and security entries are being built. Public housing of the 70s has been refurbished and sold off at inflated prices. By the same token, low cost housing is placed in isolated areas and with no, little or poor quality infrastructure support!

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: reclaim public space!!

2011-12-19T19:46:00.006+08:00

Some of the “antisocial” (as promoted by politicians and media) activities of young people are simply an attempt to reclaim public space. Space from which young people have and are being systematically excluded. Train stations, parks, amenities, etc.

The young people are excluded from access; yet when they try to reclaim access, they get labeled as antisocial

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: fighting someone else's battle

2011-12-12T19:45:00.015+08:00

Asking young people to ‘fight their own battles’ is both hopeful and naive. While some young people can and even do. For example, young people, writing through the Internet, have developed plausible youth policy and submitted it to government. Government assumed the writers were adults… However, at the same time – youth are only young for a short time…and just when they get used to fighting their own battles and start to get good and it – it becomes someone else’s battle…

Although I have 25 years of experience working in the community welfare sector and most of that in direct line youth work - now I'm just an old guy as far as most younger people are concerned. All I'm "good for" is policy... but at the same time, some young people are now so good at writing policy that I'm not really needed! So long as the Government don't realise this great policy information is actually coming from young people themselves, they really take it on board.

That's why the Internet is so important, that's why we need to teach our little children about it and get people of all ages connected. I heard someone quoted (I think it might have been Bill Gates) as saying, "Chance favours the connected mind." Young people need to be connected to each other - and that synergy will develop plausible youth policy!

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: be normative!

2011-12-05T20:08:00.001+08:00

There’s a constant push for young people to “take responsibility” for themselves: appearance, language, manners, public image, public self-image, public performance… that leaves little room for any deviation from what the older people see as ‘normal’. The phrase "take responsibility" is really just saying, be normative by our standards. No one really wants those young people to take responsibility... just to fit their mould.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: constucted media images

2011-11-28T19:12:00.001+08:00

The constructed media images of youth are not truly real…they are constructs to “sell” the media’s product. Be that newspapers, ratings or advertising dollars. However, the perceptions take over and all parties (not in a political sense but in an identified group) start to believe the constructed images. It becomes a self- fulfilling prophesy. Fear and threat over take the adults… and young people believe that the behaviour displayed in the media is normative. Further to this, class and age polarisation over-take the false constructs of media. Young people are pushed further towards the margins.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: crime of being marginalised

2011-11-21T19:11:00.001+08:00

The ‘criminalisation of the marginalised’ has become commonplace in society – this treats the people as the problem; rather than the structures causing the marginalisation. So it essentially becomes a crime to be marginalised (to be different, isolated, or financially pressured).

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: modern learning vs ancient methods

2011-11-14T19:07:00.000+08:00

The other day, my wife did a course “on-line”. It was a skills upgrade/policy training course required by her employer. She did the course in one night, the system produced a certificate of completion, which was printed immediately – and all requirements were met: An excellent example of modern learning. Young people are now more computer and on-line savvy than ever before. But much training still continues to be delivered by the methods of the 1950s.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: state political leverage

2011-11-07T18:10:00.000+08:00

Youth policy (particularly at a State government level) is generally used to gain some form of political leverage (mostly law-and-order but also employment or education).

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: education investment

2011-10-31T20:03:00.000+08:00

Student numbers throughout all levels of educational institutions have continued to grow – while government investment in the sector has continued to been systematically reduced by multiple methodologies.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: commodities we disregard

2011-10-24T18:05:00.000+08:00

The ‘economic rationalist’ approach treats education and students as commodities, to be bought-and-sold, as a market driven transaction. This reduces education to little more than a mobile phone contract. Knowledge, as gained through education, is linked to the ‘commodity’ of the student. The young person is treated (within the system) as a product. Underperforming students are shifted so as not to devalue the ‘currency’ of the institution.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: shifting the burden

2011-10-17T19:59:00.000+08:00

It remains remarkable that the tax burden is constantly being systematically shifted away from the rich and the corporations sector – and more squarely on the pay-as-you-earn wage earner. This affects every wage earner, not just young people. While it may impact the higher wage earners less, the injustice and inequity are incredible.

The situation in the US in August 2011 is a classic example. The conservative politians were able to 'ensure' that the tax burden that the Obama administration wanted to 'impose' upon the richest people in the nation was stopped; as part of their deal to agree to the rescue package. So they made the deal, so long as the rich get richer!

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: gran's shopping trolley chat

2011-10-10T20:56:00.003+08:00

The police are never called to ‘move along’ a bunch of old ladies chatting in a doorway- blocking or making people’s access difficult, and yet my experience suggests this obstacle is frequently present. People with prams or shopping trolleys who block access by standing around talking in shopping centres or at the cinema also frequently commit the offence. But they are not considered a threat. The police aren’t called when some people stand outside a shop or hospital (directly in front of a no smoking sign) and smoke… making other’s access uncomfortable. But a bunch of teenagers are basically fair game for just ‘being around’. The most marginalised people are often marginalised even more or discriminated against.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: how we exclude youth

2011-10-07T19:52:00.004+08:00

Social practices, sexual politics, marginalisation, power, poverty, gender discrimination – all plague our society when we try to exclude or ignore young people from the community. Access to power in society is limited – so the individualism problem (again) emerges. We have, too greatly, lost our sense that life is essentially about a corporate/community (ants) and not rabid individuals (rats). The Church’s ideal that focuses on the corporate nature of our existence is an important message.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Enjoy making your Will

2011-10-05T18:53:00.001+08:00

Making a Will is a great activity. It is like planning a camping or fishing holiday. You get the items you need to take with you, load up the trailer or boat and know that you’re ready for a break. The trouble is we all know ‘you can’t take it with you when you go.’ So you need to look at that trailer and everything you’ve got, and think about who will take it on when you’ve gone.

Mr Peter Hotchkin, a foremost Bequests Director in Western Australia said, “Most people feel good after making their Will. They feel relieved that they finally got that task done. They especially feel good about themselves if they’ve left something to a charity.”

However, it is important to remember a few key points for making a Will. Most solicitors advise us to divide our Will by percentages. If we name a specific item, perhaps: “My house at 43 West Street” and then sell that house, then that bequest will fail. If we divide everything into percentages, then we can leave 20% to each of our children and 20% divided evenly between our favourite charities. Solicitors also warn us to make sure we have a secondary clause in a Will. This is in case the first person we want to give to dies before we do.

Mr Hotchkin said, “It is important to seek the advice of a legal representative as this can avoid some of the pitfalls. These do-it-yourself Will Kits make more work for solicitors than termites make for carpenters.”

Once a Will is written, it is important to let people know where it is and to keep it up-to-date. “It is usually a good idea to review your Will every five years,” said Mr Hotchkin. “It may not need to be rewritten, but just checking it means you know it is safe and you can make sure no-one has died or moved away.”

In this day of computers, it is relatively easy for your solicitor to update your Will if changes need to be made.

Mr Hotchkin said, "It is a great act of generosity to include a charity in your Will. When the family is standing on its feet, then it's worth considering looking out for a charity to include alongside the kids."

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Assignment - Exegesis Genesis 15:1-21

2011-10-03T20:06:00.001+08:00

This was my assignment (as submitted) for the "Life and Literature of Ancient Israel". I haven't really edited it properly after having received feedback from my lecturer - whose opinion I greatly respect. I wouldn't suggest anyone use my Blog for assignments at all and particularly just taking this material into their own assignment. Some points that were shown to me about this work were that I seem to cover a too great a spread of dates, talking from 8th Century prophets and 10th Century Epics. I guess that I felt the final material of Genesis has bit written in the 8th century and bits from the 10th or even earlier! Some of it is, based on my examination of the evidence and other literary material, almost certainly plagiarised from other cultural stories and myths dating from before the 10th Century BC. However, I also have no doubt that it was edited again in the 8th Century and possibly again since too. However, my word count and lack of articulation meant that I did not "cook" these ideas sufficiently in the essay. Therefore my dates come across as confusing and too widely spread; and my idea come across as a little too raw.

The exploration of sources has proven of interest in this exegetical essay. I believe the potential for the pericope having more than one source, even though now placed together in a unified way, is high. The text comes from an Old Epic Tradition; a foundational myth with a narrative expression. The covenant story described here is arguably the most influential Hebrew text upon the New Testament Christian writers, particularly of the Pauline school.

This pericope is the story of the covenant between Abram and Yahweh concerning the descendants of Abram and the land promised to them. This essay shall refer to Abraham as Abram; as does the text of Genesis 15. However, most scholars and commentaries I cited referred to the patriarch as Abraham.

This story comes after Abram’s victory and rescue of his nephew Lot. Abram donated of a tithe of the spoils to Melchizedek (king and priest of “El Elyon”). The remaining goods were given to the king of Sodom. The name “El Elyon” (translated here as “God Most High” ) was arguably as likely to be the name of a Canaanite god as it was to be another name for Yahweh.

The story comes before the ‘birth of Ishmael’ narrative. Immediately after the Ishmael narrative is another story of the covenant between Yahweh and Abram in Genesis 17. It is my belief, as represented by Collins , Boorer and Houk that Genesis 17 is the Priestly-source (P) of the same covenant story in Genesis 15, which is the Yahwistic-source (J).

It is impossible to date these events, Anderson ventures a date c2000 BCE. Anderson proposes an indicative the start of the oral traditions of the Israelite Patriarchs as c1200-1000 BCE.

I particularly want to explore the sources for the text. This essay presumes the Newer Documentary Hypothesis (Graf-Wellhausen). In this pericope, the divine name used is “Yahweh,” which is not used by P before Exodus 6. The use of an act of some sacrifice or animal rite, outside the ‘one place’ and the intimate conversation between Yahweh and Abram both point to J. The Elohim-source (E) is highly difficult to identify in any text, and there is no mention of “Elohim” in Genesis 15. However, as stated, I believe that there is evidence for E in the text. Abram had travelled to this location from his home in Haran. Therefore, there may have been oral Abrahamic traditions from the far-north. In the story of Abram’s rescue of Lot, Abram pursued ‘the four kings’ as far as Dan. Dan, as well as being part of the Northern Kingdom (where E was composed ), would not have been known by that name until the time of the Judges.

There are two narratives or ‘scenes’ in Genesis 15, which appear to replay the same story of promise. It appears to me that there are two narratives with similar outlines and structure. Wenham highlights Gen 15:1-6 as one scene, with Gen 15:7-21 a second scene of the same promise. Westermann describes the same break-up of verses as promises, “converted into narratives.”

Collins suggests the possibility of E cannot be discounted. I am inclined to agree that E begins here in Genesis 15. Speiser asserts that “the whole is clearly not of a [one] piece, though now intricately blended.” Speiser says while the pericope “shows no trace of P-source; it exhibits… …marked departures from the usual manner of J.”

The genre of the text is a narrative of a foundational myth. That foundational myth is the covenant between Yahweh and Abram. Westermann suggests the material is simply “dressed as narratives” by a redactor who has shaped a promise into a narrative. Genesis 15 also contains elements of Prophecy, Prophetic Action and Report, Lament, Legend and Foundational Myth.

The structure outlined by Wenham suggests a story repeated in “two scenes:”

“Yahweh’s word: v1 Promise of reward v7 Promise of land

Abram’s word: vv2-3 Complaint about childlessness v8 Guarantee sought

Yahweh’s reaction: v 4 Promise of heir v9 Oath rite commanded

Public act: v5 Taken into open vv16-17 Oath rite completed

Yahweh’s word: v5 Promise of many descendants vv13-16 Promise of land

Conclusion: v6 Abram’s faith vv18-21 Yahweh’s covenant”

In my opinion, the ‘promise’ aspects and ‘oath rite’ command and completion have elements of prophecy, prophetic action and prophetic action report.

A Biblical parallel is the covenant with Abram according to P-source in Genesis 17. This tells the same story of a covenant. However, in keeping with usual P-material, Genesis 17 lacks sacrifice, personal appearances by Yahweh, vision elements and Abram being given prophet status. It substitutes circumcision for the animal rite.

Explaining: Genesis 15:1-21

1. After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision, “Do not be afraid, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.”

“After these things:” The writer intentionally places this pericope in this order of events, even though the phrase indicates elapsed time since the previous events. The reference to ‘shield’ is connected to the victory in the previous chapter. Wenham, citing Mesopotamian and Egyptian parallels, suggests the shield metaphor presents Abram is a military warrior. The word of Yahweh comes to Abram “in a vision.” Visions were one of the means of divine communication to humans. Janzen suggests visions have a distinctive difference of being outside normal time boundaries: a vision can occur during the day, revealing events occurring at night. This could explain some of the time-shifts in this pericope. The use of “the word of the LORD came to Abram” is consistent with typical prophetic revelation and presents Abram as among the prophets.

2. But Abram said, “O Lord GOD, what will you give me, for I continue to be childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?”

Westermann describes this statement as “the lament of the childless one” and says Ugaritic texts also refer to childlessness as being an affliction. Abram’s childless situation stands in contrast to the general ancient view that “divine blessing leads to being fruitful and multiplying”.

There is evidence of a Nuzi practice of the “slave-heir”. The adoption of a slave as heir was possible, although “would most likely be a course of last resort.” Most poignantly, the childless one would be without a future. A slave may meet the needs of burial and inheritance, but Abram’s lament is the unfulfilled promise of an heir. Parallels of childless people promised offspring exist in Ugarit stories of Aqhat and Kirta. However, Abram is promised more than children, but also land.

3. And Abram said, “You have given me no offspring, and so a slave born in my house is to be my heir.”

The redactor’s work provides a nearly seamless report of this intimate conversation of Abram’s lament. However, the tautology presented in v3 suggests the possibility of two sources being available. No new information is provided by this verse; only a restatement of the same lament. In blending the two sources, the redactor didn’t remove the restatement, perhaps intentionally “to preserve both of them.”

4. But the word of the LORD came to him, “This man shall not be your heir; no one but your very own issue shall be your heir.”

This statement confirmed that Abram will have a son, not just an heir. The words “...your very own issue” clearly describes a son: literally “what comes from your body.” While this statement repeats the promise, there is still no change in the situation. Abram & Sarai remain without ‘issue.’

5. He brought him outside said, “Look towards heaven and count the stars, if you are able to count them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your descendants be.”

The ‘sign’ of a glance towards heaven does not change the situation. Stars, no matter how many, are not a promise of a son.

Stars were objects of worship in Canaanite religion, so the significance of this direction is often understated in reference to its cultural cultic praxis. Most read it simply as a numerical promise of countless offspring, but its connection to cultural worship ‘of the stars’ may indicate that Abram had developed fears that his childlessness was determined by cosmic divine powers, against which his family deity Yahweh was ineffectual.

6. And he believed the LORD and the LORD reckoned it to him as righteousness.

This verse seems to end a complete narrative. It has been suggested that no other Hebrew text has influenced the ‘New Testament’ writers as much as this pericope and this verse in particular. Considerable reference is made in Pauline literature to Abraham and faith. Brueggemann argues that Paul’s theology of justification by faith is based upon this account of the covenant between Yahweh and Abram. Other commentators suggest too simple an examination of the text leads to this single option.

Westermann, quoting Lohfink, cites a Babylonian prayer parallel: “In my beseeching, in the lifting up of my hands, in all that I do... let there be righteousness.” This may be evidence of greater reference to and influence of surrounding cultures.

7. Then he said to him, “I am the LORD who brought you from Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess.”

Janzen says Yahweh now moves from the promise of a son to the promise of land. Westermann and Wenham suggest the parallel story or scene begins here. My assessment of the structure follows the second hypothesis.

Collins raises the point that the name “Ur of the Chaldeans” could be no older than the exile (in the 6th Century BCE). “So the reference… …must be a secondary addition” or further evidence for E. The Chaldeans were known by the 8th Century BCE, when E is thought to have been composed, but not while J was composed, most probably a century before.

8. But he said, “O Lord GOD, how am I to know that I shall possess it?”

Westermann says Abram is asking for a sign to confirm his belief. Wenham points to the parallel in v2. If there are two sources, then this verse could plausibly be part of the second source.

9. He said to him, “Bring me a heifer three years old, a female goat three years old, a ram three years old, a turtledove, and a young pigeon.”

Abram is now asked to do this symbolic act. If Abram is indeed numbered among the prophets, as cited earlier, then this could be interpreted as more than a selection of animals for sacrifice: these instructions could be considered a prophetic action.

10. He brought him all these things and cut them in two, laying each half over against the other; but he did not cut the birds in two.

Wenham describes this action as “reminiscent of a sacrifice.” Wenham, quotes Hasel as identifying this act with parallel treaty ratification ceremonies from Mari and Alalakh. Speiser also mentions similar Ammorite and Mari traditions in animal rites for entering into a compact. The potential for this animal rite to have origins in other religion’s praxis exists.

11. And when the birds of prey came down on the carcasses, Abram drove them away.

Most scholars perceive the birds of prey as an evil omen. Wenham says they are unclean and are representative of foreign nations, particularly Egypt. The subsequent prophecy, no doubt referring to Egypt, could enhance this assessment. Abram saw the rite as significant enough to drive away the birds of prey. This enhances the position that the act is a sacrifice, at least in Abram’s mind.

12. As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram, and a deep and terrifying darkness descended upon him.

We see the vision aspects of the story being emphasised here. It is possible to intermingle day and night when describing a ‘vision.’ Abram had just been taken to look towards heaven and count the stars; now the sun is only setting. A deep and terrifying darkness (presumably worse than normal darkness) comes upon Abram.

13. Then the LORD said to Abram, “Know this for certain, that your offspring shall be aliens in a land that is not theirs, and shall be slaves there, and they shall be oppressed for four hundred years;

This contains the long-hoped promise of an heir. However, it also contains a prophecy with a negative forecast. Scholars equate this to the oppression of Israel in Egypt for 400 years.

14. but I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterwards they shall come out with great possessions.

This is a reference to the Exodus; which shows that Exodus traditions were known by the time of writing.

15. As for yourself, you shall go to your ancestors in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age.

Abram is told he shall die in peace. The emphasis is that he will be fulfilled and secure; Speiser says, “in other words… in peace of mind, untroubled.” The second clause in the verse reinforces this ideal.

16. And they shall come back here in the fourth generation; for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.”

This verse seems out of context here and would be better mentioned with either v13 or v14. A ‘generation’ was possibly defined as “the age of a man when his first son was born – in Abram’s case, 100 years. Therefore, a generation in this pericope could be considered 100 years.” There is probably a connection between the 400 years and the fourth generation. The placement of this verse and the syntax of 400 years and fourth generation may indicate a redactor drawing from dual sources.

The divine pronouncement of promise is completed here. The return of Abram’s descendants “signals trouble for the Amorites,” who Wenham states are all the inhabitants of Canaan. Speiser attributes this collective term for the pre-Israelite population of Canaan to E.

17. When the sun had gone down and it was dark, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces.

Presumably, Abram is now awake from the deep and dark darkness of v12. It is generally agreed that these symbols represent God. However, Speiser says both these items “are recorded in Akkadian [parallel] texts as pertaining to magic.” Many commentators interpret Yahweh passing between the pieces as being “self-imprecation”: “to cut a covenant.” Wenham quotes Hasel as querying if Israel could conceive of Yahweh speaking in such terms. I suggest, only in J could Yahweh perform such an act of humility and promise to a mere human, even towards the Patriarch Abram.

18. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates,

This is a far greater area than Israel ever covered. The closest it could have come to these geographical boundaries could have been for a brief period under King Solomon when the unified kingdom was at its highest point. However, even that lacks strong evidence.

19. the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites,

20. the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Raphaim,

21. the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.

Wenham says this is the longest listing of pre-Israelite inhabitants of Canaan that can be found in the Hebrew Bible. Westermann, quoting Dillmann, suggests this is the most comprehensive or complete listing.

The text comes to us, through probably two sources (J and E), from an Old Epic Tradition. It is a foundational myth, expressed within a narrative. A very typical J expression of Yahweh describes a personal God sealing a promise with a sacrifice and vision. Genesis 15 also contains elements of Prophecy, Prophetic Action and Report, Lament, and Legend. The covenant story described here is arguable the most influential Hebrew text upon the New Testament Christian writers, particularly of the Pauline school. The aspects of source, Old Epic Tradition and the impact upon Christian writers have proven the most enriching aspects of the process for me.

Bibliography and Cited Works
Bibles cited:
New Revised Standard Version
New International Version
The Jerusalem Bible
Contemporary English Version
King James Version
New King James Version
The Amplified Bible

New International Version Study Bible, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985

Bernhard W Anderson, The Living World of the Old Testament, Essex: Longman Group, 1988

J Barton, “Redaction Criticism (OT),” Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol 5, Murdoch: ECMS

Suzanne Boorer, “A Comparison of J and P”, Murdoch: ECMS

Walter Breuggemann, Genesis, Murdoch: ECMS

John Bright, A History of Israel, London: SCM Press, 1980

John J Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004

F L Cross and E A Livingstone, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, New York: Oxford University Press, 2005

Cornelius Houk, “Statistical Analysis of Genesis Sources”, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 2002 27: 75, 2002

Gerald J Janzen, Abraham and All the Families of the Earth: a commentary on the book of Genesis 12-50, Murdoch: ECMS

Ephraim A Speiser, Genesis, Murdoch: ECMS

G M Tucker, “Form Criticism in the OT,” in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Vol 5, Murdoch: ECMS

John H Walton, Victor H Matthews and Mark W Chavalas, Bible Background Commentary (Old Testament), Downers Grove IL: Inter Varsity Press, 2000

Gordon J Wenham, Genesis 1-15, Murdoch: ECMS

Gordon J Wenham, “Symbolism of the Animal Rite in Genesis 15”, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 1982 7: 134, 1982

Claus Westermann, Genesis 12-36: a Commentary, (translated by John Scullion), London: SPCK, 1986

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Reflection on Hebrew Literature

2011-09-30T21:01:00.001+08:00

This is a reflection exercise I was required to write for my studies on the Life and Literature of Ancient Israel. I have found this unit to be both interesting and enlightening. Looking over the journal entries during this semester, some thoughts have been highlighted for each area of study. There are three areas over-all that will now enlighten my reading of the Hebrew Bible.

• The importance of a ‘careful reading’ of the text cannot be overstated.
• Understanding that the material is an explanation or foundation myth is crucial.
• The work of redaction in the Hebrew Bible is remarkably outstanding and intelligent; it made me embrace the sheer brilliance of the redactor’s work.

The unit placed the Hebrew Bible in an historical and geographical setting. This reminded me that the texts do not exist in a vacuum but within a cultural setting and among other Ancient Near Eastern cultures.

We learned that the ‘Creation story’ in Genesis was, in fact, two different stories. It is plausible that Genesis utilised earlier sources and stories from Mesopotamia, including Enuma elish. We learned that the account of the flood was closely aligned to Mesopotamian myths such as Atrahasis and the Epic of Gilgamesh. In short, that this biblical material was similar to other Ancient Near Eastern mythology.

In discussing a date for the Exodus, we nearly settled on a 13th Century event. Then after considering the logistics, we almost abandoned the possibility of an Exodus at all. If one and a half million Israelite slaves were in Egypt, they should have been able to organise a rebellion and overthrow Pharaoh. If they didn’t organise a rebellion, but ran away in an Exodus, then one would assume that someone in Egypt would have written even a sentence about it, no matter how embarrassing such an event would have been. While there may be evidence of a few isolated escapes, the scale of the Exodus in the text is beyond reason.

The language, references and historiography of Deuteronomy place it as constructed, most likely, in the late 6th Century BCE. It was certainly not written or spoken by Moses.

In exploring the Israelite monarchy, we learned that David was probably a rebel usurper who took advantage of an unstable king Saul to overthrow his leadership and supplant himself as ruler. We discovered the books of Kings and Chronicles were rewritings of political-history with different theological perspectives, therefore creating contradictions.

In reviewing prophetic literature, we discovered it is complicated, probably unreliable and highly edited for political and theological reasons. In particular, much purports to be material from 8th Century prophets, but has information relevant and applicable only after the 6th Century.

While many of the beliefs of my upbringing were challenged, I found the Unit promoted the broadening of one’s mind to include greater understanding of history, theology and scholarly exploration. If one’s Christian faith ought to be built on Scripture, Reason and Tradition; then this unit explored all these areas in relation to the Old Testament.

This unit provided three key highlights for me: the importance of ‘carefully reading’ the texts, understanding the material in the light of foundation myths and surrounding cultures, and the brilliance of construction and redaction in many of the Hebrew Bible texts.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: I want acceptance

2011-09-27T21:39:00.000+08:00

“Resistance to society” (as some activities of young people are perceived) – is often and desperate desire to be accepted by society. Graffiti artists want their work acknowledged as bone-fide art. Students’ attacks on teachers are to get attention in classrooms, because they want education.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Wisdom Literature

2011-09-23T21:41:00.004+08:00

Texts – Proverbs 7-8; 22:17-24:22
Job 3; 7-9; 11-12; 29-31
Ecclesiastes 1:1-2, 3-11; 2:12-26; 3:1-15; 4:1-3; 5:18-6:6; 9:1-16
The Instruction of Amenemope

Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom
Crenshaw, A whirlpool of Torment
von Rad, Wisdom is Israel

As a young man in Christian Para-church ministry, I was encouraged to read a chapter of Proverbs every day. “There are 31 days in many months and 31 chapters in Proverbs… this is not a coincidence,” I was told. Of course, upon reflection now, I suspect it is entirely coincidental. I doubt anyone seriously intended that I should read this material, because it was this very act that started me down the path towards questioning theology and ultimately towards the liberal end of the theological spectrum. Perhaps there is little wisdom in Wisdom Literature. I suspect my poor reading skills in those days meant that I had to concentrate on the words and through that, various anomalies began to arise for me.

Beginning to ‘carefully read’ the texts has challenged me greatly. The chapter begins with an observer seeing and describing a woman. She is variously called a strange woman, a prostitute, an adulteress. As portrayed in Proverbs 7 she is a loud, wayward woman who is never at home and makes a love-nest, ready to draw in the unsuspecting young man to whom this instruction is directed. We are not told of the male’s identity. There is a certain anomaly in the suggestion that she is never at home, but she makes her home into, essentially, a brothel. She represents foolishness, adultery, and the abandonment of God. The negative qualities attributed to her are a form of social control upon women. The woman should be prudent, at home, faithful to her husband. Indeed, marriage is to be considered normative in society. So a relationship with foolishness leads to death and Sheol.

Compared with the woman wisdom in Proverbs 8, the wayward woman of Proverbs 7 is demonstrated as poles apart. However, the wisdom woman is introduced in a similar way to the adulteress. It is almost like an ‘observer’ is peeping out the window, watching the way of life go by. Wisdom calls in the streets. Is this calling loud? Wisdom gives instruction, prudence, justice, discretion and brings gifts, knowledge, favour from the Lord, good fortune, treasures and wealth. She represents the good wife. The woman in Proverbs 8 symbolises wisdom and favour.

Disturbingly, the language used to describe both these women is the language of sensuality. Lips, mouth, luxurious items are common to both descriptions. Crenshaw makes the point that wisdom literature tends to frequently discuss sexuality, saying, “The wise never tired of discussing the dangers of sexual license.” This focus on sensuality (the senses) as well as sexuality (license) creates a bias against women. The women in both these texts seem to be directing their attentions to a particular young man. Is he a prince, a public figure, or a representation of all young men? The answer would identify the social circles within which wisdom literature functioned. However, the material didn’t specifically answer the question for me. Perhaps all these groups are the focus of wisdom literature.

Exploring the Proverbs 22-24 text, in comparison with the Teachings of Amenemope, reveals a common thread of literature in the ancient Near East. This is similar to how the creation and flood literature has common passages, stories and foundation myths with those of the same geographical location – and probably a common cultural heritage. The material shares a common philosophy and this could point to a common oral tradition. Some key points are as follows:

• Marriage is considered normative among people, and keeping within that marriage is wise behaviour
• Restraint and moderation are promoted
• Bribes are obviously proving useful in society, but are notable for their injustice
• Adultery has dangers – but particularly upon the social order and control
• Speaking out, saying the wrong thing, has perils
• Strong drink has hazards, again upon the social order

From the Crenshaw reading, we can identify that Israel didn’t have a monopoly on wisdom; or indeed on wisdom literature. These themes pervade Hebrew Scriptures as well as Egyptian and Mesopotamian literature. All these texts provide a model for the appropriate social behaviour. Every culture has the same criteria for “wisdom.”

Grace plays no role in this wisdom literature in any culture, including the Hebrew texts. Every act within the union of religion and ethics, as characterised within all ancient wisdom literature, has religious consequences. That is the position of the wisdom writers’ world view. We know from other ancient Hebrew texts that every act of killing meat for a meal became attached to a religious ceremony of some description. There was not separation of sacred from secular. So all wisdom literature is religious and provided for society’s instruction on right behaviour, perhaps even social control. Unlike other genres within Hebrew literature, virtue in wisdom literature is its own reward: there is no grace from Yahweh active within the writings.

Having considered the Proverbs, we now turn to the book of Job. This has been one of those books in the Bible that I have never enjoyed. It seems filled with lament and sorrow, with some ridiculous outcomes; while having very little hope or encouragement. The teaching or ‘wisdom’ aspect of the text doesn’t emerge for me. Crenshaw points out that Job’s list in defence of his own innocence, however long, doesn’t set him apart from any other kind-hearted person from the ancient Near East, no matter what cultural group of origin. As already outlined, Israel held no monopoly on wisdom and the Amenemope reading shows Egyptian wisdom provided the same themes and motifs for ‘the wise’. Crenshaw points out Mesopotamian counterparts to Amenemope present similar advice. Every culture essentially has the same criteria for “wisdom.”

“I am innocent,” cries Job, “but God cannot be stopped. There is no umpire between man and God.” Therefore, what he says about life contains little encouragement. We see the language of a man in distress. “Why was I born?” he asks. Woe is me... “Robbers are at peace,” he says. He senses that life is fleeting and he wishes he was dead. Job says, “I loathe my life.” He declares he is the laughing stock to his friends. His belief is that he has been righteous and generous, good and faithful; but this has been to no avail. He says at one point, that God was with him once; with the implication that this is no longer the case. He claims he did good works in the community, but now they make sport of him. His conclusion: that God controls all things, including wisdom, strength and understanding; offer little to console him.

Job’s friends have little to say above accusations. One says, “Why don’t you repent?” The conclusion is that God does not pervert justice; therefore Job must have done something evil in God’s sight. Job pleads his innocence, to the support of the other friend who suggest, either “Repent anyway,” or “No one is without guilt. Wisdom is many-sided.” The suggestion being that Job is either not innocent or not understanding wisdom. To my reading, they provide little in the way of friendship or support. Their advice, or that given in the book, seems to lack wisdom.

“Koheleth,” as von Rad names the author of Ecclesiastes, offers more positive themes than Job; at least to my mind and reading. “All is vanity... Creation declares it,” sound like a lament. However, when one reads further, there seems a positive philosophical outlook. While Job tells us, “Woe is me; I wish I was dead…” Koheleth declares, “All is vanity, so you might as well eat, drink and be merry.” There is a great deal of this repeated credo to ‘eat, drink and be merry’ in Ecclesiastes. Part of the message of Ecclesiastes seems to be: ‘do what God wants you to do, but not to the detriment of being happy and enjoying yourself.’ An alternative interpretation might be ‘to do what God wants you to do will bring happiness and enjoyment.’ Perhaps there is the suggestion that ‘you will be doing what God wants for you; when you are doing what you enjoy.’ There is also the suggestion that if you are able to ‘eat, drink and be merry,’ then this is itself a gift from God. If you have the means and capability to ‘eat, drink and be merry,’ then it’s due to God. In a community where not everyone could ‘eat, drink and be merry,’ this theme has weight. Ecclesiastes carries a hint of contradiction within the text itself; the litany of ‘Everything has its time’ (Eccl 3:1-8) as a prime example could be read as a series of contradictions and justifications. However, when contrasted with the wisdom of Proverbs (and even Job), Ecclesiastes’ proclamation or definition of wisdom is a complete opposite. It seems, according to von Rad, that ‘Koheleth’ became an observer of life, losing any meaningful participation in it. Yet it seems that this ‘observer status’ is reflected in the Proverbs readings in Chapters 7 and 8; and in the epic of Job and the interaction with his friends.

Literature exists from many places of the ancient Near East that shows similar themes to Hebrew wisdom literature. Israel did not have a monopoly on wisdom. Every culture displays similar, if not the same, criteria for wisdom. The similarities between literature of this genre, and the ‘sub-genres’ within it are quite marked across the ancient Near East, over many centuries. The three texts we explored displayed various aspects of wisdom; but often in quite different ways. The over-arching aspect of wisdom literature, as Crenshaw says, is in its world view. Wisdom literature attempts to explain the good and bad things that happen in life within the circles of the wise, or those being instructed in wise ways. It seems to do so from the position of an observer upon society, who notices behaviours that impact and lead to certain outcomes. The material is then packaged in a way to provide instruction and societal control. More emphasis is placed upon the individual lessons, rather than the consistency of the wisdom literature corpus.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Form Critical Issues in Psalm 30

2011-09-21T20:36:00.001+08:00

Text – Psalm 30

Whenever I think about Psalms, my mind goes to a phrase like: “speak to each other in Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs.” In Form Critical issues and language, I immediately think: poetry. The genre of the Psalms is largely poetic. However, I think Form Criticism has to drill more deeply into genre than just ‘poetry’. We see examples of laments within the Psalms. We also see examples of praise, song, thanksgiving, confession, and perhaps even bargaining with God.

One of the key points I learned about genre in the Unit, “Thinking Theology” was that a genre can only provide what that genre is able to provide. That is, a poem cannot truly give detailed factual information. By virtue of its genre, it needs to be emotive, paint a picture, and move the reader or hearer. Likewise, a text book isn’t meant to provide emotive material. A newspaper report isn’t meant to provide editorial comment, although an editorial piece can be given greater latitude. A cartoon isn’t able to provide hard statistical facts and details, although some might be able to weave it into their work. However, cartoons can use humour (even in commenting on political issues).

The genre (and the ‘sub-genre’ in the case of Psalms) is meant to provide us with information for the Setting in life (Sitz im Leben) for the text in relation of the ancient Israelite community. However, we need to draw on other materials and information in many cases: references to other scriptures or texts that place the Psalm in some context. For example, many of the Psalms attributed to David have some setting in events in his life.

Psalm 30 does give us some limited information in this area. Kraus references Psalm 30 as having a role in the Israelite community from 165 BCE through until the Common Era. He cites 1 Maccabees 4:52, 2 Maccabees 10:5 and John 10:22 as examples. Craigie references the Talmud as using Psalm 30 in celebrating Hanukkah and the Mishnah as using Psalm 30 at harvest time. However, Craigie says the text itself doesn’t give any clues as to the Sitz im Leben. I many ways, I find that to be the case. Without the knowledge from the commentaries that the Israelite community continued to use the Psalm in other community events, I would not have drawn such conclusions from the text of the Psalm alone. However, these points make a good argument that the form of Psalm 30 was an individual Thanksgiving Psalm, which became a Communal Thanksgiving Psalm for use in liturgical worship.

On initial reading, Psalm 30 seems to be an individual’s thanksgiving for personal healing. The personal praise and thanksgiving elements being evident in the text as read in the first instance. Someone was sick; they called out to Yahweh and were restored to health. Their healing is attributed to Yahweh and they give thanks. The Psalmist encourages all ‘the faithful ones’ to join in with the praise, invoking that Yahweh is brief in anger and lifelong in grace and favour.

Psalm 30 seems to hold a uniform mood throughout the whole Psalm. Many other Psalms do not maintain this consistency. This also gives the Psalm appeal for community worship. There is no need to exclude or edit the material for any Sitz im Leben for the Israelite community.

The structure or outline of Psalm 30 is described (by Kraus) as follows:
• Introduction and praise to Yahweh who has performed some act of rescue from sickness and near death. (1-3)
• A call to all pious people to join in with the praise (4-5)
• A description of the healing, with concluding praise (6-12)

Craigie provides a more detailed outline:
• Introduction (1)
• Narration or summary of sickness and healing (2-4)
• Call to others to praise (4-5)
• Reference to an earlier crisis (6-8)
• Recalling of a former lament (9-10)
• Description of deliverance (11)
• Final praise (12)

Both of these structure outlines follow similar, but not exact, lines; which demonstrates that a simple reading of this material is not adequate in rigorous study of the text. In combining the outlines, one gets a very detailed structure which both commentaries describe as a classic example of a Thanksgiving Psalm:

• Introduction (1) (or at least the start of verse 1).
• Narration
o The problem or lament (1)
o The plea to Yahweh (2)
o Yahweh’s response or action (3)
• Call to others to join with the Psalmist in praise and reason for doing so (4-5)
• Narration recalling a previous crisis
o The problem or lament (6-7)
o The plea to Yahweh (8-10)
o Yahweh’s response or action (11)
• Conclusion – Praise (12)

This closer reading leads one to ask some questions about the text and the situation of the Psalmist here. Verse 1 says Yahweh has not let the “enemies rejoice over me.” Who are these enemies and why would they rejoice? Craigie suggests that the enemy may be death itself, arguably ‘the last enemy’ and one who was a very real threat according to the text of Psalm 30. However, it may be more basic than that. As I understand it, an overarching theology in the ancient Israelite community was that good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people. This Psalm addresses additional options to this simple perspective on the Sitz im Leben.

Some other key sub-themes that arise in the text suggest that the Psalmist in this episode is truly at the depths of their life position. The person is close to death, in a physical sense. That is, they have a physical illness such as a mortal disease or condition. The Psalmist weeps in the face of death. The praise is for more than just an assurance that healing will come but for actual healing. The Psalmist is “restored to life” (not necessarily as a resurrection) and brought back from ‘close to death’ – to full health.

How then, did this Psalm grow into use for communal worship? It is probably due to the additional themes of Yahweh’s anger and favour. The Psalmist declares that anger is the divine response to sin. While the Psalmist doesn’t seem to admit sin in the first lament, the second lament describes a ‘sin’ of self reliance or confidence in self; rather than Yahweh. Given that such self reliance would lead to Yahweh’s anger: and Yahweh’s anger at one would lead to their death, it might be implied that the cause of the illness in the first lament is the ‘sin’ described in the second lament.

Yahweh’s favour was always considered the divine response to goodness. Clearly, in this Psalm, the Psalmist is admitting to not always being ‘good’. However, the Psalmist does admit to repentance and contrition. So the community can take such motifs into their worship as an example of how to act when Yahweh’s anger befalls them. It does indeed provide hope and instruction within any Sitz im Leben for the Israelite community.

Craigie suggests that the self reliance is the fundamental sin. Therefore, the Psalmist’s thanksgiving is twofold: for the healing from the mortal illness and for the forgiveness of sin. Kraus suggests the Psalm states the purpose of life is to praise Yahweh (v9 and v12); and that the philosophy of life is that the one who is rescued must not remain silent (v12). I can see all these themes, which touch on the Sitz im Leben, would make the Psalm appealing for community worship.

Both the key commentaries draw different conclusions about the Psalm’s settings in life and culture. The theme of Yahweh’s anger not being for long; but Yahweh’s grace being forever is important to the Israelite’s Sitz im Leben at many stages of history. The theme of Yahweh’s favour towards the good and towards the contrite and repentant also provides a central motif in the Israelite experience. The call to all faithful people to join in with the praise and the outlining of reasons why would provide an excellent logic and reasoning for this essentially Individual Thanksgiving Psalm to become part of the communal experience of the Israelite community. The information that Psalm 30 continued to be used in Israelite liturgy and communal events provides a good argument that it began as an Individual Thanksgiving Psalm; and grew into a Communal Thanksgiving Psalm. As poetic in form, it meets the criteria that it can appeal to the emotions, paint a picture, and ‘move the heart’ of the hearer. Within Psalm 30 we see lament, confession, thanksgiving, praise and even a sort of bargaining with Yahweh (If I die, I won’t be able to worship you anymore). It is not difficult to see how it describes a common Sitz im Leben and therefore, how it came to be a part of Israelite communal worship.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: imposed powerlessness

2011-09-19T20:53:00.000+08:00

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Succession planning & Wills

2011-09-18T19:49:00.001+08:00

It’s remarkable how many people do not have a Will! Recent research shows that only 53% of Western Australians have a Will. Yet succession planning is vitally important for anyone with a business or major assets. A family home or farm can be difficult to distribute when there is no Will.

Peter Hotchkin, a Bequest Development expert in Western Australia says, “A Will is a very important document. It needs to be kept safe, it needs to be well thought out and you have keep it up-to-date. Around 10% of people actually know that their Will is out-of-date.”

Mr Hotchkin said, “My great-grandfather didn’t have a Will. He just never got around to it… When he died, the farm was divided equally among my grandfather’s family. The trouble was, only my grandfather was still working the land; the rest of the family were townies, some even living and working in the city!”

“The only way to express your wishes is to have a legal Will. Without a Will, an Estate is dealt with according to the letter of the law, without your succession plan to keep the family business going and without compassion, which probably isn’t how most of us want to be remembered.”

“For my family, that meant my grandfather had to buy-out his brothers’ shares of the farm they didn’t even want.” Mr Hotchkin said, “It’s very hard when someone doesn’t make a Will and the family have to sort through issues, while still trying to get over the death and loss.”

“Too often, I see a family faced with a huge mess when there is no Will,” Mr Hotchkin said. “That’s also when we see injustice.”

"My grandfather was always proud that the farm was never in debt... which meant that he had to sell off some land to make the payments to others - rather than the smooth succession of the family farm to him."

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: change...?

2011-09-16T21:39:00.000+08:00

Any cultural change – implemented by any one (young or old!) – is anti-establishment. But cultural process is dynamic. Change is always noticed… but young people are singled out by the media, etc rather than the change itself being the object. Again, placing the blame on a particular group, rather than focussing on the change.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Redaction Critical Issues in Jeremiah

2011-09-14T19:29:00.001+08:00

Texts – Jeremiah R W Klein “Saying Yes to Exile –and No!: Redactions to the Exile in the Book of Jeremiah”

The book of Jeremiah always struck me as a book of judgement and woe. There never seemed much hope for redemption. Where I studied, worked and worshipped, we always called Jeremiah “the weeping prophet” and the setting of the Exile was never far from the mind of the reader… the way I was taught to read it. However, most of this assessment was based on a less than ‘careful reading’ of the text. There still seems plenty of weeping and sorrow; but the question is now raised, how much of this is the redactor’s handiwork to explain how Israel came to be in this situation? Klein would assert that the Deuteronomists added material to the ‘original’ Jeremiah text, in order to explain how Israel could have fallen so far as to be carried off to exile in a foreign land.

The first thing that leaps out from the text, and clearly reveals redaction has occurred is the frequent switching from first to third person language. While this could also be use of ‘Prophetic Biography’ form in the text, it is so frequent as to become almost a distraction to the careful reader.

The book begins with a brief superscription… although I am never sure if there are two superscriptions because the first two verses (as we have them today) are a clear superscription. However, verse 3 gives the ‘sense’ of being an additional superscription. “It also came in the days of…” leaves me wondering if verse 3 was added after the obvious superscription of verses 1-2.

The vision and calling of Jeremiah takes place next in the text, which would seem appropriate as coming from a Jeremiah source. It appears early in the book and without ‘editorial’ beforehand. It provides a good example of a ‘Commissioning Report’ if form criticism. However, the text also seems to switch between a poetic formatting and that of prose. This switching in format also leads me to ponder if the redactor’s hand has been at work.

There seems to be insertions throughout the book. These are probably best understood as ‘interpretive insertions’ but there seems to be repeated signposts in the text in the form of wording such as, “The word of the Lord came to me,…” or “Hear the word of the Lord…” or “Then the Lord said to me…” These are so numerous, it would be impossible to list them in a brief weekly paper such as this. However, the use of these words or phrases, often associated by redaction critics with redaction, would point to considerable additions to the text. Or perhaps to multiple fragments of writing that came together as the book.

The question or task is to discern what came first, or at least earliest? Was it the lamenting prophet of tears or the Deuteronomists of judgement and their attempts to explain the Sitz im Leben for the exiles that form the earliest text? Is the gentle (sins are about injustice), more positive (there was a gentle and loving plea from Yahweh to repent) and hopeful (future redemption) material of the book of Jeremiah, the actual message of Jeremiah; or is the motif of hope an attempt by redactors to lift the spirits of Israelites in exile – that Yahweh would not forget them but one day restore Jerusalem and the temple? Alternatively, is it the Deuteronomists explanation that the broken law is the cause of the exile, and Jeremiah’s message that Yahweh promises hope for a future?

I think Klein argues the ‘original’ Jeremiah (if we dare call it that) is the more positive (if we dare call it that). In that thesis, the references to sins and unlawfulness or inappropriate cultic praxis (certainly major themes for the Deuteronomists) are the obvious redaction. That would appear to me to be the most obvious conclusion. No simply because the Deuteronomists held sin, lawfulness and ‘correct’ cultic praxis as central, but also because in textual criticism, this thesis presents the earlier material of Jeremiah as being the sorter text and the more (theologically) difficult for the Deuteronomistic redactors.

To me, in spite of the conclusion that the ‘earlier Jeremiah’ was material from the book with considerable references to sin and error removed, the book retains much of the lamenting and accusing motifs I grew up with. The process of separating the material of the redactor from the original feels well beyond my capabilities. Even the potentially ‘more positive’ aspects of the text border on a misery I cannot grasp. Can the redaction be so extensive that the redactors have overtaken the original material and changed the message of the prophet entirely? The answer, of course, is that is entirely possible. We have already seen some commentators declare that the Deuteronomistic History has provided so much additional material, that the Deuteronomists could be considered authors, rather than redactors. In my reading of the text of Jeremiah, that option could be entirely realistic.

What expressions of judgement upon the people are found in the book of Jeremiah? The judgements that Israel (well, probably Judah and Jerusalem) can expect were invasion, destruction, exile and the end of the monarchy. All these things had taken place already by the time the Deuteronomists would have completed their redactions. ‘Early Jeremiah’ suggests that the northern and southern kingdoms will be reunited under a new king. However, that is considered highly unlikely by the time the Deuteronomists work begins and they include different outcomes within the Jeremiah text. ‘Early Jeremiah’ also suggests that the people taken into exile get used to the idea that it will be a while, so they might as well plant and marry and work hard for the best interests of their ‘new country’ – because now their prosperity is bound up in the prosperity of Babylon. Surely the Deuteronomists couldn’t concede that Israel’s prosperity was bound up with anyone but within and from Yahweh by the obedience to the monotheistic deity.

What are the reasons for the judgement? What are the sins that have led to this situation? To answer this, I will attempt to divide what I see as possible ‘early Jeremiah’ from possible redaction. The people had lost their love of Yahweh as a husband. They had rejected the service of Yahweh. The people had (in a symbolic term) allowed the vine Yahweh had planted for them to become a wild vine. Jeremiah spoke of the injustice within Israelite society: between each other, towards the alien, the orphan, and the widow. The Israelites had trusted in deceptive words, not repented or answered Yahweh when they had been called. They had trusted in the Temple and Jerusalem (according to the ‘Temple Sermon’). Therefore, Yahweh would not accept their sacrifices. These last two are very telling as ‘early Jeremiah’. For the Deuteronomists, it would never be a sin to trust in the temple or in sacrifices.

The list of offences I suspect were added by the Deuteronomists include forsaking or changing gods (‘who are no gods at all’). This is establishing a monotheistic stream into Israel. The people had found fault in Yahweh, again reflected in other Deuteronomistic work, such as the Ten Commandments. The people had mishandled the law; the law being a major motif of Deuteronomistic History. The people had defiled the land and made offerings to other gods. Again this development of monotheistic theology is introduced. In the middle of an oracle of Jeremiah, there is a reference (immediately after comments about injustice) that the people “steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, and make offering to Baal.” The list being similar to other Deuteronomistic writings, I suspect this is interpolation to the social justice issues that were part of ‘early Jeremiah’s’ criticisms.

What expressions of hope are found in the book of Jeremiah? I think only 31:31 has sufficient ‘hope’ for my reading. The other messages of hope don’t provide me with much in the way of uplifting bedtime reading. Of course, I’m reading through the lens of my own experience; however, if I imagine myself as an exile in Babylon, I can’t find any additional hope in the text. In particular, the selections we were recommended to examine closely.

What does the prophetic office involve as portrayed in Jeremiah? The role of the prophetic office in Jeremiah seems to be to proclaim or speak the plea of Yahweh for the people to repent and do right. The Deuteronomists include obey the law, which clearly doesn’t happen and causes the downfall of Jerusalem. Jeremiah warns the people of the consequences of their sins – including symbolic action and symbolic action reports. Particularly interesting is the action of wearing the yoke – which is broken (in another symbolic action) by another prophet (Hananiah). Jeremiah returns later in a symbolic action report to take on a yoke of iron and declare that Hananiah is a false prophet who will die within the year. The Deuteronomists possibly speed up the process as it ends up being only a couple of months. However, we know from the book of Deuteronomy that the false prophet is to be stoned to death, which means Hananiah’s rapid death is in keeping with their theology.

Perhaps finally, Jeremiah’s role as prophet included offering some hope for the future after all. While he did announce a unified kingdom (which we know from history did not occur), he gave reassurance that Yahweh held a time-limited anger towards Israel. Jeremiah’s role included reassurance that there would be a new covenant with Judah and that covenant would be within the hearts of the people. In that way, it is interesting in that it isn’t contingent on obedience to the law or cultic praxis, but rather welling up from within the people and a renewal of their love as a bride towards Yahweh, their husband.

The book of Jeremiah always struck me as a book of judgement and woe. There never seemed much hope for redemption. Jeremiah was commonly called “the weeping prophet”. The setting of the Exile was never far from mind. Careful reading reveals that there still plenty of weeping and sorrow; but the question is now raised; how much of this is the redactor’s handiwork to explain how Israel came to be in this situation? Klein would assert that the Deuteronomists added material to the ‘original’ Jeremiah text, in order to explain how Israel could have fallen so far as to be carried off to exile in a foreign land. On the balance of probabilities, and bearing in mind textual criticism in addition to redaction criticism, it would seem a sensible conclusion. Under Klein’s theory, the earliest work of the book of Jeremiah would have been shorter in length and contained material theologically harder to accept (for the Deuteronomists). This conclusion would make the ‘original’ words of Jeremiah a more positive assessment of the future and provide hope in a different way... perhaps even a way that was not conditional on cultic and legal adherence (as the Deuteronomists would have us believe).

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: perceptions of young people

2011-09-12T18:34:00.000+08:00

The truth is that individual young people adopting one particular sub cultural lifestyle is quite rare! Mostly, young people move and change between groups and subcultures… but generally, most young people fall into what is seen as “acceptable” cultural forms of society.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Peter Hotchkin

Redaction Critical Issues in Hosea 1:1-2:1

2011-09-09T11:26:00.002+08:00

The prophet Hosea creates a myriad of problems for the modern Christian reader. Issues and principles held sacred are discarded in the interests of prophesy and prophetic symbolism. It would be far more comfortable to interpret this text as purely metaphor. This interpretation would avoid the unpleasant nature of the text. Yet Collins suggests it is a not-unrealistic picture from the time of ancient Israel that the needs and teaching of the corporate community were considered over the individual’s wellbeing. Modern scholarship would seem to argue, quite convincingly, that prophetic symbolism in other books of prophets demonstrates dramatic action was often taken to make a point. Collins makes a point that the prophets were essentially preachers, rather than writers. The likelihood that they wrote a single word of the prophesies that they articulated is significantly low. This fact alone makes it obvious that redaction occurred in the construction of the text in the form we know it now.
The ‘word of Yahweh’ continued to have significance for the community beyond the time and issues first addressed. This could be because so much of the material seems to have been written well after the events or placement in the Hebrew Bible; such as Deuteronomy. In this way, it was necessary to apply redaction to the material. In the examples of Kings and Chronicles, it was also necessary to apply redaction to the original material to place the predominant theological perspective of the time. In this respect, the body of work known as the Prophets is not dissimilar. The material was redacted, partly in order to place it within the social and religious situation of the time. The redactors clearly believed that the prophetic materials were not old relevant for their current situation, but also that some careful redaction could make the prophetic writings even more enduring in their application to the life of the nation.

In preparing for this week’s tutorial paper, I read the text carefully before referring to the commentaries. This careful reading, even with my limited knowledge and experience, made the redaction critical issues appeared quite obvious. As demonstrated in other tutorials, I drew two columns that might represent redacted material from the earlier text. Further reading then provided valuable information about these redaction issues. It would seem clear that the final form of the Hosea material as we know it now came through the pen of Judean redaction (or redactors).

Hosea was a northern kingdom prophet; but the redactors were Judean (that is the southern kingdom). They also wrote with some formulaic style, so new material was included as an introduction or ‘superscription’. Hosea 1:1 is a fine example of this superscription. In the light of 1:2 it would seem unnecessary; but more significantly, the order and information demonstrate that the redactor’s understanding of the northern kingdom is somewhat wanting. Hosea, as a northern prophet, could be reasonably assumed to have given the message to the northern kingdom. But the gaps and accuracy of the kings in the northern kingdom is where the problems occur in the superscription.

When the words and deeds of the prophets were collected and written down, they were redacted in order to demonstrate the significance of the speech for the new context… in the light of the total defeat and abolition of the northern kingdom, the Judean redactors were able to make some sense and relevance for their community in the Hosea material; that provided an explanation for the Judean position and a level of hope for their future.

Hosea 1:2 provides another introduction to the prophet’s material. Essentially the verse begins by saying, this is the start of the story. This is more likely, not only to be the earlier material from Hosea, but therefore the beginning of the prophesy for the northern kingdom. As mentioned earlier, in the third verse, Hosea is told to perform an act of prophetic symbolism: to take a ‘wife of whoredom’. Mays asserts that it is highly likely that this was an actual event that Hosea carried out. Many modern scholars would agree. The nature of Gomer’s behaviour is questioned and argued from different perspectives. The ‘sin’ of Israel involved ritualistics sexual acts. Wolff seems to argue that all Israelite wives would have been forced, even against their will, to participate in these sexual rites. The assumption being that Hosea could have taken any woman as a wife, and permitted he involvement in the errant worship of Baal. Mays suggests that it would have been necessary for Gomer to be known as a harlot and it was therefore likely she was a temple prostitute; perhaps even a high-profile one. If Gomer was just a promiscuous woman, the prophetic symbolism would lose impact. Davies seems to have some agreement, but favours a known promiscuous woman; somewhat toning down the image of Gomer’s behaviour.

Verse 3 provides as much information about Gomer’s heritage as is provided about Hosea. Simply a name and a fathers name. Mays says Gomer and her father’s names are ‘real names’ and not symbolic. Mays also suggests that the Judean redactor had no further knowledge of Hosea as he was a northern prophet. It is unlikely a great deal of redaction occurred from verse 3 until verse 5.

After the birth of Jezreel, this time a symbolic name meaning “God sows”, the narrative seems to take a symbolic nature. Yahweh will punish Jehu for the blood of Jezreel is more likely to refer to the destruction of what God sows than to the death of the child.

Mays implies that verse 5 is almost certainly a redaction, adding another interpretation of the name Jezreel and including an approval denunciation of Israel (the northern kingdom). Collins says that “Jezreel” was also the name of the summer palace of the kings.

The second child is a daughter. The text doesn’t say, “Gomer bore him a daughter,” (as it does with the introduction of the two sons) and some have suggested that Lo-ruhamah was fathered by another man in the midst of the sexual rites of Baal worship. Lo-ruhamah is given this symbolic name meaning “not pitied”, that Yahweh will not pity the house of Israel. Another interpretation could be “not loved” – which although tragic, might also contribute to the argument that the daughter was fathered by another man.

Verse 7 takes a new direction and is clearly a Judean redaction. Yahweh will have pity on Judah… so this can explain the total destruction of the northern kingdom, while a remnant remained of the southern kingdom. It also provides the Judean redactor to take another opportunity to denounce the northern kingdom. However, that Judah was taken into exile had to be explained: thus, while Yahweh would take pity on the house of Judah, Yahweh was not going to save them by bow, sword, war, horses or horsemen.

Next, Gomer bore Hosea a son, perhaps a subtle reference that Hosea was indeed the father of this child. Hosea is instructed to name the son Lo-ammi, another symbolic name meaning ‘not my people’. An additional explanation is given, which may be further redaction. This explanation refers to the Deuteronomical covenant: “You are my people; I am your God.” The prophet reverses this covenant… “You are not my people and I AM not yours.”

To my reading, verse 10 becomes a little less obvious. The whole verse could be Judean redaction. However, the first part of the verse names Israel only. Other material to this point has separated Israel and Judah, so perhaps v10a was part of the earlier material directed to the northern kingdom. It would seem the second part of the verse is Judean redaction, outlining a message of hope... but only for the house of Judah. Verse 11 continues what, to me, appears as Judean redaction. However, it too could have been originally a message of hope to a northern kingdom in a state of siege. It tells of a reunification of Judah and Israel, with one head, rising up from the land; finishing with the declaration, “For great shall be the day of Jezreel.” This is undoubtedly symbolic in meaning, rather than referring to the child. We know that this reunification didn’t happen and never would. According to Davies, there is no trace of this idea in the rest of Hosea’s prophesies, which may point to Judean redaction. However, there appears some argument in either direction for the place of this prophesy being from the earlier work or the redaction, at least to me.

Hosea 2:1 is undoubtedly Judean redaction. This verse presents a message of hope. This verse points to the future restoration of Judah. It is not addressed to Hosea’s children but rather to the people. Perhaps it is an encouragement and expression to support the community from within. That is, to remind each other, while in exile, that they are Yahweh’s people and that they are pitied or loved by Yahweh.

According to Davies, the prophet’s denunciation of the northern kingdom would have been well regarded by the Judean redactors, so it was undoubtedly part of the earlier Hosea material. In the narrative, metaphor meets reality in the actions of the prophet. The subsequent names of the children are pronouncements of judgement against Israel. That they were left in without great redaction could indicate that the Judean redactors saw the exile as part of the overall punishment for both northern and southern kingdoms. However, the redactors certainly enhance the station of Judah in the eventual outcome of the material. The modern reader can’t help but feel pity for the children in the narrative, with their names and associations. However, we learn that in the time of ancient Israel the needs and teaching of the corporate community were considered over the individual’s wellbeing. The prophets were essentially preachers, rather than writers. The likelihood that they wrote a single word of the prophesies that they articulated is significantly low. This fact alone makes it obvious that redaction occurred in the construction of the text in the form we know it now.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

"Raving Fans"

2011-09-08T20:48:00.002+08:00

Here's my summary of a great little book. I acknowledge the details below so you can track it down to get a copy!

Book: "Raving Fans! A revolutionary approach to customer service."
By Ken Blanchard and Sheldon Bowles. Harper Collins Business, 1993.

Satisfied customers mean nothing: today you have to create Raving Fans to be successful.

Service is so awful customers expect to be abused: Cold food, dirty toilets, late deliveries, rejected parts, lost orders – it’s all normal. This is okay if your customer service slogan is like everyone else’s: “No worse than the competition”. But imagine a customer so pleased that they became a Raving Fan? Now translate that to a donor who became a Raving Fan!

The first secret to creating Raving Fans: Decide what you want
You are the source: create a vision of perfection for your organisation, centred on the customer. You don’t have to be perfect, just decide and imagine perfection centred on the customer. This vision is what you work on within your organisation.

The second secret to creating Raving Fans: Discover what the customer wants
Discover the customer’s vision for interaction with your organisation and alter your vision if necessary. There are three things to learn: Unless you have your own vision first, how can you understand the customers’ vision? Secondly, when you find out what the customers really want, what their vision is, it will likely only focus on one or two areas (your own vision has to fill the gaps). Thirdly, you have to know when to ignore what the customer wants. Maybe they need to take their vision elsewhere to be fulfilled.

How do you find out the customers’ vision? Ask them! But you also have to find out who is your market, who your customers are…? To create Raving Fans, you need to include a vision for everyone who is touched by your product or service.

Discovering exactly what the customer wants can be difficult. Silence or people who say ‘fine’ are sending a strong message that they are not Raving Fans. So ask more questions to get further details. Sincere questions! Take the time to get a conversation going, customers will sense you’re serious and respond.

When you discover the customer’s vision, it will only come in small nuggets. These you fit into you vision or reject. Success is found only within the window you’ve defined in your vision, not in looking after every whim of the customer. The customer’s immediate vision may be narrow, but customers care about everything! Within an organisation, your people might have several customers, both internal and external. When your people look after customers, if you say thank you and reward them, they’ll do it again and again.

The market secret builds on the first secret (the source secret). He third, the experience secret, builds on the first two. Simple and powerful the third secret to creating Raving Fans is Deliver plus One. Deliver the vision, plus one percent! No exceptions contemplated or allowed. Consistency is critical as it creates credibility. Don’t offer too much (at least at the start). Customers become Raving Fans, only when they know they can count on you time and time again. To be consistent you have to have systems, deep in the soul of the organisation.

Meet first. Exceed second! Once you’re consistent, ongoing improvement is equally important. That is where the “plus one percent” comes in. Don’t try too much at once, but take steps. This has a second advantage in that it allows you to add the magic ingredient that leads to improvement, not just change. Don’t simply follow a plan blindly, but improving in one percent steps shows flexibility towards the customer.

The three secrets all fit together. Understand the importance of having your own vision to start with. See the necessity of then talking with customers. Know what talking with customers really means and how to listen, even to silences. Know when to implement what customers want and when to ignore those wants. Know how to take this vision and turn it into an action plan. Consistency alongside ongoing improvements plus the ability to alter course quickly are keys to creating Raving Fans. Promise more, only up to the point you can deliver consistently and then deliver more using the rule of one percent.

PS.
I was at a work conference recently, where a number of people in leadership of an organisation kept using the phrase that is the title of this book. I don't think everyone there was aware of the book so it reminded me how important it is to reference one's sources. I have quoted all sorts of things in my lifetime and often miss the citation. But University study is reminding me to reference everything.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Redaction Critical Issues in 2 Chronicles 33

2011-09-07T20:20:00.002+08:00

Text – 2 Chronicles 33:1-20 (with a parallel in 2 Kings 21)

One of the most convenient aspects of Chronicles as a book (or books) is that even the minor scholar or early theology student doesn’t have to look too far to find the source. Generally, we can be comfortable with the source as the book/s of the Kings. As we know, great slabs of text are quoted verbatim from Kings. However, the books of Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua and Samuel are also drawn upon by the Chronicler as source (and to assist in his or their redaction of the Kings material). The author/s also name other sources as a “History of the Kings of Israel and Judah” and a “Midrash of the Kings of Israel and Judah” and an “Annals of the Kings of Israel.” Cross and Livingstone suggest from the list of high priests, Chronicles would date from around the latter half of the 4th century BCE. While there are verbatim excerpts in Chronicles, there are some sections of obvious and deliberate redaction. If one couples this redaction, with the fact that Kings, as a source for Chronicles, had multiple sources too; the role of redaction becomes both interesting and complex.

There are a number of particularly interesting pericopes that demonstrate this redaction. One of these is the text for this tutorial. The reign of Manasseh presents some challenges to the Chronicler’s theology, and this provides an explanation for the redaction evident in the pericope. McKenzie points out the immediate difference in how Chronicles regards Manasseh: Kings clearly describes Manasseh as the worst king of Judah; Chronicles, through careful redaction, does not. Kings, most probably forming part of the Deuteronomistic writings, details the multiple ‘sins’ of Manasseh. Japhet makes the observation that the reign of Manasseh, as described in Kings, is formulaic and essentially portrays him as having violated every Deuteronomistic law. The account in Chronicles, Japhet suggests, draws upon the Kings source, but redaction is evident in an exceptionally elaborated introduction to his reign, an epitomised middle and a rephrased conclusion. That is that the Chronicler outlines and adds to Manasseh’s list of sins. However, the middle of the story restores Manasseh after his repentance and humbling himself before the Lord... the epitome of the personal responsibility and repentant behaviour expected from a king of Judah. This ‘middle’ is not really present in Kings. The Chronicler’s conclusion of the reign of Manasseh excludes the continued list, the threat and warnings and the supposed shedding of innocent blood that Kings describes. In essence, Chronicles gives us the sanitised Manasseh.

The most significant turn of events redacted by the Chronicler and a major point of difference is that Manasseh is taken away in chains (or more probably, by a chain through the nose) to exile in Babylon; which led him to humble himself before the Lord and repent of his sins. This is a complete re-writing of the source material that dramatically changes the outcome and shape of Manasseh’s reign.

The major problem for the Chronicler is that Manasseh has a long and fruitful reign, in spite of living a life of ‘sin’ (strongly outlined in Kings). That long-life conflicts with the Chronicler’s theology. Wellhausen proposed that the Chronicler had to deal with the peculiar figure of Manasseh demonstrating some of the outstanding aspects or signs of ‘blessing’ in the face of his obviously ‘sinful’ lifestyle. Put bluntly, they had to change the story or it was contradictory to their theology. The evidence of a Platonic aspect of good and evil producing blessing or punishment, respectively, pervades the Chronicler’s perspective.

Both Chronicles and Kings link the sins of Manasseh to “the nations” of Canaan. That is, the peoples Israel (or Yahweh acting for them) were meant to eradicate when they crossed the Jordan into the Promised Land. However, it is probable that Israel as a nation emerged from a Canaanite heritage; a history that served neither the Deuteronomist nor the Chronicler.

Another aspect of the Chronicler’s theology is of individual responsibility. This also presents a problem with Manasseh. The Exile, as a major historical event, occurred after the reign of Manasseh. It is therefore not possible to blame him for the Exile because of sin in his lifetime; at least not for the Chronicler. Kings, on the other hand, seems to outline a prophetic warning that too much evil has been done and that Manasseh is so bad that Judah and Jerusalem are put outside of possible redemption.

The Chronicler, in obvious redaction, writes in a ‘mini-exile’ into Manasseh’s life. This becomes an event that leads Manasseh to humble himself before the Lord and repent. Japhet and McKenzie both outline a possible, if indirect, Assyrian source to back-up the Chronicles account of this ‘mini-exile.’ Although it is more probable that Manasseh was a loyal Assyrian vassal and paid an official visit to his overlord. Even if the ‘mini-exile’ is based in factual events, it certainly supports the Chronicler’s theology and yet is omitted in the Kings account. Fact or fiction, the exile and repentance of Manasseh is a redaction to meet the Chronicler’s theological bias. He becomes a far more ‘savoury’ monarch due to his return to the ways of Yahweh. Chronicles then blames the continuance of the ‘high places’ upon the people, rather than Manasseh.

Why didn’t the Chronicler simply have changed the dates of Manasseh’s reign, to coincide with the Exile to Babylon? This would have been an easy option, but the Chronicler chose not to take this simple option. This made for an inconvenient truth within the life of Manasseh. The Chronicler maintained the dates and order of Kings; and constructed a whole new description of Manasseh’s reign, bringing in the theme of repentance; a far more complex (and obvious) redaction. However, this is not inconsistent with previous evidence that the writers of the Hebrew Bible were primarily interested in the theology of their works than the historiography.

Manasseh is reported to have led Judah into sins. Kings says he ‘misled Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem into more evil than the nations whom the Lord had destroyed before the people of Israel.’ Firstly, this gives the Chronicler material to connect Judah to their eventual exile due to their own sins; making them personally responsible for their own calamity and making that calamity a direct result of sin. This appears to me as a redactional attempt to apportion blame and support the Chronicler’s theology of sin, punishment and atonement. The Chronicler places this blame on Judah in the form of a prophesy and warning. In that way, there is no ‘cumulative sins of the generations’ that can be blamed for the eventual Exile (as is implied in the Kings source). Rather, the seers warned the people, Manasseh commanded them and the Lord welcomed them to return to the ways of Yahweh. Again, the theme of ‘the nations’ is repeated in the Chronicler’s redaction to draw guilt to the Israelites and to compare their fate to that of ‘the nations’ before them. However, the subsequent generations did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and the ‘prophesy’ was fulfilled.

The difference between a prophetic warning; thus fulfilled, and ‘the cumulative sins of generations’ may be subtle; but it is significant in the motives behind the Chronicler’s redaction of the Kings source. In spite of warnings in the time of Manasseh, the people and the subsequent kings continued to do evil in the eyes of the Lord and this is causative in the destruction of the temple, and their removal to exile.

Chronicles apportions some of the reforms of Josiah to Manasseh (after his repentance). Manasseh restores the altar in Jerusalem, offers sacrifices and commands Judah to serve the Lord. However, it is the people (not Manasseh) who continue to offer sacrifices at the high places. Although in this instance the people have turned back to Yahweh, offering sacrifices only to the Lord their God. In the late 4th century BCE (of the Chronicles writing), this redacted story of Manasseh provides a message of hope. There is the possibility of restoration – after repentance. It is not acceptable to blame previous generations or kings, but all Israelites must accept their situation is their own responsibility. However, Manasseh’s example of prayer, humility before Yahweh, and restoration to Jerusalem is held up by the Chronicler as the ideal model.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: fear vs reality & evidence

2011-09-05T19:32:00.000+08:00

Young people are blamed for society’s “fear of crime” without empirical evidence!!! The fear of crime has become more real than crime itself. The perception and thought of possible crime has overtaken actual crime. However, it has also become a ‘self-fulfilling prophesy’ for both adults and youth. Young people feel they are expected to behave a certain way because the media promote ‘this is what we see from youth.’

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

"Brothers & Sisters"

2011-09-02T15:51:00.003+08:00

“Brothers and Sisters: the order of birth in the family” by Karl König

Rudolf Steiner Publications Inc, New York. Floris books 1993 ISBN 0-903540-38-X

In this summary, I have mostly highlighted and reproduced comments and quotes from this outstanding book that are most pertinent to my own children (first a boy, then a sister). The book contains considerable information about other configurations and these ought to be addressed separately. I do not have the space to fully account for any number of constellations.

Although this 4th edition was published and reprinted in 1993, the original book was written in 1958. Much of the language lacks the gender non-specific style that we are accustomed to now. I have, against my preference, preserved the original quotes in this summary.

Introduction:
“The encounter between man and his whole environment – people and weather and demands and opportunities and destiny and everything which is not he himself – is basically determined by his rank in the order of birth.

The first-born attempts to conquer the world.
The second-born tries to live in harmony with the world.
The third-born is inclined to escape the direct meeting with the world.

The fourth, fifth and sixth child repeat the basic trends of a first, second and third-born, and so on.”

Concerning the one and only child:
“The family-constellation, however, shapes the social behaviour of man. It determines the way he reacts to other people.”

“Both the introvert as well as the extravert powers are needed in every human being because we are thinkers as much as we are doers.”

“With everything and with every person, we experience an immediate sensation that arises from the depths of our being. We feel it also with animals, flowers and plants, with stones and crystals. Sound, noise, colour and shadow, smell and taste – everything around us kindles an immediate emotional contact in us.

“The secret of every contact-situation is that the bond between the individual and the object is an emotional one. It is in the sphere of feeling that we meet the surrounding world and do so with either sympathy or antipathy. And what we often experience is not simple like or dislike. There are different shades of so-called ambivalent feelings; we may like and dislike the same object at the same time.

“Our sympathies are always concerned with extraversion and our antipathies are with introversion; extraversion is the direction of sympathy, introversion of antipathy.”

The first child:
The first child begins life as a one and only child. The second child comes as an invader or intruder. The first child is aware that they are no longer the ‘only darling’ as Helen Keller observed.

“It takes time before the first child is willing to accept his brother or sister. This depends on the difference in age, on the attitude of the parents, on the general conditions in the home and last but not least, on the temperament and personality of the child himself.”

“The two little rivals will easily find one another if they experience their parents’ determination not to give preference to one of them. Here, however, the father and especially the mother will have to be highly conscious of what they do and feel. To regard the firstborn as well as the second child with equal care and tenderness and to give to each equal parental guidance will make all the difference to the overcoming of the initial difficulties.”

“The first child is a defender; a defender of faith, a defender of tradition, a defender of the family. The first child preserves the past against the onrush of any new ideas and actions. He has to maintain what has been achieved.”

“The first boy with one sister develops qualities of serene behaviour. He may also become as stiff as an old school-master, because he has imagined himself from early days onward as the teacher of his female companion.”

“To complete the picture of this first child, we still have to consider another side of his background; the relation to father and mother.”

"In this respect the first child holds a unique position. He is mediator between his parents and the rest of his brothers and sisters. ...it will always be the first who bears the full impact of the interplay between parents and children. He is the one whose face is turned both ways: to the parents as representatives of the past, to his sisters and brothers as the guarantors of the future. He belongs to neither – because to his parents he is the child, to his sisters and brothers he is the substitute for the parents. His position is an ambiguous one. The parents are the captain of the ship of the family; the firstborn is the coxswain. He is part of the crew and yet he is not. The older he grows, the firmer must be his grasp on the wheel.”

"Firstborn children are the true and rightful inhabitants of this earth.”

The Second Child:
König refers to Alfred Adler as the founder of Individual Psychology and quotes from one of Adler’s close associates on the research of birth order. “An ‘eldest’, Alfred Adler discovered, was generally a dependable, conventional, authoritative, law-abiding child, standing by its parents in its protective and sometimes domineering attitude towards the younger children; but this is by no means invariably the pattern of the eldest – since the child may take what Adler has termed its ‘dethronement’ by a second child so much to heart that it becomes discouraged, loses all self-reliant powers, and refuses to accept responsibility; but an ‘eldest’ to whom his parents have given wise and loving explanation of his followers in the family, so that he feels he has an equal stake in their well-being, is unlikely to lose courage or fail to keep his leadership.”

“The second child rarely has the intention of catching up with its elder brother or sister; the second child is not a conqueror and by no means a defender. ...each child has a different task to fulfil according to its rank.”

“Disharmony comes about when a first child is given the task of a second one, or when a second child upon the death of an elder brother is forced to take his place. Here, often, lie the roots of psychotic and neurotic disorders in the sphere of social behaviour.”

König uses the illustration of Cain and Abel as first and second child. Cain carries the extension of the curse upon Adam, as Cain must till the ground. Abel has a different nature, friend and companion of the flock, living among the beasts and sharing their carefree life.

“Abel is a dreamer; he listens to the voice of his sentiments and feelings. He follows the course of his own thoughts and longs to be back in the realm whence he came. His interests do not lie with the earth and her needs and destiny. His yearning reaches out into the higher spheres of all existence.

“Cain is concerned with the transformation of the earth. Abel’s task is to overcome the earth. Cain is immersed in the tasks of the present; Abel in listening to the past, continually tries to prepare for the future.”

“Abel is rarely a fighter. He is usually a pioneer, a seeker, a dreamer, a poet, a saint. He is not so concerned about worldly matters. He likes to live without making too much effort.”

In the second born, there is not the sense of duty that exists in the first born.

Using an illustration from a book by Richard Church (Over the Bridge, < >, London, 1955), König describes that periodic attacks of illness are typical of second children. “It is the typical form of reaction of second children to the overpowering might of their environment.”

In these attacks, the slaying of Abel is repeated in the second child. In the story of Over the Bridge, Richard Church (the second child) describes his own health attacks as ‘the friendly old enemy’ and says that the attacks serve to monopolise the mother’s attention and to transform the elder brother into his servant.

Other characteristics of a second child that König draws from the Richard Church story include a “belated mastering of letters and words, and in grasping the significance and relationship of numbers...”

“...later on when he attended a boys’ school, he remarks: “Only in reading did I find serenity and self-confidence. As soon as I put down my book and took off the armour of words, I felt the winds of life blow cold upon my nakedness and I shivered with apprehension.”

König claims every second child is endowed “...with special spiritual powers that are his by inheritance. He is nearer to the Kingdom of God than any other person on earth. It is his prerogative, but it is also his danger. It can elate him, but it can also spoil him and make him a fraud and a charlatan. To be a second child mostly means to walk along a rope stretched between heaven and earth; to maintain the balance between above and below is the chief attribute of the second child.”

“In many second (child) sisters a spiritual, sometimes even an angelic determination is present. They are devoted nurses, teachers, doctors and social workers – always playing second fiddle, yet indispensible in their deeds and achievements to the community...”

“Neither Abel nor Artemis are weekday beings; they belong rather to the festival days, to special occasions, to the outstanding events. The drudgery of life is foreign to them; they will accept it if their help is needed and their labour valued. Second children are guests – to them the earth is but a temporary place of accommodation.”

The Third Child:
“...there is a gap between the first and second child on the one hand, and the third on the other. The first and the second child belong together however different they may be. Their destinies are intimately connected, and their sympathies and antipathies are dove-tailed into one another.

“The third child appears as an outsider. Now a single stands against two. It is quite natural that the first two stand up against the third. A third child can gradually work its way into the circle of the first two...

“It will even put a greater effort into this task and try by every possible means to qualify as a respected partner among his forerunners.

“Here we meet two of the fundamental attributes of third children. They feel apart, sometimes even cut off from all other people. This separation, however, is a very different one from that met with in the only child. The latter always shows a degree of aloofness. He is above all other people; a firstborn with all its qualities. The loneliness of the third child has a different flavour. It bears the sting of inferiority.” “He longs to be one of the others and can never fully achieve it.”

“in many third children such a sudden break in their destinies can occur. A certain number of them die rather young and sometimes, suddenly and unexpectedly.”

“It is a lofty job to be a third child and a very dangerous one. Therefore so many of them perish before they have ever reached their aim.”

Summary:
“These three types of man represent the three archetypal forms of his social destiny. As a first child, he defends the past, as a second child, he lives with the present, and he prepares the future as the third. The defender of the past is a ruler. The child of the present is an artist. The preparer of the future is irrational. All three are needed in the great web of human life.”

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Counting Chickens and Bequests

2011-08-31T20:45:00.001+08:00

Someone told me their footy tips half way through the round... and said they "would have to be happy with 7 out of 8 games afterall". I pointed out that the chickens hadn’t all hatched yet and they wouldn’t necessarily get all the remaining games right!

We sometimes reckon the tipping or count the chickens before they’ve hatched with our health and our Will. The best thing about a Will is that you can divide your hard-earned wealth the way you want it to go... but you still keep it if you need it. Without a Will, your hard-earned wealth is divided according to legislation. If you want to give something back to the community through a Bequest to a Charity – you can only do it with a Will. You cannot be assured that someone, even a trusted family member, will actually carry out your wishes to donate to a charity after you die; and they’re under no obligation to do it either.

Many people are beginning to consider a charity in their Will, alongside their family. You have to take care of your family first, but after that, why not consider giving something into the community through a charitable bequest? Most people have cottononed to the idea of dividing everything by percentages. Using set figure amounts might not add up in the future, but percentages mean no matter what is in your estate, the share goes around at that year’s values. Many people are dividing their estate with a proportion towards their favourite charity or charities. They still give the lions share to their family, but include giving something back for others. For example, someone with three children divided their estate into 4 quarters. The children got one each, and the last quarter was divided between a couple of charities that were important to the person.

After taking care of your family, a charitable bequest is the highest act of generosity.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: wealth or amenity

2011-08-29T20:30:00.000+08:00

Politicians have emphasised private wealth over public amenity: Fancy houses over public transport: 1^St home buyer’s grants over investing in infrastructure to outer suburbs where poorer people live. Governments don’t bother increasing infrastructure or building rail, light rail or suitable public transport to outer suburbs. However, they offer grants to entice families to buy and build homes in these areas. Then the young people become bored, frustrated and isolated from positive activities, employment opportunities, and social pursuits. Conversely, in wealthier suburbs the best quality of infrastructure is provided.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”. Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Negative and Positive Views of the Kingship

2011-08-26T11:23:00.001+08:00

Text – 1 Samuel 8-12 Key commentary: Hertzberg 1 & 2 Samuel pp70-100

Without doubt, the Hebrew Scriptures were written in a later date than the events occurred. In such a context, it becomes easier to describe prophesy, foresight and predicting the future… because it had already happened. Hertzberg makes the point that the turn of events at the start of this extended section of Scripture; by no means limited the period of the judges. Samuel’s sons not following in the ways of Yahweh would not have prevented the rise of other just judges to the Israelites. After-all, Samuel’s rise to position of judge was in the wake of Eli’s sons’ failures to walk in the ways of the Lord. However, historically the period of the judges didn’t continue, so the authors and compilers of the Hebrew Scriptures knew that the period of the judges was at an end. We are again faced with the interesting subject of redaction criticism.

The contrasting sections of the 1 Samuel readings displaying an almost alternating view of the monarchy from negative, to positive, to negative, to positive; seems to me to indicate two different sources being drawn upon by the redactor. It would seem clear to me that there were two different stories or versions on the same events that were meshed together by the writers. However, this “mash-up theory” leaves the text appearing as clumsy as sections of Deuteronomy. Perhaps the same writers were responsible? Alternatively, the contradictions reflect an alternating view of the monarchy, upon reflection of its eventual failure as an institution and the Exile of the Hebrews to Babylon.

1 Sam 8:1-22 describes a predominantly negative view of the monarchy. Israel declares they want to be “like other nations” and have a king. The text states that this displeased Samuel, and presumably displeased Yahweh too. Yahweh reassures Samuel that it is no the judgment of Samuel that is being rejected but Israel is rejecting Yahweh as their “king”. The writer’s presumably came from a theological position that Israel was not, in fact “like other nations” but rather set apart from the nations. The theology of a covenant, including flood, Abrahamic promises, the chosen nature of Israel as “God’s own” and the mega-motif of the Exodus are key themes. Samuel outlines a list of ‘negatives’ concerning the results of having a king, including what a 21st century CE person would summate as an expensive military budget, a 10% GST, wastage on Government infrastructure and a burdensome public service. However, Israel really wanted to be “like other nations”. This is, in my opinion, the crucial theological point of this particular writer. Israel was meant to have destroyed the “other nations” upon their entry into the land promised to them. Other sections of writings also emphasise the language of Israel’s “sin” in the context of being “like other nations”, taking on the gods of these other nations and turning away from Yahweh.

1 Sam 9:1-10:16 then describes the monarchy in a relatively positive context; Yahweh has decided to chose a king. It begins with an introduction to the young man who would become the first king of Israel. He was a handsome young man who stood head and shoulders above everyone else. Was he tall or was this a metaphor for his special place in Israelite history? Saul, we are told came from good stock and breeding; a Benjaminite with a wealthy father (Kish). Hertzberg suggests that Samuel was immediately connected to Saul and developed rapport, inviting Saul to his house and becoming intimately friendly. The text also states that God evidently arranged the meeting, informing Samuel of the chain of events the day before. Again, this is one of those prophesies that is best told after the event has occurred. Yahweh informs Samuel that Saul with deliver Israel from the hand of the Philistines. Does this mean they were again under slavery, as they had been in Egypt? Saul is anointed in private, with even the servant being sent ahead. Saul experiences a prophetic frenzy; although the description of this event doesn’t really sit well in the context of an unknown, young man who had been anointed as king in secret. However, it does make an important theological point. I think the most important positive theological statement is where the text states that as Saul turned around, “God gave him another heart.” This makes a statement that the king is changed and perhaps even controlled by Yahweh; his fundamental nature is changed.

In my reading of the text, I am not convinced that the image of Saul is entirely positive. He is described as being on a journey that, to me appears as a hapless and hopeless chasing a bunch of donkeys. It hardly inspires me to consider this man a viable king. Upon Saul’s return, he speaks with his uncle, telling him all the events except that he had been anointed as king. It strikes me as an important point to omit. While the text also provides an explanation of the word ‘seer’ being synonymous with prophet (and while it is undoubtedly an anachronism for me to say so), I connect the word to a 20th century understanding of seer, and thereby connect the terminology to the suicide death of Saul after his decision to abandon Yahweh and consult the witch of Endor.

1 Sam 10:17-27 returns to a more negative view of the monarchy. Hertzberg suggests this pericope is told as if the writer had no knowledge or had not read the preceding chapter. The text returns to the theme of the people rejecting Yahweh as their king. Samuel makes a speech, invoking the exodus imagery that almost appears as a ‘last ditch’ effort to talk the people out of this decision. Now Samuel, evidently at Yahweh’s direction, had already anointed Saul as king. Presumably, Saul knew he was to be king. Yet Samuel appears before the people and a process (probably long given the number of tribes and families) of casting lots took place. It was an acceptable practice and possibly took place to ‘prove’ to the people (and perhaps confirm to Samuel) that the decision was the right one... that Yahweh was involved in this choice. However, at the crucial moment (as observed by McCarter from last week’s tutorial), Saul is nowhere to be found. Most telling, it is revealed that he is hiding among the baggage. I see a link between his exception in retelling the events to his uncle and this decision to hide. Again, though it is anachronistic, I see a parallel to the vernacular language of ‘baggage’ in the 21st Century. When Saul is finally presented, Samuel then outlines the rights and duties of the king; and writes these in a book. One cannot assume that the list was identical to that in 1 Samuel 8 – but there is (at this point) no mention of the obligations and duties of the people towards their king. There are some dissenters and people critical of Saul. The writer chooses to describe these people in harsh terms as “worthless fellows” – a group into which I guess I would have fallen, given my earlier remarks. However, the Saul’s grasp on the monarchy was tenuous at best and within the next five chapters, Yahweh is eventually grieved to have make Saul king and sends Samuel on an expedition to find the suitable successor. The pericope ends with a segue into a positive view of the monarchy outlined in 1 Samuel 11.

1 Samuel 11:1-15 describes a positive view of the monarchy; not just this particular monarch but the institution of the monarchy as being able to muster and direct troops in order to conquer an enemy. The previous chapter had introduced this issue about the Ammonites gouging out the right eye of the Israelites; presumably a symbolic act of proving submission to the Ammonites. The Israelites seek a treaty, and in return are invited to freely accept this barbaric submission! The text states that the spirit of God came upon Saul in power and “Saul became angry”... in many Christian communities, a person displaying anger is considered the opposite of being “spiritual”. This anger is seen as a weakness today, but is clearly one of the positives of the monarchy in the Samuel text. In this anger, Saul musters the people (with a treat). The rights and responsibilities of the people towards their king are becoming evident. Israel, through their king, is mobilised to action and defeats the Ammonites. The place of the monarchy is cemented in that part of history as Samuel renews Saul as king, before Yahweh, at Gilgal.

1 Samuel 12:1-25 returns to a negative descriptor of the monarchy. Samuel makes his farewell address. As discussed in last week’s lecture, the cycle of the judges was one of Israel’s faithfulness, descending into unfaithfulness and eventual oppression. Israel would call out to Yahweh, who would raise up a judge and bring deliverance to the people. In this speech, Samuel calls on this history and returns to the exodus motif again in declaring that Yahweh was their king and they rejected Yahweh! Then Samuel again presents Saul and says, “Here is the king that you have chosen.” If I remember back a couple of chapters, it was actually Yahweh who chose this king and the process included what appears to me to be a random selection via the casting of lots. However, Samuel provides some positive statement by warning the people if they fear the Lord and serve him, then all will be well. So in spite of there being a monarchy, the people are called to hold their allegiance to Yahweh, rather than the king.

Yahweh, through Samuel, then performs a somewhat miraculous meteorological event (or magic trick) with an out of season thunderstorm. The resultant reaction of the people is the strongest negative view of the monarchy presented thus far in the series of pericopes. The people realise they have greatly sinned against Yahweh and Samuel declares their act as evil! They beg Samuel (the judge rather than their king) to intervene to save them from the consequences of their ‘great sin’ in seeking a king to rule over them. Again, Samuel reiterates the point, fear of the Lord (Yahweh) and serving him only is the path to Israel’s salvation. It seems the monarchy is ignored in this equation. Samuel finishes with the treat: “Do wickedly and you will be swept away; both you and your king!” The monarchy is more than reduced to equity with the people; the fortunes of the king become bound to the people’s behaviour.

In short: The positives (9:1-10:16 and 11:1-15) were probably written or sourced from a time of Saul or David as king. The negatives (8:1-22 and 10:17-27) were probably written or sourced from a time after the failure of the monarchy (that is, after the exile in the 6th Century). The text in 12:1-25 is in the exact style of a Deuteronomical Speech and was written or sourced after the exile to Babylon.

The people had chosen to seek a monarchy. The text was probably written after the failure of that monarchy as an institution. The decision to seek that monarchy, while interspersed with positive anecdotes, is generally quite harshly criticised in the text. It would seem that two streams or probably two writers are describing their views and reflections of the monarchy; with the eventual redactor combining the stories in a roughly coherent manner and presenting them as a theological reflection upon the history of Israel, with a corresponding explanation for how they came to be in the place they were when the text was written.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

The Deuteronomistic History

2011-08-23T19:12:00.000+08:00

Tutorial Topic: redaction criticism of 1 Samuel and how David came to be in Saul’s court.
Text – 1 Samuel 16:14-17:58 Key commentary: McCarter, 1Samuel pp277-309

There can be no doubt that both the Hebrew and the Christian Scriptures have come to their present for through editing or redaction. To paraphrase a verse from the Christian scriptures, “All scripture is inspired and redacted, and valuable for instruction.” Just because the text has been edited, doesn’t remove the importance of the text to those who are committed to that religion.

Clearly, the pericope being explored here (1 Samuel 16:14-17:58) is drawn from some, if not many, different sources. Given the importance of the monarchy to Israelite religion in antiquity, stories and (obviously) traditions about how David became the king are entirely expected. The text is designed to reinforce the institution of the monarchy, the location of Jerusalem as not only the capital of the Unified Kingdom but also as the centre for God’s house, temple and the worship of Yahweh. These are evidences of Deuteronomistic redaction because these are principles that would have been important in Deuteronomistic History and to the Israelite priests in Jerusalem. The dating of when this material was produced in its current form becomes very difficult to pin point, because there are obvious inconsistencies, interpolations and redaction.

To reproduce the text, highlighting possible and probably redaction would not only be a major undertaking, it would far exceed the word count for this paper. However, making the assumption that there is some prior knowledge of the text and commentary, I propose to make a few comments and observations on the text.

In the anointing of David as ‘replacement’ king for Saul, McCarter points out that David (as was Saul) is missing at the climactic moment in the story. However, there is a contrast between what each man was doing at the time. Saul was “hiding among the baggage” (which to our ear in post-modern language has additional implications) but David is out in the fields: working, practicing his battle skills with the sling and trying his strength against lions and bears. At least that’s what the later text would have us believe. However, David is only a boy in this section.

The reworking of the original text and the addition of material about the prophetical orientation is possibly to place the prophets at the centre of Israelite life and history. The prophet is nominating God’s anointed king and life is soon to revolve around the united monarchy of David.

One of the questions that we are to consider in this tutorial is the stories or accounts of how David came to be present in Saul’s court. In this text, there are clearly contradictory interpolations about this story. In fact, it seems that in some respects, the redactor/s made no attempt to harmonise the material at all. Firstly, David’s musical ability brings him into the service of Saul. He is an adult man in this story. This is probably the older of the two stories and Textual Criticism would lead us to consider it the more accurate version of the text. It is certainly simple, short and somehow fits with later traditions about David writing musical Psalms.

The second account draws in far more complicated stories, as there are a couple of possible sources that can be identified in the second account. This is obvious, in part because of the contradictions in the text, but also due to the Deuteronomistic History dating to the time of the Exile: where the line of David and the historiography of David needed to be inspiring to a people in the depths of despair at their defeat and exile to Babylon.

In the text of the “Goliath story” Saul is, at one moment speaking to David before he goes out to battle; then later asking who that young man (boy) is who is going out to battle. Did Saul’s tormented soul stretch to suffering Alzheimer’s or was there interpolation? Most scholars would suggest the latter. In the order of the two stories, David is a boy, then a man playing music in the king’s court, then a boy again in a battle and unknown to the king.

Then there are the later stories of giants (including a ‘Goliath’ (whose spear was like a weaver’s beam)) in 2 Samuel 21:19-22. This ‘Goliath’ was killed by Elhanan. Another giant is killed by Jonathan, son of David’s brother. So there are, perhaps, sources for the David and Goliath story – where David was simply supplanted into the text by redactors who then placed the story before David’s rise over king Saul.

The text also brings in a reason for Saul’s animosity towards David. While the previous text is clear in respect that the issue is that Saul is in decline and David, with whom Yahweh’s anointing rests, is on the increase. Perhaps noting this, the pericope where Jonathan seems to switch political alliance from his own father Saul, to David may have been included to emphasise this switching of Yahweh’s anointing to David. Such a move, by Jonathan (who was next in line to be king) would seem improbable in logic; even though there are even modern examples of kings or heirs abdicating their right to the throne.

Possible sources for some of the material might also have been the traditions from the northern kingdom. David, the shepherd boy who became king suits the northern kingdom’s image of their southern, estranged counterparts in Judah far better than David, the strong, handsome warrior-blooded hero who cut his teeth fighting lions and bears with his bare hands while protecting the sheep of his father’s flock. This boy, anointed to be king, who then defeats the Philistine warrior (with lots of righteous indignation and religious aspects thrown into the dialogue: “you defy the living God,” and “you come against me with sword and spear and javelin; but I come to you in the name of Yahweh...”). The second story suits and serves Judah, Jerusalem and the Deuteronomistic History far better. This would only be accentuated at a time when Israel is wallowing in exile and some level of lost hope and self-pity.

Stories and traditions painting an idealised image of David and how he became the king were long circulating around Jerusalem. This is what could be expected, given the central place of the monarchy through “David’s line” that would be providing hope to Israel (in Deuteronomistic History) living in exile. The text is designed to reinforce the institution of the king, the location of Jerusalem as not only the capital of the Unified Kingdom but also as the centre for God’s house, temple and the worship of Yahweh. These are evidences of Deuteronomistic redaction because these are principles that would have been important in the Deuteronomistic History.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: Worlds Best Practice

2011-08-22T21:23:00.000+08:00

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

“World’s Best Practice” is just another way capitalism and control are imposed upon the public. With ‘world’s best practice’, it is now the worker’s fault if they’re not meeting unrealistic targets. It puts the community in a system of making everyone more competitive – so others end up unemployed. Usually, it is the already marginalised people who suffer. Often young people end up unemployed (or under-employed) under the guise of world’s best practice, producing unrealistic targets.

Suddenly, we are measuring everything that staff do by the cheapest, quickest, highest output day. Space for people is removed because it's all about statistics... not humanity.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Law, and Covenant, the Book of Deuteronomy

2011-08-17T20:11:00.000+08:00

Although this is the topic of the week, the key biblical text for this tutorial is from Exodus (Exo 20:22-23:33). This Exodus pericope is an early example of a code and is often referred to as “the Book of the Covenant.” The internal context of the pericope purports to be instruction to Moses, from Yahweh, to ‘say to the Israelites’. Coming, as it does, hot on the tails of “The Ten Commandments” – which had no such introduction – cracks begin to appear in the source or placement of the pericope itself. This text contains many fascinating references and instructions. The tutorial topic officially explores issues of slavery in ancient Israel/Judah. The tutorial provides a valuable introduction to the legal material of Deuteronomy, the beginning of the Hebrew concept of covenant and the interaction and formation of these in the context of the other codes of the ancient Near East.
Hyatt asserts that the “Book of the Covenant” is not directly taken from other cultures (eg Code of Hammurapi), but admits it is similar. It seems to me that Hyatt believes that the Israelites settled in the region and overtook the Canaanites. This could also explain the lack of any codes of Canaanite origin being discovered. However, there are examples of codes similar to the Code of Hammurapi, that date far earlier. The Sumarian code of “Ur-Nammu” dates from 2050 BCE. Another Sumarian code “Lipit-Ishtar” is dated c. 1800 BCE; as does an Akkadian code, “Laws of Eshnunna”. The “Book of the Covenant” has strong parallels with these other Near Eastern treaties; particularly described as ‘vassal treatise.’ These are treatises that mark an agreement between a power, god or deity, or king and its subjects. There is a level of expected reciprocation.

The “Book of the Covenant” is probably not part of the Sinai narrative; but was spliced into the position of the Hebrew Scriptures where it appears. This is also notable, because of the distinct and different language of the other Exodus text. If the “Book of the Covenant” was ‘given’ immediately after the exodus, the comments about Hebrew slaves would have been insensitive at the least. If Israel had just left the shackles of slavery themselves, it would be difficult to believe they would be establishing laws in favour of it. The question of the date of writing remains complex and complicated.

Childs says the language is inconsistent with the life of a wilderness people and the exodus. Hyatt points out the use of language like: sheep, oxen and asses in the ‘Book of the Covenant’ points to a somewhat developed agricultural society. The lack of language such as horses or camels points away from a wilderness or travelling people. However, Hyatt believes, as the text describes pieces of silver weighed out, rather than minted coins and that there is no mention of king nor court, the text can only be dated from a pre-monarchical Israelite history. Most scholars agree that the “Book of the Covenant” was written before the book of Deuteronomy. Childs says, ‘considerably so!’ The similarities, including exact duplications, to the earlier vassal treatise could date the “Book of the Covenant” (or its source at least) back to the second millennium BCE. There can be little reasonable belief that the “Book of the Covenant” was written or given by Moses, immediately after the exodus – but drawn from sources external to Israel and edited to a Hebrew context. The author will never be known but it is reasonable to expect the text had been significantly redacted, on various occasions, by various scribes, to create a code (with both law and moral instruction) that was relevant to the Hebrews Sitz em Leben... at some time and place.

This theology of a uniquely Israelite covenant (as found in the “Book of the Covenant”) is the basis for Deuteronomy. The laws or codes originally expressed in Exodus are greatly added to and developed within Deuteronomy. Collins asserts that the primary authors of Deuteronomy were Jerusalem scribes in the service of Josiah (dating Deuteronomy in the seventh century BCE). Under Childs’ assertion it is not inconceivable that the “Book of the Covenant” in Exodus is a significant influence (perhaps even a source) for Deuteronomy.

As a genre, it contains both legal boundaries and moral instruction within the same text. The theology of Abraham’s covenant with YHWH, which required only faith in return for YHWH’s protection, is taken further. Now YHWH requires obedience to the law as the Hebrew’s commitment to the covenant.

It is disturbing to see how often the death penalty is pronounced in these laws, having just read the ”Ten Commandments” demand that one shall not kill. The inconsistency to me is a difficult matter. Later laws in Deuteronomy highlight the Canaanites as the recipient’s of the most brutal destruction, while advocating leniency and protection for the foreigner (‘since you were foreigners in Egypt’). I suspect this is due to the high likelihood that Israel was truly a clan or cult within Canaan, which grew out from the Canaanites and wished to differentiate themselves from them in some way.

The practice outlined in the “Book of the Covenant” in releasing slaves after a period of time was not unique to Israel. Collins and Childs cites other examples from antiquity. Draffkorn indicates that becoming a ‘permanent slave’ must have been out of the ordinary; otherwise they would not have had to write about it... let alone make a religious ceremony out of it. By the time Deuteronomy was compiled, the treatment of married slaves and their children was considerably more lenient. Hyatt says the ear piercing ritual would have been to place a ring or tag in the ear to symbolise or signify that the person was ‘owned’ by a master permanently. One would assume the tag indicated the owner.

The “Book of the Covenant” in Exodus appears to be an ancient code that was adopted, then adapted and redacted to reflect an Israelite culture and purpose. It is difficult to date, identify the author or place in historical context. It is almost certainly not chronologically located within the Hebrew Scriptures. This discussion of slavery in particular seems not only out of place in the context of the exodus as described within the book. The treatment of slaves seems remarkable harsh, in the context of the supposed recent enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt. It would seem clear that the text itself became the basis for the writing of Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy was almost certainly written shortly before it was ‘miraculously discovered’ in the time of religious reform by King Josiah in the seventh century BCE.

The “Book of the Covenant” in Exodus 20:22-23:33 remains a significant pericope in the ongoing development of the Israelite understanding of its own identity and in the progressive development of covenant theology as the Israelites understood it. As a basis for the book of Deuteronomy, it has an ongoing importance in the evolution of Israelite law.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

FOUR-SOURCE THEORY OF THE TORAH

2011-08-15T21:56:00.001+08:00

Probably before I go on too much with posts about The Life and Literature of Ancient Israel, I should provide a background of the
FOUR-SOURCE THEORY OF THE TORAH - this article was on the Internet and provides a good summary and introduction for those who want to know where I'm coming from; or who want to argue with me :-) Other information about the "Newer Documentary Hypothesis" (that there were 4 documents, redacted to produce the Torah) would be worth considering. Also search for Graf-Wellhausen. Wellhausen goes back many years and while some of his ideas are 'dated' in scholarly thought, the basics still retain water. I have tried to ask permission to re-post this material but Deacon Bill Nourse has not responded. However, I credit this entire material to him. I also cannot say I take responsibility for this information either and, as always, the views expressed may not be those of the Blog owner

FOUR-SOURCE THEORY OF THE TORAH

by Deacon Bill Nourse, Ed.D.

The Old Testament was composed over a long period of time. Much of it began as an oral tradition which was finally written down after centuries of being passed down orally. What we know today as the Pentateuch (penta=5, the first five books of the Old Testament, the Torah, or "Law") was edited into its final form as a coherent account of the career of Moses.

JEDP SOURCE THEORY

The four-source theory of the Torah is proposed by Wellhausen and others, and seems to have some general acceptance among scholars. The four-source theory proposes that the Torah originated from four separate and distinct sources, arising and developing over four successive eras in history. The four sources were conflated (blended together, combined and edited) over the centuries into the single document (the Torah) which we have today.

Although the sources are mixed, it is sometimes possible to theorize the source of particular passages by classifying the way in which God is presented, and in the way certain issues are presented.

YAHWIST SOURCE (J):

This is the earliest discernible tradition in the Pentateuch, dating in written form from c. 1000-950 BC (the time of the unified kingdom under David and Solomon). It originated as an oral tradition in Judah, the southern kingdom. It deals primarily with the time of the Patriarchs, c. 1900-1650 BC.

This source presents a broad sweep of history in the context of its relevance to God's specific plan for the chosen people.

In material from the Yahwist (J) source, God is more intimate in his relationship with humans, a "divine communion." God is more anthropomorphic, less abstract, "walks" and "talks" with men, etc. The "younger son" theme is emphasized (Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, Judah over older brothers, etc.); unconditioned covenant with Abraham.

This source uses the tetragrammatron YHWH to designate the divine personal name when written down. Written Hebrew has no vowels, and "points" are used to designate vowel sounds for pronunciation. "Points" are small marks under the letters (consonants) with different shapes representing different vowel sounds.

ELOHIST SOURCE (E):

This is the "sister tradition" of (J) from the northern kingdom, but not quite as old. The written form dates from c. 922 BC. It originated as an oral tradition in Israel, the northern kingdom.

Elohim is another personal name for the divine being. Elohim is a plural form, but is something like the royal "we" or the papal "we," e.g., "We are not amused." The style is much less anthropomorphic than (J).

The (E) source is more limited in scope than (J). The (E) source has no primordial history; it begins with Abraham. God is much less anthropomorphic than in (J). God is more remote and distant than in (J), and speaks to man in dreams, in clouds, or in the midst of fire; and later, through angels.

The style is more sober and flat; moral standards are stricter and more exact, reflecting contact with pagan practices in the north which had to be resisted. In (E), the covenant is presented more like an overlord-vassal treaty; there is a preference for an idealized desert existence.

The (J) and (E) traditions were conflated into a sort of "JE" source in Judah, sometime after c. 721 BC (the fall of Samaria, the capital if Israel in the northern kingdom), with the (J) tradition emerging as dominant. This may have occurred during the reign of Hezekiah (c. 716-687 BC). The other traditions were added later.

DEUTERONOMIC SOURCE (D):

Material from the (D) source is generally restricted to the Book of Deuteronomy itself. It is more hortatory (exhorting) in character, apparently related to the fact that it was composed during a time of religious crisis. The (D) source called for a return to the (J) covenant and pure worship in the Temple in Jerusalem, with a sense of immediacy and urgency.

In (D), the covenant is seen as God's loving election of Israel, and the law is Israel's loyal response.

The (D) source dates from after the Babylonian exile, the time of Zerubbabel, and the rebuilding of the second Temple c. 510 BC. There is a tradition that Josiah found a copy of it in the Temple in 621 BC. However, its long prehistory and the nucleus of its laws suggest an origin in the northern kingdom.

It probably coalesced in written form c. 700-650 BC and was conflated with the JE source sometime after the reign of Josiah (640-609 BC) into a sort of "JED" source.

PRIESTLY SOURCE (P):

The Priestly (P) source concentrates more on liturgy and laws, together with some narrative material. Its style is more abstract, redundant. There is more emphasis on genealogies, chronological precision, minute descriptions of ritual elements. Anthropomorphic representations of God are avoided.

The Priestly (P) source also has a long prehistory, but in written form dates from sometime after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the First Temple (c. 587-586 BC). This was the beginning of the Exile (c. 586 BC). The glorious eras of David (c. 1010-970 BC), Solomon (c. 970-931 BC) were long past, the Ark of the Covenant had been captured by the enemy (some say hidden) and lost, the Holy of Holies was an empty room inhabited only by the presence or spirit of God.

The (P) emphasis was on Israel remaining pure and holy and uncontaminated by man-made morality, hence the emphasis ritual and legal cleanliness.

The (P) source is the youngest. It was probably added to the "JED" source after the Exile, c. 586 BC, with "JEDP" emerging as the result, edited into its final form as the Torah a little later.

The Torah brought back from Babylon by Ezra (c. 400-420 BC) was likely the Torah in its present form, isolated from the historical books (Jos-Kgs). Thus the final compilation of the Torah could have been this late, and its composition could have taken as long as six hundred years.

CONFLATION OF SOURCES

These four sources are mixed in the Pentateuch (Torah) as edited and redacted over the centuries, although in some instances a single source may be clearly dominant in certain sections. In many cases, sections or phrases or episodes are repeated in somewhat different language. This was done deliberately when material was added. The editors/redactors were reluctant to remove or alter earlier material, even if it was similar to what they were adding, for fear that something important might inadvertently be lost.

Sometimes we can deduce "which God" (J, E, D, P source) is being presented in the text of the Torah from the way God is portrayed or presented. E.g., if it's a personal God who walks and talks with man and exhibits human characteristics (as in the Garden of Eden), then it's probably (J) source material. If it's more of an abstract God (as in the Burning Bush), it's probably (E) source material.

Reposted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: Life 101

2011-07-31T09:21:00.000+08:00

Education systems have ignored “Life 101” – by that I mean that a true exploration of relationships, family, friendship, communication, participation in processes, sexuality and sexual identity are largely ignored in education curriculum and policy.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Exodus

2011-07-15T21:43:00.001+08:00

There is probably no better-known ‘narrative’ from Israelite history than the Exodus. Jewish families recite the Exodus annually as part of the Passover Haggadah. Themes of plagues against one’s enemies, an escape from slavery, rescue by one’s God, victory over chaos and liberation are recited in the story of celebration. The Exodus forms one of the greatest nationalist myths of human history. The Israelite law eventually demanded the re-telling of the story to keep those the themes ‘alive’. Recent decades have even seen Christian groups re-tell the Exodus story in a dramatic way such as a Passover meal. However, closer reading, even within the biblical text itself, creates problems for the story’s consistency. The lack of any significant independent attestation to the story, virtually no archaeological evidence and patchy references in non-biblical literature to the events (even within a few centuries), relegate the story firmly into genre of nationalist myth. There can be no doubt that the events, as portrayed in the Hebrew literature, didn’t happen. There is reference within scholarly research to Hebrew sources J and P, with even the possibility of source E. Extra-biblical material is available from the Akkadian story of King Sargon. To me, this material leaves the greatest use of the Exodus story for present academic study to source criticism. However, I also have to admit this is also influenced by my interest in that stream of study.

Exodus 13:20-14:31 a) The text gives two reasons given for the Egyptian motivation to pursue Israel. First is because they had lost their slaves. However, there is little doubt that there would have been Egyptian slaves at the time so this is questionable. The other reason in the text is that Yahweh hardened Pharaoh’s heart. This provides a motif of Yahweh’s control over everything and everyone. It does seem a little illogical in the story because if Yahweh had this total control, then why wasn’t Pharaoh controlled from the start of the story, avoiding inconvenience and delay in the release of Israel. b) The text initially says the waters were controlled by a driving easterly wind blowing all night. However, later the parting of the seas is attributed to a miracle performed by God, through Moses. c) Within the text, the Egyptians are destroyed through a variety of events. At one point the cloud ‘looks at them’ and sends them into panic, then their wheels get clogged (stuck in the mud), and finally they follow Israel into the dry sea bed and the waters close over the Egyptians (leaving the Israelites safe at the same time). Presumably the story implies that the Egyptians drowned.

Reading the text as divided into the most likely J and P sources raised some fairly consistent themes within each source’s theology. The J source seems to repeat the word fear – being fear expressed by both sides of the conflict. The Israelites fear death, fear the Egyptians, fear loss. At one point they prefer their life of slavery above the freedom that comes with this fear. They also fear Yahweh. Moses exhorts them not to fear. The Egyptians also fear the Lord (Yahweh). They are thrown into panic as a result of the cloud that is said to ‘look at them’. The Egyptians fear the Israelites, because their God is fighting for them. This fear is extended to the sea as it returns to depth and the Egyptians ultimately face their own deaths. The P source repeats the motif of sea/chaos and dry land/victory and control. Collins points out; this is a return to the theme of the P source in the creation and flood stories. The commanding power of Yahweh is repeated. The instructions to Moses are enacted without question. Seas part at the command of Yahweh through actions performed by Moses. This establishes Yahweh’s power above all and Moses’ authority among the people. Obedience (even if frequently outside of personal choice) is an emerging theme. Another emerging theme is that of ‘wandering and wilderness’. When the biblical story continues, this theme will be further utilised.

Exodus 15:1-18 a) This song, although beginning the Exodus story in a similar way, adapts the content of the ‘narrative’ style. The genre here is a poem and it is therefore unfair to expect more from the text than a poem can provide. In the poetic reconstruction, some theological motifs are utilised. In particular those of the power and absolute control that Yahweh has over all situations. Wind is described as the ‘the blast of God’s nostrils’ and ‘floods stood up in a heap’. These terms are poetic reproductions of some of the previous narrative. The poem mentions locations, battles and nations that were not featured within the Exodus story. The poem celebrates the controlling power and victory of Yahweh as believed by the Israelites.

While it is virtually certain that the Exodus event never occurred on the scale or in the way that the text outlines, there are some possible parallels from extra-biblical documents that may point to sources for the myth. These were outlined by Collins in the readings required for the lecture. Many of these extra-biblical histories are from more recent times, recounting oral traditions of their own, passed down. They, therefore, may contain legend of their own. Manetho wrote a history of Egypt in the Hellenistic period. In this story, the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt. This account is similar to work by Jewish the historian Josephus. Hecataeus of Abdera (an earlier writer than Manetho) also talks of people expelled from Egypt who then built Jerusalem. Papyri from the time attest to Habiru or ‘Apiru slaves working on construction of a capital city during the reign of Ramesses II. In the Anastasi Papyri, one records the escape of a tribe during a drought and another records the pursuit of escaped slaves. These writings suggest a date for the Exodus within the thirteenth century. Evidence that supports a date within the fifteenth century is predominantly internal biblical text and is highly inconsistent with any archaeology or extra-biblical sources.

There is evidence of a couple of these separate ‘exoduses’ around the thirteenth century. If the Exodus took place at all, then it could have been a collection of smaller ‘exoduses’ that were combined in the creation (or more likely evolution) of a nationalist myth.

The Exodus story provides an excellent example of the probable evolution of nationalist myth, from external and internal sources, as retold by generations to maintain (and develop) the sense of purpose, existence and nationalistic difference in identity from other cultures within their world.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Myth and Epics of the Ancient Near East

2011-07-13T19:37:00.001+08:00

As an introduction, I make three points about these stories, myths and epics. Collins suggests that these writings are “serious, but imaginative attempts [by the cultures of antiquity] to explain life” in their world. Secondly, I found the readings really enjoyable (I know this isn’t a phrase I should use in an academic paper). Effort is certainly required to carefully read the texts, especially those with missing sections, but the general experience of reading is pleasurable. “They’re good yarns, sometimes with a moral, ethical or human lesson attached.” This has implications for how one (as a 21st Century Christian) reads the Hebrew Scriptures. Thirdly, it is notable that women, priestesses and female gods play a greater role in ‘non-Israelite’ stories. Women are (or redaction made them) more subservient in Israelite writings.

Gen 1:1-2:4a
Similarities and differences between Biblical text and “The Epic of Creation” (Enuma elish)

The Epic of Creation identifies that one god became “top god” (Marduk). Although this is not how the Israelite redactors eventually produced a monotheistic religion, we know that Israelite history included belief in other gods. It is therefore possible that the belief in other gods existed in historic Israel. The Elements existed in the story before an actual ‘creation’ occurred, as in the Genesis story. However, these are described as being gods, rather than just ‘matter.’ Marduk similarly separated and set boundaries for the waters of the earth.

Similar to the Genesis account, some of the creation in Enuma elish is through the spoken word of Marduk. It appears as a kind of magic trick, speaking to create, then make disappear and reappear at will. The seasons are created by Marduk through the mutilation of the body of Tiamat, a female opposing god (something that seems different in the Genesis text). The rivers are also created, like the seasons, through this violation of Tiamat. However, Collins notes that there are Hebrew parallels in methodology of sacrifices in the image of how Tiamat is killed. In Enuma elish, Marduk creates Babylon; perhaps a parallel to Eden in Genesis.

The Epic of Creation concentrates on the gods and their interactions, rather than humankind. Humans come at the end of the story. After creating Babylon, Marduk ‘does miracles’ to create primeval humankind. In contrast to creating an earthly being in the image of God/gods (in Genesis); humankind is created to work so that the gods could devote time to leisure. However, one of the Genesis accounts references the requirement to work the land by the sweat of the brow to get it to produce food.

Gen 6-9
Similarities and differences between Biblical text and Atrahasis, The Epic of Gilgamesh and the two accounts of the flood in Gen 6-9

The Atrahasis myth includes elements of creation as well as the flood story. Collins says that flood stories are popular in many languages from the Mesopotamian area and era. Similar to Enuma elish, the gods rule over aspects and elements on earth: sky, earth, waters below the earth. All these elements existed before ‘creation’ in both Genesis and Atrahasis. Mother goddess, Mami, with god Ea, creates men out of clay and blood. This is similar to one of the accounts in Genesis where God fashions man from the ground. Prior to humankind being created, the gods did the work on earth... so humankind was created (as in Enuma elish) to ‘till the soil’ (also mentioned in Genesis).

Humankind reproduced effectively and populations grew. Humans became annoying to the gods, so some decided to destroy these noisy creatures; firstly through plagues. In Tablet III, the flood is used to destroy all creation. The contrast in Genesis is that human wickedness and corruption led God to destroy the creation. One of the gods warned Atrahasis; who took his family and livestock into a boat. A clear parallel to God warning Noah in the story in Genesis.

“Tablet III
ii) Boat carried everything there was [ ]
Pure ones [ ]
Fat ones [ ]
Birds, cattle, wild animals”

This has clear parallels to the developed account of Noah taking an increased number of ‘clean animals’ into the ark as described in Genesis. At point “v)” in Atrahasis, he makes sacrifices that appeal to the gods; again a parallel with the added section in Genesis (is that the P...?). Like the story of Uta-napishti (or as Collins uses “Utnapishtim”) in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the gods gather like flies to the sacrifices.

As for the Epic of Gilgamesh, Collins provided some background to the story. The main characters in the epic are humans, although Gilgamesh himself is 2/3 divine and 1/3 human. Being like a god (in an interesting reflection on the Genesis creation story) – means being civilised, rather than wild and beastly. However, in contrast (and contradiction), gods appear to be immortal; being human means being mortal.

Expanding into the Epic of Gilgamesh (Tablet XI), the gods cause a ‘Deluge’ (line 14). The flood hero is to build a boat to put on the ‘seed of all living creatures’ (86). As an interesting aside, I have heard ‘Christian Bible literalist’ use this phrase about the seed of all living creatures to account for a literal interpretation for the Genesis ark. They say that infant creatures, pregnancy and eggs allow for the entire global species to fit within the confines of an ark as outlined in Genesis. That probably provides a good example of Eisegesis, but it is also interesting that this concept is borrowed from Gilgamesh, rather than being part of the Genesis account.

As in Genesis, although in different detail, the dimensions of the boat are given, the quantity of bitumen (pitch), the numbers: 6 decks, 7 parts, 9 interior sections are outlined in Gilgamesh (59-68). Similar to Genesis, the boat in Gilgamesh settled on a mountain (around 142). As in the Noah story, birds are sent out (around 148ff). Finally a raven is sent, which doesn’t return, indicating the flood waters have receded.

As in the second inclusion within Genesis (and in Atrahasis), within the Epic of Gilgamesh, Uta-napishti makes sacrifices or offerings that pleased the gods (attracted them like flies). Although in the Epic of Gilgamesh or Atrahasis, no promises were made to ‘never again destroy the earth’ – there are certain population controls put in place by the gods. In Gilgamesh, the population controls include wild animals, famine (rather than a repeated ‘deluge’).

Other interesting inclusions from the Epic of Gilgamesh that reappear within Genesis account of the expulsion from Eden story include population control ideas such as increased risks in childbirth, human working the land to produce food and the imagery of a snake taking the plant that promised immortality.

There exists a significant body of material to demonstrate that large portions of the Genesis creation stories and flood stories have parallels in Babylonian folklore, stories and epics; dated earlier than the Genesis accounts. This would point not only to more than one internal Israelite source but lead on to conclude that additional sources and materials were utilised in developing the Genesis stories. This places the genre of these Genesis accounts clearly in the field of folklore or mythology. They are not historical documents to portray historical facts and details; rather they are theological documents to explain their beliefs and understandings: “serious, but imaginative attempts to explain life” in their world.”

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: guilty until proven older

2011-07-08T12:49:00.002+08:00

‘Law-and-order issues’ almost always target young people. A climate of fear is promoted: people are encouraged to fear young people because supposedly, they’re the cause of breakdown in law-and-order. Young people are “guilty until proven older."

Creation: two separate explanations

2011-07-08T10:40:00.001+08:00

When Christians describe the Christmas Story and the Easter Story, they tend to pool the material from the Gospels and describe what is perceived as a big picture. Sadly, this discounts the significance of the differences. In the creation story, a similar technique is often applied by well meaning Christians. This method, of course, is not rigorous theological study and (except for some colleges) it is not presented as such.

However, even a cursory reading of the first two chapters of Genesis highlights significant differences in style, content, order and perhaps even genre. It seems obvious that these accounts are written in different styles, drawn from different sources and were, most likely, written by different authors. This was my personal reflection upon the careful reading of the text as instructed for the tutorial.

I found it encouraging to note that the commentaries reinforced my initial impressions. I found, even more interesting, the possible sources used in constructing the creation story presented in the Hebrew Scriptures.

In the first chapter of the book "Introduction to the Hebrew Bible" by John J Collins (Fortress Press, 2004), some key stories, myths and writings from the region and era were discussed. These writings set the scene for the Hebrew account. The adaptations of some stories and myths that pre-date the Hebrew Scriptures create an interesting challenge for the ‘well meaning’ Christian practice of combining the accounts.

The first account has a structured, orderly description – almost reading like a narrative of the story. The order of creation is punctuated by days and particular words to indicate stages of this creative work. However, even within that structure, there are certain textual problems and contradictions.

Gen 1:1-2:4a places the order of creation as follows:
1. Light (light and darkness, being called day and night), but darkness, wind and waters were described before this creation of light.
2. A ‘dome’ called the sky, separating waters in the sky from waters on earth (presumably a pre-meteorological attempt to explain rain.
3. Waters of the earth separating to ‘create’ dry land (although it seems more to reveal dry land than create it).
4. The Land then ‘brought forth’ vegetation, plants, seeds, and fruit. At this point, God began to say “it was good.” It seems that God gave the command, but the earth itself brought forth or created the vegetation. There is no mention of any poisonous plants.
5. The two great lights were created next. As Habel points out, the sun and moon were objects of worship for the ancients, so the Genesis writer here is careful not to name these two great lights as the sun and the moon. While the sun was to rule over the day and the moon over the night, we see a motif of ‘rule over’ being included in the story at this stage.
6. Some English translations also include the creation of the stars at this point. Again, in a pre-astronomical age, this was a valid attempt to explain the world as they understood it.
7. Sea animals are created next. Again, as with the vegetation, it is the sea that ‘brings forth’ or creates the swarms of creatures. The text (significantly) mentions great sea monsters; which is a connection to mythology of the time. This is important in exploring sources for the Genesis text.
8. The ‘birds of the air’ are also created at this time. These animals of the sea and air are encouraged by God to breed
9. The living creatures on earth are created next. Again, the earth brings forth these animals.
10. At this point God starts to talk to someone else… who it is, is not defined. Humankind is created; male and female were created at the same time in this account. Again, like the animals, the male and female are encouraged to breed. God gives ‘dominion’ to humanity, over all the animals. They are instructed to fill and subdue the earth. Again, this is a motif taken from earlier writings and stories of surrounding cultures.

It seems that all animals were given every plant to eat. All seem to be vegetarians at this stage in the story. As a whole, the work of creation being completed, in this narrative, God declares ‘it is very good.’ The final act of creation is the Sabbath, being a day of rest. This becomes intertwined with Jewish law, later in the Hebrew Scriptures, and this statement is either a precursor to that law, or an addition after the law was set out and the creation story was written.

The second account seems to flow more freely and paint a picture of a more approachable, human-like God who is an active participant in the creation process.

Gen 2:4b-24 Has a different order.
1. Water rose up from the earth.
2. God formed man from the dust.
3. God planted the garden of Eden: trees of food, tree of life & tree of knowledge of good and evil are specified. There are great rivers flowing out of Eden, including gold within them.
4. Good took and placed the man to till the garden of Eden, to work/farm it. The man is instructed not to eat from the tree of knowledge.
5. Animals are formed and birds too. These are brought to man to be named and to seek a suitable companion.
6. When no suitable support is found for man, God places the man in a deep sleep, removed a rib from the man, and fashions woman from the bone of man. The woman is created after the man (unlike the first account where both are created at the same time) and the woman is stated as subordinate to the man. Another motif to rise later in Jewish law.

Already present in the beginning in Gen 1:2 is a formless earth, darkness, wind (of God) and water. In Gen 2:4b-6, earth, water and the heavens are already present. The earth is unable to ‘bring forth’ food because there is no one to do the work of tilling the fields.

In the Gen 1 account, humankind is made in a simple way, by spoken command like all other created things. Humans are created last in the order, but given dominion over it all. In Gen 2, the creation of humankind occurs early in the process. It is complicated, requiring surgery.

The style of the Gen 1 account is very structured and orderly (like a business plan). God is painted as ‘creator’, and yet much of this creation rises, comes forth or is given from the earth. The motif of humanity ‘subduing’ and ‘having dominion over’ the earth is explicit. This has parallels in stories from other Ancient Near Eastern cultures. God is called “God”; God gives commands and creation events occur. The litany of “God saw that it was good” is repeated; as is “And there was evening and there was morning, the day.”

The Gen 2 account is more ‘easy flowing’. There is less strict structure and the order of what is created is different. There is no emphasis of the days. While there may be an implied ‘dominion’ of humanity over the other created order, this doesn’t (to me at least) seem as explicit. God is referred to as “the Lord God.” This Lord God seems to have more compassion for humanity: “It is not good that the man should be alone.”

The picture of God in Gen 1 is of a structured, commanding God. God speaks and ‘things’ obey. The structure of seven days, then the day of rest is, to me, a clear connection to the Jewish Law. In the light of this topic being about source criticism, I would assume that it is either added, or from a different source. The picture of the Lord God in Gen 2 is one of a more hands on approach. The compassion, moving the man to the garden of Eden, the ‘fashioning’ of the man from the ground and the creation of woman from the man all point to an involved Lord God who is an active participant in this creating work.

The task of carefully reading the texts brought out many new issues and points to me. The commentaries backed up these new thoughts and ways of looking at the text. I was particularly interested in the connection of the word “man” and “ground” in the Hebrew language. This is something I have not yet had the chance to learn.

While simply conducting a careful reading of the text uncovers the inconsistencies and obvious issues of source, further scholarship reveals even greater differences.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: getting a posse together

2011-06-29T09:19:00.000+08:00

The vital step to resolve the problems young people face is to “take young people and their lives into serious account.” If you take young people seriously – as a societal identity – you start to realise and acknowledge that they are not a series of gangs or groups but people (genuine individuals) who need a community to function… and yet require and deserve personal attention. Society systematically excludes young people from the community. Is it any wonder that they form groups, or gangs or tribes or posse?

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: devaluing education

2011-06-05T22:20:00.000+08:00

Successive Australian Governments have lowered the value placed upon education. Obtaining Austudy is easier than getting the dole; so some young people, who are not interested in education, participate in it anyway. This devalues education.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: working poor

2011-05-16T10:16:00.000+08:00

The “mainstream youth” are not main, common or normal. Young people are essentially denied a living wage and even those who work; must remain at home and rely upon parents. Students who work, are often paid meagre wages, and called upon to take ludicrously short shifts. Some teenagers are called into work two hours at $7.25 per hour.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: exploitation

2011-04-05T10:13:00.000+08:00

Many stages within the ‘steps’ or life journey in transition towards adulthood are now marked by exploitation…Young people are systematically marginalised by institutions, in how those institutions create and reinforce unequal outcomes through classed and gendered practices, through IR Laws that discriminate against young people and through casting blame, control and competition.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: working for respect

2011-03-10T09:40:00.000+08:00

More young people now seek employment (from an early age) than ever before. Partly because they want “stuff” (clothes, mobile phone credit, gadgets, “toys”). But also because it is seen as a traditional transition to adulthood. They're seeking their transition to be accepted... they have better phones, better cars and better clothing than many older than they are - so subconsciously hope that their efforts towards transition with lead to respect.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Building Your Career

2011-02-14T20:41:00.059+08:00

Here are some key words for building your career opportunities:

Diversity
Get experience in a diverse number of areas, and be ready and able to demonstrate that diversity. While some companies are still in the last century, many are realising that staff of diverse experience are more valuable than 'single area experts'.

Continuous learning – not credentials
The days when people wanted someone with a BA, and that was enough... they're over! Even a specialist degree and training isn't sufficient to satisfy the requirements of progressive employers. You have to demonstrate continuous learning: that you are not resting of credentials but always looking for new learning opportunities for yourself. Demonstrate that you are in control of your own learning.

Skills and roles – not job descriptions
Everyone has a job description. We can roll that out to show what we are meant to do. Intelligent people can roll out a job description and say how they do it. But real leaders can articulate why they do what they do! These exceptional leaders can demonstrate skills and roles within their job - and work at building those. If you only work your job description, you're not building your career.

Employability
Be available and employable. Be willing and able to move for the right position in your career advancement. If you can't, then you're probably a step behind other applicants. However, your reasons for not being transportable may be fully legitimate. In that case, have a strategy to articulate alternatives that can fit into your goals. The most common and valid reason would be family based issues. This demonstrates that you are a balanced person who is a better asset and employee than a person without balance in their lives. Speak and explain all things in terms of employability and benefits.

Flexibility
Progressive employers are not looking for 9-to-5 employees. They want people who demonstrate flexibility and willingness to go the hard yards, work outside their job description when the team needs it and roll up their sleeves. Doesn't mean that you're sacrificing family or free time. You have to remain flexible to work when it's needed... and assertive enough to make that flexibility work both ways. Any employer who isn't happy with this might be good for your CV - but they're not a progressive employer... it might be worth reconsidering working for them!

Attitude
You get hired for your skills. You get fired for your attitude! You have to have the right attitude at the right time for the right setting. This can mean "having attitude" as well! So long as you're demonstrating that in the right setting - you're demonstrating your value to the company.

Transportable skills
If you want to build your career, you're probably not going to stay at the same employee forever. You're probably not going to stay in the same field for your entire working life. If you really want to be a leader, then you need to seek out, develop and create transportable skills. Everywhere you go; take every opportunity to learn and build skills that you can demonstrate are transportable into your next career move.

Connectivity
You need to make connections. That's why connections are central to all social and business networking formats. You need to build contacts throughout the world if you can! You also need to connect everything you are doing, developing (in terms of skills), learning, trying-something-new, and your attitude. You need to demonstrate that you are in control of your destiny and connecting everything together.

Anthropomorphism
This word means what 'anthropology' (human identity) would a progressive company 'metamorphoses' into if it could. What would your company be like, as a person... as a human identity, if it was turned into a human form? On top of this assessment of the human form of the progressive company, you need to assess where your own personal values are intersecting with the organisational values. If this company was a person, could you be friends?

Two final words of advice I was given by an employment agent (Philip Mayers):

"If you want a better job: do the job you have better!" and,
"Get yourself a job you love – and you’ll never have to 'work' again…"

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: arriving

2011-02-12T09:40:00.001+08:00

Too often the concept of “transition” is perceived to be a single process…and that adulthood is a clearly defined status (at which one “arrives”). The reality is far more complex than that!!! People change throughout their lives, even as adults. Becoming an adult is an individuals' journey, rather than a single event. An 18th or a 21st doesn't suddenly make someone an adult. Sadly, suddenly how society and the law treats someone based on their age changes suddenly without much space for supporting the transition.

At the same time, the law and society treats an adult differently, based on the best circumstances a lawyer can conjure... or on the best excuses an adult can present to their peers for unacceptable behaviour.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

The Salvos respond to bushfires in Western Australia

2011-02-08T10:36:00.000+08:00

Since the first indication of a major disaster in the foothills of Perth, The Salvation Army swung into action through its team of volunteers catering for the firefighters, SES, police and support agencies. Over 2,000 meals have been cooked and served to ensure that all were refreshed and nourished.

As the escalating scale of this disaster has quickly become evident, The Salvation Army is keen to work with the Department of Child Protection in supporting people in their greatest need. We are anticipating the capacity for financial assistance could reach $100,000, which is only the start to help people with their immediate needs.

The Salvation Army urgently needs the help of the public of Western Australia to be able to respond quickly in circumstances like this. Financial donations can be made through www.salvationarmy.org.au or phone Pedrth office on (08) 9260 9500.

As the community comes to terms with the substantial pain of their loss, The Salvation Army is seeking ways to support long-term recovery. We are working closely in partnership with the Bendigo Bank in Roleystone to see how we can support the recovery of this community.

Contact for media
Warren Palmer, Public Relations Secretary, The Salvation Army – Ph- 0417 909 964

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Julian Jenkins on Risk Management (Summary & Review)

2011-02-07T20:33:00.001+08:00

RISK MANAGEMENT KEY POINTS

In the area of risk management, Public Relations departments need to:

Ø Shift their thinking and reporting from process compliance and hypothetical threats

to providing a clear view of where the most immediate issues and risks lie

Ø Reshape the scale and format of risk reporting to make it easier for senior managers and boards to see and respond to the most significant issue

Ø Involve a wider range of stakeholders in identifying risks and highlighting potential areas of concern

Ø Free up meeting agendas to allow more time for serious discussion of major risk topics

Ø Conduct a workshop with the board “risk committee” to explore the role it wants to

play and the sorts of questions it wants to be able to answer.

Jenkins, Julian is a management process designer with 2^nd Road. “Risk Management Key Points”. Management Today, Risk Roundabout, March 2010: 17.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Personal Survival Kit

2011-02-02T18:45:00.002+08:00

I carry an emergency kit in my pocket. It used to be in a Strepsils tin. That's a good size because you'll still carry it and won't be tempted to leave it behind because it's too bulky. I upgraded recently to a small plastic container. This is certainly more confident in being water proof. But I fear the plastic container is just a little too big because I haven't always got it on me. A tin has no overhanging sides, but the plastic box is much wider. I'm looking for other options that have greater water-proof reliability than my strepsils tin, but not as much bulk as this wide plastic box. Often, I've taken to keeping it inside my back pack instead of my pocket. However, if you get separated from your back pack, then you have nothing. It's still only about the size of a cigarette packet... but the survival kit is something that would save your life in an emergency... the other box is slowly destroying your life.

Anyway, this is inspired by John Wiseman (who has probably died by now). He wrote a survival book for the SAS and it has been very helpful to me in my emergency management preparations. However, I've noticed at a few camping stores, you can buy a similar kit all sealed up in a tin about the size of a small tin of sardines or oysters. So that may be an easier option for someone who thinks being prepared might be a good idea. I have gradually added to the list of John Wiseman's, but also taken out some items that are obviously not available or suitable to carry.

All this sounds a little over the top, but all disaster preparedness does!!!

I'm still working on getting the exact contents of the kit right. I guess I always will due to the nature of emergency management. It got just a tiny little bit big for the strepsils tin, which is partly why I changed. But I may change back or search for a more compact (externally) plastic box. And unfortunately, with events in the last decade, it is impossible to carry a kit of this nature on a commercial flight on an aeroplane. Again, anyone who thinks I'm insane should watch the movie "Alive!"

I shall post my current list at a later date. But in the light of recent natural disasters around Australia, I figured I wanted to get people thinking about it. Today's news stated that some towns and places in far north Queensland are likely to be isolated for more than 24 hours when STC Yasi hits. In the rcent floods, some places were flooded out for days. People are running from bushfires in Gippsland.

I'm not saying the end of the world is coming. I'm just saying, give yourself the best chance of surviving.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Severe Tropical Cyclone Bianca

2011-01-28T15:37:00.000+08:00

I am a self confessed Emergency Management "nut" -
But I urge everyone: don't just ignore these warnings copied from the BOM website:

Perth Forecast

Issued at 11:25 am WST on Friday 28 January 2011
Warning summary
Tropical Cyclone Watch for Sunday.

PRIORITY

TROPICAL CYCLONE ADVICE NUMBER 35
Issued at 2:59 pm WST on Friday 28 January 2011

CYCLONE BIANCA EXPECTED TO IMPACT COMMUNITIES IN THE SOUTH WEST OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA ON SUNDAY

Bianca will weaken significantly before it reaches the South West. However there is a significant risk that it will retain cyclone intensity so people should prepare for:

. DAMAGING WINDS with gusts to 120 kilometres per hour
. VERY ROUGH SEAS and DANGEROUS SURF CONDITIONS
. COASTAL EROSION and FLOODING OF LOW LYING COASTAL AREAS
. SEVERE to CATASTROPHIC FIRE DANGERS
. HEAVY RAINFALL south of the cyclone with possible LOCALISED FLOODING.

A Cyclone WATCH is current for coastal areas from Jurien Bay to Albany, including Perth, Bunbury and Busselton.

At 2:00 pm WST Severe Tropical Cyclone Bianca, Category 3 was estimated to be 495 kilometres west northwest of Carnarvon and 1130 kilometres northwest of Perth and moving southwest at 30 kilometres per hour.

Severe Tropical Cyclone Bianca continues to move in a southwest direction away from the northwest of the state. Strong and gusty winds are still possible in areas between North West Cape and Carnarvon though winds will ease from the east during the afternoon and evening.

Severe Tropical Cyclone Bianca is expected to gradually weaken as it takes a more southerly track overnight. On Saturday Bianca will move in a southeasterly direction towards the southwest corner of the state while weakening steadily.

However there is a significant risk that Bianca will maintain tropical cyclone intensity as it approaches the coast early on Sunday. If this happens, coastal areas between Jurien Bay and Albany could experience DAMAGING WINDS with gusts to 120 kilometres per hour. Wind gusts to 100 kilometres per hour may be experienced through inland parts southwest of a line Jurien Bay to Albany.

On Sunday tides between Jurien Bay and Cape Naturaliste are likely to rise significantly above the normal high tide mark with VERY ROUGH SEAS, DANGEROUS

SURF and FLOODING of LOW LYING COASTAL AREAS. SIGNIFICANT COASTAL EROSION is possible. HEAVY RAINFALL is also possible on the southern side of the system.

LOCALISED FLOODING is possible but extensive flooding is not expected

VERY HIGH to SEVERE FIRE DANGERS are likely near the west coast on Sunday.

EXTREME to CATASTROPHIC FIRE DANGERS are likely across inland areas south of a line from Geraldton to Leonora to Israelite Bay on Sunday.
FESA State Emergency Service (SES) advises that people should start planning for bad weather and listen for further advice.

Details of Severe Tropical Cyclone Bianca at 2:00 pm WST:
Centre located near...... 23.9 degrees South 108.9 degrees East
.Location accuracy........ within 55 kilometres
.Recent movement.......... towards the southwest at 30 kilometres per hour
.Wind gusts near centre... 220 kilometres per hour
.Severity category........ 3
.Central pressure......... 950 hectoPascals

A number of years ago, people just ignored a tropical cyclone that came through Perth and down to Busselton. That one severely damaged the Busselton Jetty and it took a decade to get the tourist spot back into shape. A year ago we didn't think much of a little bit of dark cloud that came through... But by the time houses had been damaged by the hail storm, we paid a little more attention.
You don't have to set up an evacuation centre in your house... Just think a bit and prepare.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: Out of touch!!!

2011-01-25T09:39:00.000+08:00

Put bluntly: Policy (and therefore Government) is out of touch with the real experiences of young people.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

As easy as getting new glasses

2011-01-20T16:14:00.002+08:00

A last Will and Testament is a very important document. It can be quite easy to get one prepared if you follow a checklist and try to keep things simple. It is best to get legal advice but with some simple preparation the task can be much easier and take far less time than you might think.

Many organisations produce booklets and checklist to help people in the steps towards preparing their Will. The information is usually free and is available by calling the charity you trust the most. Look for a cause that is honest and operates with integrity. A cause where you can be sure the money is actually used for what they tell you. If you want to give money to a charity, not only do your research but check facts and ask direct questions. It is a very noble thing to do but you have to know they're actually trustworthy and not just pretending to be. Charities do have to use some funds towards operating costs but heavily scruitinise anyone who claims they don't.

Peter Hotchkin, a Bequests Director in Western Australia likened preparing a Will to getting fitted for glasses. He said, “When I first got glasses, I couldn’t believe how clear everything became! For months, even years, I had been putting up with books, papers, and all reading being hard work. I finally had to admit that I couldn’t see properly when I gave one of the kids the wrong dose of medicine because I couldn’t read the small writing on the bottle. Thankfully it was ok.

“However, I immediately had my eyes tested, found out what glasses I needed and had them in about a week... then a new world opened up to me! It was so easy I can’t believe I didn’t do it earlier. Plus it gave me peace-of-mind for taking care of my family.”

Mr Hotchkin believes that preparing a Will is similar. “People put it off for years because they don’t want to admit they need it. Then when they finally see a solicitor they find actually having a Will drawn up isn’t too difficult after all.”

“More and more people are choosing to include gift to a reliable charity within their Will,” said Mr Hotchkin. “Many people put us alongside family; with a small percentage of their estate.”

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: acceptance vs experience

2011-01-18T22:23:00.000+08:00

Within the world – the “average person” is losing power. Within the ‘youth world’ it is even more pronounced! The desire of young people is to be taken seriously and accepted in “mainstream” society (generally). Young people ‘relate’ to the world through an identity formed in the crucible of family, culture and educational experience. They ‘resolve’ the contradictors of age and situation through the distinct activities and behaviours of various subcultural experiences.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: resistance is not useless

2011-01-10T22:23:00.000+08:00

“Resistance to society” (as some activities of young people are perceived) – is often and desperate desire to be accepted by society. Graffiti artists want their work acknowledged as bone-fide art. Students’ attacks on teachers are to get attention in classrooms, because they want education, not being ignored in favour of 'better' or 'better attention seeking' students.

When I saw footage of a school girl attacking her teacher recently on TV - all it did was reinforce the statistical fact that girls get less attention in class at co-ed schools. This person really wanted to be educated! So she responded to being ignored in an immediate and forceful way. I'm not condoning violence at all... the girl's actions were an innappropriate way to respond. But I can understand the frustration.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Metalanguage about the metaphysical God

2011-01-06T19:42:00.001+08:00

St John of The Cross believed... like... "who am I that I should speak of God... that I may defame him or defile him by speaking wrongly of him." He said... "the fear of God is to think of God when we are unworthy."

Simone Weil said, "Christianity speaks too much and too quickly about holy things."

Bishop Richard Holloway said, "We never get 'God as; as God is...' because we only ever get God as secondhand: through language."

The language of and about God is so inadequate to apply to the subject...

Posted by Peter Hotchkin

Notes from the margins: age-related restrictions

2010-12-29T09:21:00.000+08:00

Young people are positioned in education and law, within society, as less responsible, more dependent and with fewer rights. Why would it not logically follow that young people would want to subvert these age-related restrictions? They are over-come with the institutionally imposed sense of powerlessness.

When one feels powerless - the natural instincts of fight or flight take over. So the logical rebellion arises. If one considers history (even just recent history in Australia); student movements in Universities, young people asking questions or 'bucking the system'. These events occur through the action of young people... no matter what generation they were at the time... when they were young; it mattered to say something, do something, challenge something.

Notes from the margins were taken from notes I made while reading the book “Rethinking Youth”.Johanna Wyn and Rob White. Rethinking Youth. St Leonards, NSW. Allen and Unwin. 1997.

Posted by Peter Hotchkin