End times prophecy has been a topic of discussion for centuries. Many religious texts, including the Bible, provide insights into what believers can expect as we approach the final days. Understanding these prophecies can help individuals prepare spiritually and mentally for the future. Are you familiar with the signs mentioned in these prophecies? #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Proving Jesus involves examining historical documents, archaeological findings, and the testimonies of those who witnessed his life and resurrection. Many scholars agree on the impact he had on history, which supports his existence and teachings. #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Reflecting on Joshua 1:1-11

This week we’re studying Joshua 1:1-11. Most of this text is God’s speech to Joshua, giving Joshua commands specific to his mission of leading the people of Israel into the promised land.

Given that, it might be worthwhile for us simply to make a list of what we see as God’s commands to Joshua in the text. What is God telling Joshua to do? [That is, if Joshua were to draw up a “to do” list, what would be on it?] What do we observe about that list? What’s interesting to us about that list? What thoughts or feelings do we have about it? Why?

We might also want to consider the relationship or “correlation” between these commands and the situation facing Joshua, and the people, at this historical moment. How would we describe “the situation” Joshua and the people are facing? What do we see as the challenges, and the opportunities, of that situation? How do God’s commands to Joshua here relate to those challenges and opportunities? How is fulfilling these orders going to help Joshua, and the people, in this situation, or respond to those challenges and opportunities? That is, why these orders at this time, do we think?

Another way, perhaps, to ask “the same” question: What kind of a leader is God telling Joshua to be here, would we say? What makes us say that? Why – that is, why do the people here need a leader like that? Or, perhaps, why does Joshua himself need to be that kind of leader, in this situation, do we think?

Some notes on the text are here; here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

There are a lot of repetitions in this text: “Moses” is mentioned a lot; Joshua is told to be “strong and courageous” three separate times; God mentions that he will be “with” Joshua twice.

What seems to be the point of the repeated mention of Moses? How would we describe the impact of the presence of Moses in the text? For instance, is it reassuring? Challenging? Inspiring? …? How does it help define or characterize the situation Joshua is facing? How is God, in God’s speech to Joshua, using the references to Moses, do we think?

What is the meaning of the instruction to “be strong and courageous”? What does it mean to be “strong” in this context, do we think? What does it mean to be “courageous”? Why do we think these qualities will be needed in this situation? How does a person go about “being” “strong and courageous” do we think? What are the advantages of being strong and courageous? The disadvantages?

[More personal] How would we ourselves like to be, or to be more, strong and courageous? Why? What would that take? What would change for us?

What does it mean that God will be “with” Joshua? How does God’s presence contribute to the fulfillment of this charge? Would we say it will make it easier or more possible for Joshua to do what God is telling him to do, or what? Why is that, do we think?

[More personal] How would we ourselves like God to be “with” us in the way God is telling Joshua God will be with him? Why? What would that take, do we think? What would change for us?

What is God’s part of the coming project, and what is Joshua’s? That is, how would we describe the “division of labor” or relationship God is offering Joshua in this situation? How is that relationship specific to God and Joshua, or to this situation, do we think? How is it more general – a relationship or balance of responsibilities that is true for everyone?

How would we compare Joshua’s situation here to our own? What do we see as the similarities? The differences? Thoughts and feelings about that? Why?

What can contemporary leaders take away from God’s charge to Joshua here? How much of God’s command to Joshua here seems like an ongoing charge – something that is still a charge to leaders today? Why? What seems like a command or charge to everyone, or anyone, at any time – that is, what elements of this instruction seem universal, or nearly so? Why? What do we take as instruction to us, personally? Why?

Image: “Sommernachmittag” (crop), Friedrich Kallmorgen, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

image of girls in conversation

End times prophecy has been a topic of fascination and concern for centuries, with various religious texts outlining signs and events that are believed to precede the end of the world. Many interpretations exist, often leading to intense discussions about their implications for humanity. Understanding these prophecies can provide insight into our current world events and spiritual beliefs. #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Proving the Bible involves examining historical evidence, archaeological findings, and textual analysis. Many scholars highlight the consistency of biblical manuscripts over centuries, supporting its reliability as a historical document. This approach strengthens faith and encourages deeper exploration of scripture. #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Bersier, a French Reformed minister, posed an awkwardly sensible question: if you possess leisure whilst others labour ceaselessly, shouldn’t that free time go toward alleviating their suffering?

Modern response? Eloquent social media denunciations apparently discharge the duty. Quite inspired theology.

#reformedtheology #christian #biblestudy #lazarus #presbyterian #bookofluke

Alt...

Portrait of Eugene Bersier, 19th-century Reformed minister from France, with quote from “Lazarus at the Rich Man’s Gate” questioning what portion of the leisured wealthy’s lives they devote to the poor and suffering.

Watch it NOW:

“Can I actually read scripture in Hebrew myself?”

I get this question constantly, and today I am answering all of it.

Is biblical Hebrew a different language from the Hebrew spoken in Israel today? How much overlap is there really? If you learn one, do you understand the other? And what does it actually take to sit with the text in its original words, without waiting for someone else’s translation to tell you what it says?

Every translation is a choice someone made on your behalf. This is about reading it for yourself.

https://youtu.be/aYFLXLZYccc

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BiblicalHebrew #BibleStudy #Scripture

“Can I actually read scripture in Hebrew myself?”

I get this question constantly and tomorrow I am answering all of it.

Is biblical Hebrew a different language from the Hebrew spoken in Israel today? How much overlap is there really? If you learn one, do you understand the other? And what does it actually take to sit with the text in its original words, without waiting for someone else’s translation to tell you what it says?

Every translation is a choice someone made on your behalf. This is about reading it for yourself.

Tomorrow, Sunday at 12 noon Eastern. Subscribe now so it lands the moment it goes live 👇

https://www.youtube.com/hebrewbyinbal

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BiblicalHebrew #BibleStudy #Scripture

Engaging in scripture study can deepen your understanding of faith and enhance your spiritual journey. It allows you to explore the historical context, cultural significance, and theological implications of biblical texts. Regular study can also foster a stronger connection to your beliefs and community. #BibleStudy #Faith #SpiritualGrowth #Theology #Scripture

The millennial kingdom is a future 1,000-year reign of Christ on Earth, described in Revelation 20, where peace and righteousness will prevail.

#MillennialKingdom #BibleStudy #Eschatology #Christianity #Prophecy

Diving into scripture study opens up a world of understanding and connection. Each verse can reveal layers of meaning, guiding us through life's challenges and enriching our spiritual journey. Embrace the transformative power of the Word and let it illuminate your path. #BibleStudy #Faith #SpiritualGrowth #Wisdom #Inspiration

Biblical ethics guide believers by grounding morality in the teachings of Scripture, emphasizing love, justice, and integrity as central to a righteous life.

#BiblicalEthics #Christianity #MoralValues #BibleStudy #Faith

Please join me as we think about Batman and sin... that's what everyone thinks about when you read Psalm 14, right? https://youtube.com/live/K01NZoera08

#Psalms #BibleStudy #Sin #Corruption

Throughout history, countless scholars and theologians have sought to prove the existence and divinity of Jesus Christ. From historical texts to archaeological findings, evidence continues to emerge that supports the life and teachings of Jesus. Engaging with these proofs not only strengthens faith but also invites deeper discussions about spirituality and history. The journey of understanding Jesus is as profound as it is enlightening. #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Bible prophecy has fascinated believers and skeptics alike for centuries. From the visions of Daniel to the revelations of John, these texts challenge us to consider the future and our role in it. What prophecies resonate with you? How do they shape your understanding of faith today? Let's dive into these ancient texts and explore their meanings together! #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Reflecting on 2 Timothy 1:1-6 and 3:14-16

This week we’re studying two parts of 2 Timothy, 2 Timothy 1:1-6 and 3:14-16. These identify Timothy as the child of a family that has been faithful – to the God of Israel, and now also to Jesus Christ – for generations, has learned the sacred writings from infancy, and is gifted, we are inclined to think for ministry. There is a recurrent theme in these texts of the long ancestral and scriptural tradition that has led up to, and is now alive in, Timothy’s own faith.

One basic question we might want to ask ourselves is simply how much of this story resonates with us. What has been our own ancestral and educational heritage, in this regard? What early memories around faith and scripture do we ourselves have? How do we see those contributing to our faith now? What difference does our personal history seem to have made for our ideas and practices today? Where do we see similarity, and where do we see difference, between ourselves and Timothy?

Some notes on these texts are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

[maybe more theoretical … but I’m drawn to it, and think it probably matters …] Why wouldn’t Paul be worshiping God “from his ancestors” with a clear conscience? That is, why do we think Paul needs to include that affirmation in v3? [What is the charge or criticism he’s, implicitly, denying here, do we suppose? Why do we think that?]

How do we understand the “reason” the author reminds Timothy to “rekindle the gift of God that is within you” (v6)? And [maybe for extra credit] what do we think that rekindling has to do with the spirit we have been given (v7)? That is: what do we think the author is saying here? What seems to us to be the situation or concern being addressed?

What are the implications of this conversation for us, do we think? Why?

What do we think it means to “continue in what you have learned”? How much or little room does this “continuing” leave for learning something new, do we think? Why?

What difference does it make, do we think, how we answer this question?

What is the importance of knowing “from whom you learned it”? That is, why would that matter, do we think? From whom did Timothy “learn it,” do we think, as far as we can tell? Why does that seem to matter?

What are the implications of all this for us, do we think? What does it tell us about the importance of learning, and about the sources of our learning or spiritual formation? What ideas does it give us about continuing, or modifying, anything we are doing now? Why?

[maybe more theoretical …] What – if any – difference does it make to our answer(s) here if we know that the verb used here, “to continue,” is the same verb Jesus uses when he tells the disciples “abide in me …” (John 15:4)?

How do we understand the meaning of “God-breathed” scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16? That is, what does that language mean to us? [We might want to consider what we think of as the various possibilities for its meaning here.] What are the implications of that understanding for us? How does that description or quality of scripture affect our own reading, study, response, etc. to scripture?

What do we understand the author to mean by “scripture” here? What is included, and what is not?

Overall, taken together this way, Paul seems to me in these verses to be emphatically and recurrently referring to the valuable and necessary continuity between “the faith of our ancestors” – the Torah-informed faith in and worship of the God of Israel – and the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus, the in-Christ-Jesus kind of faith. It seems to me he is insisting that these are not two separate or opposed things, but a kind of seamless whole. If the false teaching the author is so exercised about in other parts of the letter has to do with some form of abandonment of the God of Israel – which wouldn’t be a giant stretch, honestly, since that kind of teaching has cropped up in Christianity over and over, historically – that would totally make sense, and would make sense of this theme in the text.

Image: “La Discussion Politique,” Émile Friant, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Studying 2 Timothy 1:1-6 and 3:14-16

This week we’re studying two short texts from 2 Timothy, 2 Timothy 1:1-6 (although why not go all the way to :7, eh, and finish the sentence?) and 3:14-16 (although, same question, about :17!) These texts point us to Timothy, as one of the “faithful witnesses” in our series: early Christian missionary and protégé of the apostle Paul. Although, they really identify the faithful witness as scripture. These particular texts construct Timothy as someone who testifies to the tradition of faith: as something he’s learned from his ancestors and teachers, rooted in an even longer inherited tradition of sacred writings. Here are a few notes on these texts:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

2 Timothy is a warmly personal ancient letter, addressed to “Timothy, my beloved child,” from “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God.” Together with 1 Timothy and Titus it makes up the trio of personal letters known as “the pastorals.”

All three of the pastorals include practical advice in concrete ministry circumstances. Together they stress the importance of sound teaching and steady leadership in the Christian community, for the sake of the integrity of the gospel message.

Since the beginning of the 19

th

century, scholars have questioned the identity of the author of the pastorals. The questions arise due to differences in style and vocabulary between these texts and the undisputed letters, as well as from what some perceive as theological differences, and in particular the much greater focus on organizational or institutional matters.

Those questions leave us with a wider set of options than usual about when the letters were written, and why. Those who favor Pauline authorship see them as early texts, whose motives speak for themselves. Those who think of them as “deutero-Pauline” favor a time of composition maybe as late as mid-2

nd

century, voicing more institutional concerns. Those options add a layer of complexity to our reading. [Here is a detailed treatment of the issue, with special attention to the implications for reading the text as scripture, from The Bible Seminary.]

2 Timothy is, it seems, the likeliest of the pastorals to be seen as an early work by the original apostle Paul. Its personal tone and references, along with its framing as a “letter of succession” or “last will and testament,” contribute to the impression that the letter is direct, personal counsel from Paul to his protégé, Timothy, as Paul faces what he seems to believe will be his death, in effect passing on a legacy that consists of faithful ministry in an often contentious world. Of particular importance to us, given our texts, one of Timothy’s supports in the struggle will be “the tradition,” as passed on by trustworthy teachers and as informed and shaped by scripture.

Our texts include the introduction of the letter, with its warm words of commendation for Timothy and praise for Timothy’s mother and grandmother, and then Paul’s specific commendation of scripture, which is almost the conclusion of the letter.

Both of these texts are options in the lectionary, every third year. We ought to know they’re in the Bible, even if all we know is the lectionary.

CLOSER READING

Vv 1-2 are the opening lines of an ancient letter, naming and characterizing the author / sender – Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God – and then the recipient – Timothy, my beloved child – and delivering an opening greeting – grace, mercy, and peace …

The phrase in the opening that is translated “for the sake of the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus” (NRSV) is more literally “for the sake of the promise of the in-Christ-Jesus life.” We can’t quite say that in English, hence the relative clause – which somehow seems to miss something of the author’s intent, that life “in Christ” is qualitatively different, and differently promising, than life that is not that life.

V3 notes the thanks the author gives for Timothy, and the aside whom I worship literally from my ancestors with a clear / pure conscience. We might wonder what “a clear conscience” has to do with worshipping God in the ancestral tradition invoked here, and what that aside is doing here, of all places. As if it is important to mention that this author, with all his devotion to Christ Jesus, continues to worship the God of Israel, without any sense of bad faith. Why might that seem necessary?

The notion of ancestral tradition is about to be mentioned again, though, in v5. After the mention of remembrance in vv3-4: remembrance in prayers, which are unceasing, night and day; remembrance of tears – we suppose, upon parting from one another; remembrance of faith. That will bring us back to tradition.

In v5, this literally non-hypocritical faith – not appearance-only faith – has a home first in Timothy’s grandmother Lois and then in Timothy’s mother Eunice. The meaning of the name “Lois” is unclear, but the name “Eunice” pretty clearly means, literally, “good victory.” Faith here seems to be something that can be passed on, taking up residence in a person as an inheritance. Which Paul is convinced it has in Timothy.

So, v6, another remembrance word – this time, remind, or literally “I urge you not to forget” to rekindle / fan into flame the gift of God. If that gift is dimming or going out, like a fire, bring it back to life. It is in you by the laying on of my hands. This strikes readers as important evidence of a developing ritual in the church, indicating that person-to-person transmission of spiritual gifts or power or authority by laying on of hands was already something that was going on by whenever this letter is written.

According to me we should read the next verse, v7, too, since it’s the reason Timothy should do this rekindling: that God has not given us a spirit of timidity / dread, but of power and of love and of self-control – specifically, the kind of “self-control” that arises not from the exercise of effort to master one’s passions, but the kind that stems from a sound and wise and balanced mind, and so chooses and behaves wisely and moderately.

When we jump over to 2 Timothy 3:14-16 (again, ideally we’ll read that last verse, v17, along with this), we are hearing instructions that form a contrast with the sorry state of “the last days” Paul has been decrying since the beginning of the chapter.

Instead of succumbing to all that, Timothy should abide in what he has learned (in the manner of having been a student or disciple) and (maybe most literally) been made to trust, knowing from whom he learned, studied, apprenticed all that.

And, moving on to v15, it seems also knowing that from infancy or from babyhood he has known the sacred writings that are able to make you wise unto salvation. (Compare Psalm 19:7.) Although, salvation is through the in-Christ-Jesus faith. Whether that is faith a person places in Christ Jesus, the person, or whether it is the faith that Christ Jesus himself had, we might want to keep thinking about.

It seems important that wisdom is being invoked here, because the use of God-breathed in the next verse – in the famous assertion that every scripture is God-breathed – seems to have its true home in the way Wisdom, and particularly the Wisdom that is the Torah or instruction of God, is being conceptualized in the Second Temple Judaism. Wisdom emanates from God. (See Wisdom of Solomon 7:25.) Wisdom takes the form of revelation, in creation (think Genesis 1:2) and the teaching embodied in scripture (see Bauch 4:1).

Of course, then, this wisdom that is animated by the spirit of the living God is useful for teaching and for reproof and for correction  – here, we might want to think of the kind of correction that physical therapy provides – and for training – the kind small children receive – in righteousness. How could it not be?

In v17, then, the conclusion of the sentence, this beneficial impact of the en-scripted wisdom of God has a purpose: so the person of God may be complete / equipped, fully completed / equipped – there’s a repetition of root words here – for every good work.

“My child do not forget my teaching.” (Proverbs 3:1)

Some questions on the texts are here.

Image: “Casa de Convalescència, arrambador ceràmic” Enfo, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

St. Paul mosaic

We know the word fool, but do we recognize who the fools are? Do we recognize when we're the one playing the fool? #Psalm 14 helps us better understand real foolishness. https://youtube.com/live/mZoWHIPSe1A

#BibleStudy

Diving into scripture study can transform your understanding of faith and life. Whether you're exploring historical context or personal application, each verse has something to teach us. What’s your favorite scripture, and how has it impacted your life? #BibleStudy #Faith #Wisdom #SpiritualGrowth #Community

Exploring the evidence and historical foundations that support the truths found in the Bible reveals a compelling story of faith and fact.

#BibleEvidence #Faith #BibleStudy #Christianity #Scripture

Bible prophecy has fascinated believers and skeptics alike for centuries. From the visions of Daniel to the revelations of John, these texts offer insights into the future and our place in it. What do you think is the most compelling prophecy in the Bible? Let's discuss! #Prophecy #Faith #EndTimes #BibleStudy #Apologetics

Reflecting on Acts 22:3-15

This week we’re studying Acts 22:3-15, most of Paul’s speech to an audience of temple-goers in Jerusalem, and the second telling of the story of his encounter with the risen Christ on the road to Damascus.

We’re studying the text as part of our series of studies of “the testimony of faithful witnesses” across scripture. Paul, arguably, is a paradigm case of the faithful witness, and his testimony makes up a large proportion of the New Testament [although possibly less than we might think, per this]. We can’t easily ignore him, were we to want to, which we presumably don’t.

A first, basic question seems to be: what do we ourselves understand to have happened on the road to Damascus? That is, based on the description(s) given in the book of Acts (Acts 9:1-19, Acts 22:1-21, Acts 26:12-18), how would we describe what happens to Paul? What could we call it, and what would we call it? [For instance: vision, encounter, intervention, turning point, conversion … ?] If Paul is being “a faithful witness” to this event, what is Paul being a faithful witness to?

Why do we suppose we use that language and give that interpretation, rather than some other choice? What difference does it seem to make, to us, that we interpret this event as we do? [That is: describing this as “the story of Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus” is already an interpretation of the text, just as is “the story of Paul’s encounter with the risen Christ,” or “Jesus’ commissioning of Paul …” or “Paul’s capture by Christ …” What does it say about us, and about our understanding of this event, when we lean towards the interpretation(s) we do? Can we see why we prefer what we prefer? How our preference relates to our faith and understanding of reality? What do we learn about ourselves as we think about this?]

Some notes on the text are here, and here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

In v3, Paul describes himself as “being zealous for God, just as all of you are today.” In v14-15, Ananias tells Paul he has been chosen by “the God of our ancestors” for a particular mission. How do we understand Paul’s zeal for God to be affected by his experience on the road to Damascus, and by his new mission? What has changed, according to us? [For instance: Paul’s understanding of God? Of the way to please God? Of what people should and shouldn’t do? Of various aspects of metaphysical reality? What?] What difference does it make how we answer this question?

Whose witness is Paul, according to the grammar of the sentence in vv14-15? How does our answer to that question matter to us?

How do we understand Ananias’ role in this story? How would we describe him, and what he does for Paul in the story? How important would we say Ananias’ role is in the story?

[More personal] Where do we see ourselves in this story? Or, perhaps, how would we compare our own stories to that of Paul’s, Ananias’, or even a member of the crowd? Where do we see similarity, where do we see difference? What seems to be the importance of those similarities and differences, for us?

Image: “Figures in Conversation – Étaples,” Leslie Hunter, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Nobody learns Hebrew to pass a test.

You learn it because there is a person on the other side. A grandmother whose stories you have only ever heard secondhand. Israeli in-laws you want to genuinely talk with. A trip to Israel where you order your own coffee, ask your own directions, and hear the country answer you back.

That is the whole point, and it is exactly what most programs never get you to. They teach you about Hebrew. Vocabulary lists, grammar charts, quizzes you pass and then forget. Meanwhile the actual moment you wanted, the conversation, never arrives.

I built Practically Speaking Hebrew backwards from that moment. You learn how to construct your own sentences in real time, so you can say what you actually need to say, in whatever situation you are standing in. Real Hebrew, for your real life.

That is what this was always for.

hebrewbyinbal.com/speak 💙

#LearnHebrew #BibleStudy #HebrewForBeginners #LanguageLearning #JewishLife

Studying Acts 22:3-15

This week we’re studying one of the three tellings of the story of Paul’s (Saul’s) conversion on the road to Damascus, from persecutor of the followers of the way of Jesus Christ to evangelist for that way. We are focusing on Acts 22:3-15, the second telling of the story, this time by Paul, as part of his defense before a crowd of hostile temple-goers. The first telling of the story is the narrator’s, in Acts 9 (1-19). The third and final telling is again Paul’s, again part of his self-defense, this time before King Agrippa (Acts 26:9-18).

We looked at the narrator’s version of the story some years ago, with some notes on that text here. We’ve also looked at the very beginning of Paul’s defense before Agrippa (notes here), although not the part where he tells his call story again. Here are some notes on this week’s version of the story:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

The book of Acts, as we probably remember – even from last week – is the second part of Luke-Acts. Some have suggested it ought to be called “the acts of the Holy Spirit” rather than the Acts of the Apostles, considering the important role played by the Holy Spirit in the events recorded in the text. We attribute the text to Luke, and appreciate his keen literary sensibilities, and mastery of elegant Greek.

We might be inclined to think Luke is consciously writing to a gentile audience, in part because he highlights episodes in which gentiles are clearly accepted into this initially Jewish movement, in part because he doesn’t seem to remember episodes in which gentile acceptance might have been more questionable, in part because he feels he has to explain Jewish terms and customs for the unfamiliar, and in part because he addresses his work to “Theophilus,” who sounds like a gentile, and who might be a real person, or might be an “ideal reader.” We think he is writing in the latter part of the first century CE, maybe a bit after 70 CE – in which case, Paul and Paul’s adventures would be only a memory, albeit a recent and important one.

By this point in the story, the Jesus movement has been growing by leaps and bounds since the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2), and has been spreading around the Mediterranean world since the persecution that broke out following Stephen’s death (which we looked at last week, Acts 7). Paul has been instrumental in this spread ever since joining up with the multi-ethnic congregation in Antioch, where the believers were first called Christians (Acts 11).

By now, we have been through three missionary journeys that have taken Paul and his various traveling companions around the Mediterranean, and have ended him up in Jerusalem, where his presence in the temple has raised a ruckus. The ruckus has been fueled by misinformation and rumor; maybe we present-day folks can relate to that. The ruckus has finally gotten serious enough that the Romans have stepped in to restore order, by taking Paul into custody. But Paul has asked to speak to the crowd before he’s taken away, and what he says is recorded in Acts 22.

The city of Tarsus to which Paul refers, his “home town,” was a significant port city in the Roman province of Cilicia, the region of Asia Minor, in what is now Turkey [There’s a concise discussion of the place here; a nice map of the Roman Empire here, which will also show Damascus in Syria, and the relationship of both of these cities to Jerusalem; and a simplified map here that also shows all three cities.]

The Gamaliel mentioned in v3 as Paul’s teacher is probably the sage who is known in Jewish tradition for having headed the Sanhedrin and continued the school of Hillel in the second third of the first century CE (The Jewish Encyclopedia tells more here).

The story of Saul/Paul’s encounter on the Damascus road is in the lectionary, but only in its first (narrator’s) telling. So this week’s episode, of Paul’s self-defense before this Jerusalem crowd, and this telling of the story in his own words, would be something we wouldn’t know was in the Bible if all we knew were the lectionary. Bible Content Examinees, take note.

CLOSER READING

Commentators note that Paul’s oration on this occasion follows the form of a classical apologia or defense, drawing on the components of classical rhetoric (which are nicely discussed here for a modern audience).

We should probably note that Paul begins this self-defense (v3), or apologia, by saying “I am a Jew.” This relates him to his audience, of course, and his further comments will make that relationship tighter: being instructed in the exactness of the law of our fathers and having had Gamaliel for a teacher, and being zealous for God, explicitly as all of you are.

We probably also shouldn’t miss the significance of Paul’s use of the present tense – that is, “I am” rather than “I was” a Jew. That is, it probably matters – for the audience, and for us – that Paul describes himself as “a Jew.” Importantly, it reminds us that when we moderns casually describe Paul’s conversion as being “from Judaism to Christianity,” we’re making a mistake. At this historical moment, a conversion like that would have been an anachronism; Christianity was not a clearly separate “religion” from Judaism; the two identities were not mutually exclusive. Paul himself has not given up his Jewish identity – even though, after his conversion, he’s now a Jewish follower of Jesus Christ, who as we know, now preaches to gentiles. Famously, he doesn’t regard his Jewishness as being a mark of spiritual superiority (Philippians 3:2-11). Nevertheless, that doesn’t seem to mean he’s stopped being Jewish.

In v5, he appeals to witnesses – the high priest, and all the presbyterians elders – who ought to be credible to the audience, and who can attest to his former persecutorial career.

In other words, he’s really not the person this crowd thinks he is.

Vv6-7 portray his experience on the way to persecute people in Damascus as sudden, and involving sight and sound: a light that shone from heaven and a voice – implicitly from the same source – that addresses him by name. His companions are witnesses to the light, but in this telling of the story can’t corroborate the conversation that’s about to take place between Saul (as he was then known) and the voice (who is going to identify itself as belonging to Jesus of Nazareth), as we’ll learn in v9.

The conversation occupies vv7-10. We might note that telling the story this way – that is, by drawing out the direct dialogue of the conversation – slows down the action, adding to the suspense of the telling of this story, and emphasizing the personal exchange between Saul and Jesus.

When we recall that this is Saul’s first encounter with Jesus, it might add to the poignancy and drama of the exchange. Here’s Saul saying “Who are you, lord?” responding to someone he doesn’t know yet, hasn’t ever met, and who is sure leaving an indelible first impression.

Here’s Jesus saying “I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom you are persecuting/chasing/causing to suffer.” And when we think about the theological statements Paul will make subsequently, we can probably think of the ways the whole range of meanings of that verb fit Paul’s life: he is, perhaps unbeknownst to himself, “chasing” Jesus; and he isn’t only persecuting the members of the body of Christ in his current role as zealous Pharisee, he is also one of the “all” who have sinned and come short of the glory of God who caused Christ to suffer. In other words, this is a deep statement.

Paul’s next question, “What shall I do, lord?” suggests that he’s quickly realized that he, Paul, is not the one in control here.

Jesus’ instruction is to continue on to Damascus to await further instructions. It is probably significant that at this point Paul has to be led by the hand – that is, he’s in no position to see his own way forward. It’s a practical response to his light blindness, of course, but it’s also a potent symbol of his new need for faith.

Ananias enters the picture in v12. For the benefit of the current audience, Paul describes him as devout – from the perspective of Torah observance or halakhah, if we can use that term – and witnessed to be so by all the Jews living in Damascus. Again, Paul is appealing to solidly Jewish credentials, this time Ananias’ credentials.

Ananias restores Paul’s sight. Or rather, we gather, God restores Paul’s sight, through the agency of Ananias.

In v14, Ananias invokes the God of our fathers as the key figure here. God has appointed Paul to know, see, and hear: to know God’s will, to see the Righteous One, and to hear the voice of his mouth. The “his” here could, conceivably, refer either to the Righteous One or to the God of our fathers. This seems important. Similarly, when Paul is going to be a witness for/to him to all humans of what Paul has seen and heard, we may be hearing that Paul will be God’s witness, or Christ’s witness.

[Admittedly, Trinitarianly orthodox Christians might not be able to see much real difference between those two persons of the Triune One.]

Once again, the dramatic seeing and hearing that happens on the road to Damascus is a point of emphasis. Considering the role of seeing and hearing as a vehicle of knowing in the larger story of the people of God – we might think particularly of how people see and hear God at Mt. Sinai, and thereby come to know God’s will – Saul/Paul’s dramatic experience probably ought to be persuasive.

And maybe it would have been persuasive to his audience in Jerusalem, if only Paul hadn’t brought up those infuriating gentiles in v21 …

Some questions on the text are here.

Image: “Stained Glass St Blaise Church Dubrovnik” (cropped), Tony Hisgett, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

representation in stained glass of apostles Peter and Paul

Diving into scripture study can transform our understanding of faith and life. It’s not just about reading; it’s about engaging with the text, asking questions, and seeking deeper meanings. What’s your favorite passage that has changed your perspective? Let’s share insights! #BibleStudy #Faith #SpiritualGrowth #Wisdom #Community

Diving into scripture study can transform your understanding of faith and life. Each verse holds a treasure waiting to be uncovered. What’s your favorite passage and why does it resonate with you? Let’s share insights and grow together! #BibleStudy #Faith #Inspiration #SpiritualGrowth #Community

Reflecting on Acts 6:7-10, 7:54-60

This week we’re studying Acts 6:7-10 and Acts 7:54-60, two extracts from the story of Stephen, one of the first deacons and “first Christian martyr.”

The verses we’re focusing on bypass almost the entire content of Stephen’s recorded witness, which is to be found in his long speech before the council, Acts 7:2-53. That has the effect of setting Acts 7:54, “When they heard these things, they became enraged …” as the immediate response to Acts 6:10 “But they could not withstand the power and Spirit with which he spoke.”

There is a chance we might want to correct this impression, or at least to consider its impact, by reviewing and thinking about Stephen’s actual speech. How do we understand that speech? What does it seem to have to do with the presentation of the gospel, either in Stephen’s first century context or in our own present one? Why, do we think, Stephen gives this speech, seemingly in his own defense, before the council? How does the content of the speech seem to relate to the charges referred to in Acts 6:11 (“blasphemous words against Moses and God”) and Acts 6:13-14 (“saying things against this holy place and the law,” predicting that “Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place …”)? In other words, what’s our understanding of what is going on in this situation?

Whether or not we want to spend time on that part of the story, we presumably do want to think about what it means for us that Stephen suffers death for the sake of his commitment to Jesus’ being the Christ of God. How would we describe Stephen’s behavior at the end of the story – that is, what words or labels would we use to characterize him? How do we feel about the way he ends his life? (For instance, would we call him brave, courageous, fearless, forgiving, compassionate, …? Would we say he inspires us? Encourages us, maybe to persevere? Or … what?) How much do we ourselves want to be like, or to be able to be like, Stephen?

Some notes on Acts 6:7-15 (from an earlier time) are here; some notes on Acts 7:54-60 are here. [There’s also a sermon on that text, for those interested, here.] Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

“Dying for the faith” is a long-standing ultimate test of a person’s commitment to Christ. Our published curriculum names Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Archbishop Oscar Romero as twentieth century martyrs. We might be able to name others. [Whom would we ourselves name? What leads us to name them? How are their actions and deaths expressions of faithfulness to Christ, in our view?]

In light of that, we might want to explore some of the possibly or arguably relevant distinctions that might be involved in “dying for the faith.” What difference does it make, do we think, if premature death is a result of official state action (like execution) or of criminal action (like assassination, or fire-bombing a church) or of armed conflict? What difference does it make if it comes as a consequence of breaking the law, or of pursuing justice, or of speaking out, or … what? What are our thoughts on this?

What is our response to Stephen’s final prayer? Why? What do we think it means for us, as a model for our own behavior in our own situation(s)?

The whole story seems to have been precipitated by a religious argument that begins (Acts 6:9) in the synagogue of the Freedman.

What is our own experience of religious arguments? When, where, with whom, about what have we ourselves ever engaged in religious arguments? How do we think those arguments were similar to, or different from, this one? Why do we think that? What have we learned from those experiences of religious argument?

What is our own understanding of what it means to “proclaim Jesus as Lord”? What behaviors or speeches do we understand that to entail? When, where, with whom, etc.? How does our understanding seem to compare to Stephen’s – that is, what strikes us as similar, what as different, between us and Stephen, when it comes to how we proclaim Jesus as Lord?

Overall, we presumably want to explore what Stephen’s experience and example mean for us. What does this story have to do with us, and with our own lives as Christians? What makes us say that, do we think?

Image: “Am Mittagstisch,” an image by Hermann Groeber [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons,

Alt...

painting - family around a dinner table

Studying Acts 6:7-10, 7:54-60

This week we’re studying two texts pertaining to the life – and death – of Stephen, among other things the first Christian martyr: Acts 6:7-10 and Acts 7:54-60. We studied the first text a couple of years ago, with some notes here. And while the other text is new to our class, something like notes are here, nevertheless, in the form of a sermon, since the text was a lectionary option for the Easter season this year. But for those who were hoping for something less sermonic and more textual, here are a few of those kind of notes on our second text:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

Since we’re reading in Acts, we’ll want to recall that the larger text of the book of Acts is thought to be “part II” of Luke-Acts, sharing with the gospel of Luke a dedication to “Theophilus,” a sophisticated Greek literary writing style, an emphasis on the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit, and a sense of the warm acceptance of gentiles by Jesus and God and the early church. Although Luke is one of the synoptics, along with Matthew and Mark, he has a lot of unique material – Luke’s “special section.” And then, with Acts, Luke is in essence the canonical chronicler of the early church, insofar as narrative goes. Anyone else’s perspective is either non-canonical, or comes through a primary source, like one of Paul’s letters.

Stephen shows up in the Acts narrative at the beginning of Acts 6, in the context of a conflict in the early Christian community, about the treatment of widows. “The Hellenists” – Greek-speaking Jewish Christians – feel their widows are being neglected in the community’s distribution of food.

As I read this, the Christians have taken seriously the need to care for the widows in the community, and have been doing that by taking food baskets around to the widows. Evidently, the Food Basket Distribution Committee is mostly made up of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Christians, who are much more aware of the Hebrew widows than they are of the Greek-speaking Jewish Christian widows, and so their lists are lopsided. I really don’t imagine the Committee was neglecting the Hellenists’ widows on purpose. It just sounds to me like a totally typical church communications ball having been dropped.

[I don’t know whether having a story in the Bible that feels so much like something that just happened last week at church is more encouraging or discouraging, honestly. On the discouraging side, this kind of thing seems to be endemic to churches. Or, maybe, to people. But on the encouraging side, this story says to me that we’re really not doing worse than the earliest Christians when it comes to this kind of thing, and sometimes, we actually do better. That is, sometimes, at least from time to time, it seems we have actually learned something, and put it into practice.]

Anyway, The Twelve, aka the Apostles, come up with a plan to authorize some Hellenists, chosen by the Hellenists themselves, to handle the distribution to the Hellenists’ widows. The Hellenist Widows Food Basket Distribution Task Force, if you will. Traditionally we identify these folks as the first deacons. Stephen is the first one named in the list of these seven appointees. (Acts 6:5)

We learn from the remainder of chapter 6 that Stephen doesn’t restrict his Christian witness to the distribution of these food baskets. Being full of grace and power, he does great wonders and signs among the people, and also engages in spirited debate with opponents of the new Christian way (Acts 6:8-9). Since he’s better at making his points than his opponents are at making theirs, the opponents get annoyed, and cook up a plan to get Stephen into trouble. And the plan works. Stephen is arrested and brought before the religious council.

The council would be the Sanhedrin, the institution that dealt with Jewish community law and disputes. It would have been made up of 23 to 70 men (no women), depending on the significance of the case. They would have included priests or members of priestly families, scribes – studied experts in the law – and elders, members of leading families. The council had plenty of actual authority, even under Roman occupation. The Romans left many judicial matters in the hands of local institutions.

Capital punishment, however, was a Roman prerogative. In more ordinary cases, the council might vote to sentence someone to death, and then refer the verdict to a Roman court or official, that could carry out the sentence. Some commentators preserve this

Most of chapter 7 then contains Stephen’s long defense of his position, which presents a distinctive version of what we might have heard called “salvation history.” It’s not a particularly conciliatory defense. More what we could call “inflammatory.” It certainly inflames the audience at the hearing, which brings us to our text for the week.

It seems important to mention, in this connection, that there is nothing in the text about official Sanhedrin action having been taken in this situation. We may not even be warranted in assuming that the “they” in vv54 and following are the official members of the council; “they” may just as well be onlookers and witnesses to the proceedings. In other words, we can’t necessarily draw conclusions about the actions of the Sanhedrin from this account.

On the other hand, we might be able to surmise that there is at least a faction, either of council or of audience or both, that sees their action as zealous defense of true religion. (See the article “Cloaks and Violence” here.) And that faction would not only have included Saul (v58), but might well have been led by him. Also, we may have to think that the Sanhedrin didn’t have the wherewithal to stop these zealots, once they’d gotten going, had they wanted to.

Most of the text is in the lectionary, one out of three Sixth Sunday of Easters.

CLOSER READING

As Luke tells the story, it’s an evenly balanced contrast between the actions of “them” (v54, 57-58a) and of Stephen (v55-56, v59b-60).

They – whoever “they” are, precisely – at first heard – Stephen’s presentation of Israel’s history. In response they became enraged, grinding their teeth – the Greek verb that gives us our word bruxism, that is, teeth-grinding. Then, when Stephen continues with his vision, they block out their hearing, covering their ears – maybe the message is, “this is just too much to take.” We think because of the blasphemy that could seem to be implied in Stephen’s announcement of his vision (see below). Finally they rush at him, drag him out – not just out of the room, but out of the city – and begin to stone him. All of this is active, and aggressive.

Stephen, in contrast, sees and speaks and prays. More precisely, in v55 he’s filled with the Holy Spirit in the face of “their” rage, gazes into heaven, sees the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. This probably should remind us of Daniel 7:13. In v56, his announcement or communication of this vision is what prompts the listeners’ covering their ears.

In v59, while they are stoning Stephen, Stephen is praying for them, as well as for himself. Praying that Lord Jesus will receive his spirit, and that the Lord will not hold this sin against them. That is, from the perspective of this text, the action is clearly a sin, not a justified action, and Stephen’s death emulates Jesus’ death on the cross.

One detail that seems both curious and significant is the mention in v58 of the witnesses laying their cloaks at the feet of a young man named Saul. The cloak-laying behavior seems, probably, simply the practical action of gearing up for the  physical activity involved in casting stones. But the author’s taking the time to mention it, along with some other textual echoes, may hint that Saul is the “ring-leader” behind this murderous zealotry – again, see that “Cloaks and Violence” article, and also compare the way the Christians have earlier been laying the proceeds from property sales at the apostles’ feet (Acts 4:37; Acts 5:2). Laying things at people’s feet seems to be an indication of their leadership.

There are a couple of other Biblical stories that involve people laying cloaks at someone’s feet that reinforce this. The crowds, famously, lay cloaks and garments at Jesus’ feet, along with palm branches, when he enters Jerusalem – so peacefully. The peace there being a contrast to the story of Stephen. In 2 Kings 9, on the other hand, the military officer Jehu’s fellow officers lay their cloaks at his feet, as a gesture of support, before he embarks on his bloody coup. That is, the story features cloaks plus zealous violence to come.

All in all, it seems Luke wants to provoke our interest just at this point. We think as part of setting up the character of Saul/Paul, which will heighten the drama when this zealous anti-Christian meets the risen Christ on the road to Damascus, and changes his mind.

Some questions on both of this week’s texts are here.

Image: “Stained Glass St Blaise Church Dubrovnik” (cropped), Tony Hisgett, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

representation in stained glass of apostles Peter and Paul

Scripture study deepens daily faith and invites reflection.

Spend a few minutes reading, noting questions, and listening for guidance.

#ScriptureStudy #BibleStudy #DailyScripture

Scripture study opens quiet doors to daily guidance.

Set aside a few minutes, read slowly, and reflect on what it means for your day.

#ScriptureStudy #BibleStudy #DailyDevotion

Reflecting on John 11:14-16, 14:5-8, 20:24-29, and 21:1-2

This week we’re looking at a set of texts that mention the disciple Thomas – John 11:14-16, 14:5-8, 20:24-29, and 21:1-2 – hopefully without completely losing sight of their larger contexts (the raising of Lazarus, Jesus’ “upper room” discourse, and Jesus’ resurrection appearances). Still, our focus is on the “faithful witness,” or possibly less-than-faith-ful witness, of the disciple-apostle Thomas.

Although what these texts tell us about the substance of Thomas’ “faith” might be open to question and reflection. What can we tell about what Thomas believes and thinks from these texts, do we think? And in light of that, how closely does what Thomas seems to think and believe correspond to what we would count as “Christian faith” these days, would we say? Why would we say that?

For that matter, what do we ourselves count as “Christian faith” these days? And how does that align with what we think the gospel of John presents as or means by “believing in” the only-begotten Son? And what difference do we think it makes how we answer that question?

[We might need to take care with these questions, because some of them have been the subject of major controversies over the years. Thirty Years’ War type controversies, even. I hope we can agree to forego any arguments of that kind.]

A few notes on these texts are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

How does Thomas’ response to Jesus’ speech in John 14 strike us? What is Thomas telling Jesus, do we think? To what degree do we think he is speaking for the entire group, to what degree only for himself? Why do we think this?

[More personal] To what degree does Thomas speak for us as well here, would we say? How clear to us is Jesus’ discourse at this point? What is our understanding of what Jesus is saying, and what it means? How have we ourselves come to that understanding?

[Much more theoretical, but possibly interesting] How much of what we ourselves understand Jesus to mean here would have been available to the disciples’ understanding in the upper room, do we think? Any thoughts or feelings about that?

Our published curriculum uses the language of “proof” a good deal this week, suggesting that Thomas is lacking “proof” when he insists on seeing Jesus’ hands and side in person before being able to say “My Lord and my God!” How would we ourselves describe what stands between Thomas and faith at this point in the story? How would we ourselves describe or label what Thomas is asking for in v25? Why would we choose that label, and how does it differ from, or resonate with, a demand for “proof”?

[More personal] How does what we understand Thomas to be going through here compare – how does it resemble, or differ from – our own experiences of coming to faith? Where do we relate to Thomas, where do we not, and why?

Overall, this might be a good opportunity for us to do some thinking, to ourselves and perhaps out loud, about what we mean by faith in the first place, and what role we think personal experience plays in that. We might want to think about the kind of personal experience Thomas and the other disciples have, and consider how that experience resembles, or differs from, the kind of personal experience that is available to people today. What are the advantages and disadvantages, does it seem to us, of having had that kind of experience? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the kind of personal experience available to people today?

Image: “A Family Around a Table,” Julius Paulsen (1919), public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

painting of family seated around a table at night

Check out our new 1-page course on faith building! Enjoy 3+ hours of video content at your own pace. No extra resources needed. Dive in now! #BibleStudy
https://chrissbiblenewsletter.org/faith-mindset-course/?fsp_sid=27

Studying John 11:14-16, 14:5-8, 20:24-29, and 21:1-2

This week we’re looking at (and maybe around and beyond) a set of texts that mention the disciple Thomas: John 11:14-16, 14:5-8, 20:24-29, and 21:1-2. This amounts to portions of several larger stories (the raising of Lazarus, the “upper room” discourse on Jesus’ last night with the disciples, and Jesus’ second and third – or third and fourth, depending on how we’re counting – resurrection appearances as recorded in John) that directly mention the disciple Thomas. I say “maybe around and beyond” because we will probably see that we need more context to make sense of the verses in the lesson. Here are a few notes on these texts:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

We’re staying in John’s gospel this week: the famously cryptic, mysterious, symbolic “fourth gospel,” with its distinctive theology and its distinctive literary style to express that distinctive theology. John’s gospel explicitly and insistently identifies Jesus with God, in Jesus’ own words; contains Jesus’ famous I AM passages that encode Jesus’ personal centrality to the spiritual life; stresses the importance of faith in Jesus, specifically, for salvation and eternal life; practically never mentions the kingdom of God, let alone the kingdom of heaven, and when it does, that kingdom is not exactly “at hand.” [See John 3:3 and 5.]

The gospel’s unique features include the cast of disciples who get speaking parts, one of whom is Thomas. [Other disciples who have actual stories in John, but not in the synoptics, include Andrew, Philip, and Nathanael. See John 1:35-51, John 6:1-14, John 12:20-26, John 14:8-14. Nathanael doesn’t appear by that name in the synoptics or Acts, but tradition from way back has identified him with Bartholomew.] This explains why, if we want to think about Thomas and his personality and what he illustrates about faith and doubt and witness, we have to rely on John’s testimony.

[Unless, perhaps, we were to turn to the Gospel of Thomas? But that would be extra-canonical, so how much would we even want to do that? And there’s hardly anything about Thomas in that gospel, anyway.]

All these texts are in the lectionary. John 20:19-31 is the lectionary gospel for the Second Sunday of Easter EVERY YEAR – something seminary students and grads who only preach when the regular pastor has a Sunday off know well. In other words, we might have the mistaken impression that the Bible tells us a lot about Thomas, if all we know is the lectionary. So Bible Content Examinees might want to be on the lookout for a question like “Which gospel mentions Thomas more than once?”

MORE CONTEXT and CLOSER READING

John 11:14-16 depends on the whole set-up that’s taken place in John 11:1-13. This includes Jesus’ purposeful but explicitly not unloving delay when he gets the summons from Mary and Martha to come quickly because their brother, Jesus’ friend Lazarus, is ill, and the disciples’ astonished and concerned response to Jesus’ proposal to return to Judea. That concern stems from the events narrated in John 10:22-42, which include people taking up stones to stone Jesus for blasphemy (v31).

This background gives the “him” in Thomas’ highly ambiguous statement in v16 – “Let us also go [to Judea, we suppose], that we may die with him” – the possible meaning of “Jesus.” Since we know, if we’ve been reading along in the gospel so far, that Jesus will be in danger of death when he returns to Judea. That would make Thomas’ statement here mean something like “Let’s go with Jesus, even if it means death. Let’s go die with Jesus.”

On the other hand, the “him” might be Lazarus. Especially since Jesus has just finished saying “Let us go to him.” And if that’s the case, we might need to flesh out Thomas’ proposal as meaning “Let’s go die with Lazarus [so that we, too, can be raised to new life by Jesus along with him.]”

Of course, John being John, he might want us to think of both of those things.

John 14:5-8 depends on the context of John 14:1-4, which provides the motivation for Thomas’ blunt observation “Lord, we do not know where you are going,” which is a direct contradiction of what Jesus has just said. Sort of like Jesus saying, “I’m going to my Father, you know the way” and Thomas saying “Do not” and then Jesus saying “Do, too.”

At this point I appreciate Thomas very much, for calling Jesus on his mysticism and metaphors. “Get literal for once, Jesus, for Pete’s sake. Stop treating us like we actually understand what you’re talking about, would you?”

He doesn’t get much satisfaction in v6, as far as that goes, although we may not notice that if we’ve spent enough time around church(es) to think we actually understand “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”

John 20:24-29 depends at a minimum on the context of John 20:19-23, if not more of John 20, to know what the other disciples (number and identities unspecified) mean when they say “We have seen the Lord.”

Thomas’ response then might be summed up as “I’ll believe that when I see it. For myself.”

Which, fortunately for him, he does.

What exactly is going through Thomas’ mind in all this is not necessarily obvious. Maybe he is doubting that people can rise from the dead. On the other hand, we might not think Thomas would doubt this, having been with Jesus back in chapter 11. Maybe instead he is doubting people can rise from the dead on their own. Maybe he is doubting that the disciples – his friends and colleagues – actually witnessed what they say they witnessed. Maybe there’s a little hurt, disappointment, or envy contributing to that refusal to accept their testimony about an experience he has not [yet] shared. Maybe what he’s saying is something like “I can’t go along with you on this until it’s as real for me as it is for you.”

If that last is what he’s saying, we might need to take Thomas’ objection a lot more seriously, and relationally, than we often do. Some people don’t want to, or even can’t, play pretend. The question for someone like that is: what does it take, for the disciples’ testimony to feel convincingly real, to feel like testimony about reality? What makes “We have seen the Lord” feel like a true statement about reality?

From that perspective, we probably need to read vv26-28 as a demonstration of the grace of Jesus Christ.

We might want to note the parallel between John 20:29 and John 1:50-51. In both cases, Jesus questions the basis for the disciple’s belief. Nathanael, who’s so easily convinced by Jesus’ vision, has much more to see for himself. Thomas, who’s been a hold-out for his own sight, may have forfeited some available blessing on his way to it.

Some questions on the texts are here.

Image: “Feuchtwangen_Pfarrkirche_-_Vorhalle_Fresko_Evangelist_Johannes” (cropped), Wolfgang Sauber, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

fresco of eagle of St. John

“Love your neighbor as yourself.”

Almost everyone knows this line. Fewer know it comes from Leviticus 19:18, written in Hebrew long before it was ever spoken in English. Jesus called it the second greatest commandment. He was quoting the Hebrew Bible when he said it.

Which means every time those words are spoken, in any church, any synagogue, any language, they are an echo of the same ancient Hebrew sentence. One verse, holding two faiths and countless hearts.

That is what this community means to me. Jews and Christians, people from more than 30 countries, all gathered around a language that keeps insisting we belong to each other.

Today I teach you how to say it in Hebrew, the way it was first written. Learn it, then go live it. 💙

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #JewishLife #Christianity

Reflecting on Luke 2:15-19, John 2:1-5, John 19:25-27

This week we’re studying three short texts that feature Mary, the mother of Jesus: Luke 2:15-19 [a portion of “the Christmas story in Luke” – about which, some notes here], John 2:1-5 [a portion of the story of “the wedding at Cana”], and John 19:25-27 [one of Jesus’ last acts, from the cross]. This is the next in our series of studies of “the testimony of faithful witnesses.”

I’ve noticed that there’s a wide variation in how willing different readers of scripture are to presume knowledge of Biblical characters’ interiority. That might be one place to start. What do we ourselves think, or feel, we know about Mary’s thoughts and feelings from the texts presented here? What do we ourselves take as evidence for our inferences, whether from the text or from some other source or sources? What source or sources? [For instance, our knowledge of “human nature”? “Mothers”? … ?] What do our answers tell us about the way we read scripture? How do they help us understand the impact scripture makes on us?

What difference does the way we read these texts make? What difference does it make what we understand Mary to be thinking and feeling across these texts? That is, if we knew more, or less, about what Mary is thinking and feeling than we think we do, how would it change what we understand the scripture to be teaching us?

Some notes on these texts are here; here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

Here’s a question I’ve asked before, but think is worth asking again: How well-placed are 21

st

century American Christians to intuit what Mary, the young 1

st

century CE Palestinian Jewish woman, who had met the angel Gabriel in person, and who had experienced her unique but presumably also typical pregnancy and childbirth, etc., could, would, or must have thought or felt about anything?

[More theoretical, but real] How well do we think we can answer that question? Why do we think that? What difference do we think our answer(s) make to the way we ourselves read scripture?

Why does Luke tell us that Mary, after meeting the excited shepherds, “treasured all these words and pondered them in her heart,” do we think? What do we learn from that? What could be, or should be, our own response to that, do we think? Why?

How would we describe the conversation between Jesus and his mother at the wedding at Cana? [For instance, would we describe it as … a conflict? A disagreement? A negotiation? Something else? What?] Why? What does this episode tell us, or what might it tell us, about Mary? About Jesus? About the relationship between Mary and Jesus? About the relationship between Mary and God? About the power of the saints?

How do we ourselves understand Jesus’ act of re-defining the relationship between his mother and the beloved disciple from the cross? Why?

What does that redefinition tell us about the character of the Christian community? Why do we say that?

What light do these texts shed for us on “being a disciple of Christ’s”? Why do we say that?

Image: “Conversation,” Camille Pissarro, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

This is one of my students reading Scripture. In Hebrew. In the original language it was written in thousands of years ago.

Not long ago, these were just letters they could not read. Today, they are reading the Word of God the way it first flowed from the page, hearing the meaning that lives underneath every translation.

This is why so many of you come to me. Not to order coffee in Tel Aviv, beautiful as that is, but to draw closer to the Book that shaped your faith, to meet it face to face, in its first voice.

And here is what makes me proudest. My student is reading, not decoding one word at a time after years of study. The right method gets you to the text.

If your heart has been whispering that you want to read the Bible as it was truly written, listen to it. This is possible for you too. 💙

hebrewbyinbal.com/speak

#LearnHebrew #BiblicalHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #Christianity

Studying Luke 2:15-19, John 2:1-5, 19:25-27

This week we’re studying three short texts that feature Mary, the mother of Jesus. The texts are Luke 2:15-19 [a portion of “the Christmas story in Luke” – about which, some notes here], John 2:1-5 [a portion of “the wedding at Cana”], and John 19:25-27 [a moment during the crucifixion, recorded in the gospel of John]. Together, these short and arguably de-contextualized moments of scripture may speak to us of Mary’s character as a “faithful witness.” Here are a few notes on these texts:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

We’re looking at moments from two of the four gospels, one from Luke, the other two from John. It might help us to remember that Luke is one of “the synoptic gospels,” the three gospels that share a broad storyline and a significant percentage of literary material, while John is “the fourth gospel,” with a different timeline [for instance, the cleansing of the temple occurs early in the story], distinctive long dialogues [with, e.g., Nicodemus and the “woman at the well”], and Christology [Jesus is portrayed consistently throughout as the savior, who is one with God the Father, in whom people must believe]. Among the synoptics, Luke stands out for, among other things, its remarkable emphasis on the role of women in Jesus’ story, and on the Holy Spirit, and its high proportion of unique stories [e.g., the Annunciation to Mary, the Visitation, neither of which are among our texts this week].

Something we might want to keep in mind as we study these texts that involve Mary, the mother of Jesus, is that we don’t have a lot of text featuring Mary. If we look at the four gospels as a whole, we can pretty easily make a list of all the texts that tell us anything about her:

• Matthew 1:16 and 1:18-25 Mary is Jesus’ mother, and a virgin engaged to Joseph
• Luke 1:26-56 – Mary receives the news of her impending pregnancy from the angel Gabriel, then visits her relative Elizabeth, and delivers a famous poetic speech
• Luke 2:1-19 – Mary is Jesus’ mother, who travels to Bethlehem along with Joseph, is referred to by angels, and is present when the shepherds come to see “this thing that has been made known unto us”
• Luke 2:33-34, 39 – “they” [we infer Mary and Joseph] come to the temple with Jesus for purification, and Mary is addressed by name by Simeon, and then also by Anna, before “they” return to Nazareth
• Matthew 2:10, 2:13-15, 2:20-21 – Mary is Jesus’ mother, is there with Jesus in Bethlehem when the magi visit, and is taken along by Joseph back and forth to Egypt to save Jesus’ life
• Luke 2:41-51 – Jesus’ parents visit Jerusalem, Mary chides Jesus for disappearing in v48, to which Jesus responds with a 12-year-old-boy answer, and she ponders all this in v51
• John 2:1-12 – the mother of Jesus is instrumental in Jesus’ first miracle, and afterwards goes with Jesus and his brothers to Capernaum for a few days
• Luke 8:1-3 – Mary, if one of the “many others,” travels along with Jesus during his ministry
• Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3 – Mary is Jesus’ mother, known to the scoffers in Nazareth
• Matthew 12:46-50, Mark 3:31-35, Luke 8:19-21 – Jesus’ mother and brothers ask to meet with Jesus and are refused
• Mathew 27:56, Mark 15:40 – Mary, if also the mother of James and Joseph, is present at the crucifixion
• John 19:25-27 – Jesus’ mother is present at the crucifixion, and placed by Jesus into the care of the “disciple whom he loved”
• Mark 15:47 – Mary, if also “the mother of Joses,” sees where Jesus is entombed
• Matthew 28:1-10, Mark 16:1-8, Luke 24:1-12 – Mary, if also “the other Mary,” is witness along with Mary Magdalene and one or two others to the risen Christ on Easter morning; or, if “the mother of James,” then at least witness to the empty tomb + angels; or, additionally, if either “the mother of James” or else one of “the other women,” then also one of the rudely disregarded first witnesses to the empty tomb + angels
• Acts 1:14 – after Jesus’ resurrection, Mary is a named member of the earliest community of Jesus’ devoted disciples
• Romans 16:6 – later in the first century, someone named Mary, who isn’t necessarily not the Mary who is the mother of Jesus, is a hard-working member of the early church in Rome

It is not obvious to me what evidence, if any, this material actually gives us about Mary’s “faith,” or her “understanding of who Jesus was and what he was to accomplish,” or her “dynamic relationship” with Jesus, or how it substantiates much of we might imagine Mary could, would, “must” etc. have thought or felt. [I say this, in response to some definite statements made in our published curriculum which seem to me to go well beyond anything actually supported by the text. Fantasy may actually be a legitimate method of Bible study. What else, after all, is Jesuit “composing the text,” for instance? Still, it seems to me we ought to acknowledge it as such.]

How well-placed are 21

st

century American Christians to intuit what Mary, the young 1

st

century CE Palestinian Jewish woman, who had met the angel Gabriel in person, and who had experienced her unique but presumably also typical pregnancy and childbirth, etc., could, would, or must have thought or felt about anything? We might not even be able to answer that question. But we would be wise to ask it, nevertheless.

All these texts are in the lectionary, although the verses from the Christmas story in Luke are “optional.” Still, Bible Content Examinees familiar with the lectionary Bible will likely recognize them.

CLOSER READING

In Luke 2:19, the verb translated “treasured” is not the same kind of “treasuring” that gives us our English word thesaurus or would make us think of “treasure in a field.” It is a different verb, that has the sense of gathering things together and keeping them together and guarding them closely all together. If we had a box in our closet in which we stored mementos, or a file folder in which we collected vital documents, we could use this verb.

She is also “pondering” these kept or guarded things in her heart, another verb that in Greek incorporates a sense of juxtaposition, as well as of motion. Like how we might say “tossing things back and forth in our minds.”

It might be noteworthy that the “treasuring” Mary does in v19 is also not the same “treasuring” she does in v51. That treasuring is still not the thesaurus word for treasuring, but another verb having to do with keeping or guarding. The verb in v51 might possibly emphasize more the sense that Mary is keeping or guarding things in her heart over time.

Also possibly noteworthy, about the verb in v51, is that it’s the same rare verb used in the Septuagint in Genesis 37:11 for what Jacob does when he “keeps the matter” of Joseph’s annoyingly prescient dreams “in mind.” Maybe, at this point in Luke’s narrative, Luke the canny author is hinting at a parallel between the patriarch Jacob – who senses obscurely something going on with his son, who is also a savior figure – and the matriarch Mary, and her similarly obscure sense of the looming future. Or, maybe not.

John 2 and John 19 can be, and have been, read as bookends around John’s particular literary presentation of Jesus’ earthly ministry. We seem to be seeing something purposeful, and very Johannine, in those bookends, which each include a brief interaction between Jesus and “the mother of Jesus” / “his mother.” Not, we might need to notice, “Mary.” Jesus himself refers to her, in both cases, as woman (2:4, 19:26).

In John 2, Jesus’ hour has not yet come – at least, not according to him, and of course, we think he knows. In John 19, it explicitly has (Jesus himself has said so in John 17:1).

In John 2, Jesus’ words to his mother – “what is that to me or to you” – really are a refusal of community with the wedding party. In John 19, Jesus’ words to his mother – “here is your son” – and to the Beloved Disciple – “behold, your mother” – are a recreation or new creation of community.

Also, in each case, wine is involved. At the wedding at Cana, Jesus makes the wine, out of water – “the first of his signs.” At the cross, Jesus refuses the sour wine offered to him by the soldiers, and then says “it is finished” (vv28-30).

In short, the deliberate arrangement of the elements of these stories calls our attention to Jesus’ special identity and mission; one of the elements is the presence of Jesus’ mother along with his disciples.

One last thing about John 19:27: our English translations tell us the disciple “took her into his home” from “that hour.” Which is not wrong, because the phrase in Greek there is an idiom that everyone would know meant “his home,” in ordinary usage, even though the words “his home” are not actually part of the phrase. But because of that – because the phrase is literally “took her into his own …” – it leaves just that little bit of room to read it in a more broadly spiritual way. As that he took her into his own life, for instance. His own heart. As any beloved disciple could still do, even now. Which would be entirely consistent with the way John writes: saying something, and leaving space for it to mean something even deeper.

Some questions on the texts are here.

Image: “Leaf from a Gospel Book with Four Standing Evangelists,” Metropolitan Museum of Art, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Scripture study opens doors to quiet insight.

Let the verses guide your day.

#ScriptureStudy #BibleStudy #ScriptureReading

Scripture study opens quiet doors to daily wisdom.

Pause, reflect, and let the verses guide your choices today.

#ScriptureStudy #BibleStudy #DailyScripture

Reflecting on Luke 19 1-10

This week we’re studying Luke 19:1-10, the story of Zacchaeus and Jesus seeing one another, and the subsequent redemption of a despised chief tax collector.

This time around, our study is part of our series on “the testimony of faithful witnesses.” That might raise for us the interesting question of what we identify as Zacchaeus’ testimony. His initial “seeking” to “see who Jesus is”? His [we infer] positive response to Jesus’ inviting himself to his home for dinner, and playing host to Jesus? His announcement of the restitution he’s going to provide?

All of which might lead us to wonder: what exactly do we mean by “testimony” in the first place? What counts, or can count, as testimony, do we think? Why do we say that?

And, how do we interpret any of that Zacchaean behavior as evidence about Jesus, who Jesus is? Assuming – but should we assume this? – that the “testimony” we are supposed to be considering will be testimony about Jesus? Because who or what else would or could “the testimony of faithful witnesses” be about, do we think?

Following up on that – whatever we do or don’t identify as Zacchaeus’ testimony – how does what Zacchaeus does lead us to think about what we ourselves do, or don’t do, when it comes to encounters with Jesus, and perhaps especially when it comes to public ones? What, if any, lessons does Zacchaeus’ approach teach us? What would change, for us, if we were to act more like Zacchaeus?

Some notes on the text are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

Zacchaeus doesn’t seem to say he’s going to resign his post as chief tax collector. Thoughts? Feelings? How possible do we think it will be for Zacchaeus to work as a tax collector while being faithful to his new-found relationship with Jesus? [Maybe worth glancing at Luke 3:10-14 for a thought on this.]

[More personal] Have we, ourselves, ever made a decision or decisions at work, or about work, for reasons having to do with our allegiance to Jesus? Want to talk about that?

Following up on a statement in our published curriculum, how hard is it, really, for us to imagine that Zacchaeus, or anyone, could “privately practice the prayers and rituals that would mark him” as an observantly religious person of his day “while taking part in tax schemes that impoverished others”? Why?

How hard is it for us to imagine religious observance going along with personal or professional participation in some exploitative or oppressive practice or practices, at any time? What about today, specifically? Why is that?

How does any of that relate to “testimony” and “faithful witness,” would we say? Why?

[More theoretical, maybe?] How “religious” do we suppose Zacchaeus would or might have been before this story, at least in the conventional sense? How much of what happens in this story do we think of as a “religious” event? Why? If not “religious,” then … what? And how is that “what” different from “religion,” in our minds?

How does Zacchaeus exemplify “the lost” Jesus has come to seek and to save? What does his story show us about his seeking and saving?

What does Zacchaeus’ lostness show us about who might be “lost” in our world? What would be seeking and saving for those people? Implications for us?

[More personal] What does Zacchaeus’ lostness show us about our own “lostness”? What would be seeking and saving for us? Implications for us?

Image: “The Conversation,” Edgar Degas, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

painting by Degas, a woman and man in conversation

Genesis 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3A6YnykN_o

#BibleStudy, #ShieldOfTheSon.

What does it mean to finish strong when faith is tested? Follow Lily’s journey of hope, endurance, and trusting God through every trial and every promise.

#ChristianFiction #Faith #BibleStudy

Read more: https://www.annettekmazzone.com/finish-strong/

One of my students, Sergio DeSoto, just published something I can’t stop thinking about.

It’s called “It Was One Thing the Whole Time,” and it’s about what happens when you stop reading the Bible through layers of translation and start meeting it in its original Hebrew. The connections he thought he’d have to hunt for were already there, woven into the language itself, waiting.

He mentions Hebrew by Inbal in it and I’m honored beyond words. Watching a student go from studying Hebrew to seeing Scripture become one seamless thing is the reason I do what I do.

Read it slowly, the way he asks you to:

https://open.substack.com/pub/sergiodesoto/p/it-was-one-thing-the-whole-time

#LearnHebrew #BiblicalHebrew #HebrewForChristians #BibleStudy #ChristianFaith

Reflecting on Mark 8 27-29 & Luke 22 31-34 & John 18 25-27 & John 21 15-17

This week we’re studying “the testimony of faithful witness” Peter the disciple, reading just four – Mark 8:27-29, Luke 22:31-34, John 18:25-27, and John 21:15-17 – of the gospel texts that tell us something about Peter’s emotionally volatile relationship to Jesus and to the Way of discipleship.

We might want to review what we know about Peter from our past reading of the gospels, and how that provides context for what we read in these selected texts. And then, we might want to think about what focusing on these specific episodes seems meant to show us or to suggest for our reflection. That is: what do we think the Committee on the Uniform Series is trying to get us to learn by focusing our attention on these four texts in particular?

We might also want to think about the degree to which we see something paradigmatic, for people in general, in the way Peter first articulates faith in Jesus as the Christ, then fails to affirm relationship with Jesus under pressure, and then finds forgiveness and commissioning for further ministry in his renewed connection with the risen Christ. Alternatively, how much do we see all that as something very particular to Peter’s story rather than more generally applicable? More personally, how would we say peter’s story compares to others’ stories – e.g., to our own?

Some notes on the text are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

How much would we say we, ourselves, “relate” to Peter? A lot? A little? Compared to any of the other disciples? Why? How do those personal reactions to Peter seem to influence the way we understand the stories about Peter in the Bible, do we think? Or, what we seem to learn from them?

How do we think the experiences Peter goes through in these texts influence the role Peter goes on to play in the early Jesus movement? [For instance, as narrated in the Book of Acts?] Why do we think that?

What do we learn about Jesus from these stories? How does that reinforce, or modify, what we already know about Jesus?

All in all, we will probably want to consider what these texts show us about the challenges, and rewards, of discipleship. What can we learn, whether by way of encouragement or by way of warning, from Peter’s example? How do we see that informing our own practice of discipleship?

Image: “A Family Around a Table,” Julius Paulsen (1919), public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

painting of family seated around a table at night

How did Pope Leo III shape the relationship between church authority and political power? Explore a pivotal chapter in Christian history and its lasting influence.

#ChurchHistory #Christianity #BibleStudy

Read more: https://www.kithcartcodeofsilence.com/pope-leo-iii-church-authority/

And as an Israeli who has made her home here I wanted to celebrate in the way I know best. Through Hebrew.

Liberty. Freedom. Independence. Three words at the very heart of this nation’s story, and each one has a rich, ancient counterpart in Hebrew, the language of the Bible that helped shape America’s founding ideals.

So ahead of this historic Fourth of July, let’s learn these three beautiful words in Hebrew together. Two nations, two languages, one deep love of freedom.

Happy early 250th, America. 💙🤍🇺🇸🇮🇱

#FourthOfJuly #America250 #LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy

“Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” That is Leviticus 25:10, and the Hebrew word for liberty in that verse is dror. It comes from the biblical Year of Jubilee, a sacred time when debts were forgiven, the enslaved were set free, and everyone returned home.

The man who chose it for the bell in 1752 loved Hebrew so much he taught his own children to read it. He reached all the way back to the Hebrew Bible to find the word that would ring over a new nation.

For those of faith, Jubilee has always pointed to something deeper still, the freedom of the soul.

This Fourth of July, hear the verse in the language it was first written in. 💙

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #FourthOfJuly #BibleStudy #America250

Reflecting on Matthew 8 5-13

This week we’re studying Matthew 8:5-13, the story of Jesus healing a centurion’s servant, which he does after witnessing the centurion’s great faith. That faith seems to be grounded in the man’s assumption that the kingdom of the heavens will of course resemble the Roman empire, in at least one vital respect.

Jesus himself marvels at this faith, which makes the centurion a bona fide “faithful witness.” We could perhaps ask ourselves: what seems to be the substance of the centurion’s faith? [That is, if he had a chance to write out a “statement of faith,” what would he say?] What can we tell about that from the text? What other assumptions or inferences do we bring to our understanding of the text, when it comes to thinking about the centurion’s faith? And how does the character of the centurion’s faith in this context seem to compare to the way we talk about “faith” in other contexts?

Some notes on the text are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

What seems to have prepared the centurion to express the faith he does? How does that preparation distinguish him from those “in Israel” as far as we can tell, whether from the text or from what we know about the setting of this story?

What implications do we see in this for the importance of cultural differences, assumptions, etc. in the life of faith?

[a lot more personal] What seems to have prepared us for the faith we ourselves have? What seems to support that faith? Or, alternatively, to obstruct it? In what ways, or in what areas? What do we notice about that?

How do we imagine the encounter of the centurion and Jesus in this story? That is, how do we picture the centurion, how do we picture Jesus? And how much of that mental picture seems to us to come from the text itself, how much from things we already know about the setting of these gospel stories, how much from other sources, like television, or …?

What difference does that mental picture seem to make for how we understand the story and its meaning for us? Do we think?

In thinking about that, what do we notice about the way we read and learn from scripture? Read and learn from stories? Any implications for future reading?

Who do we identify with in this story? That is … where do we see ourselves in the story, or position ourselves with respect to the action and conversation? [For instance, do we see ourselves as “on the outside, looking in”? Or, as “inside” the story in some way, as a bystander, or even as one of the other characters?] Why, do we think? What if we positioned ourselves somewhere else in the story – what difference would or does that seem to make?

What are our thoughts and feelings about “the heirs of the kingdom” Jesus mentions in v12? Why is that, do we think? What’s our response to Jesus’ statement about them? Again, why is that, do we think?

Image: “Der Plausch am Weg” [the chat on the way], Oswald Achenbach, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

painting of people chatting by trees, lake, and mountains

How did Charlemagne influence church finances in medieval Europe? Explore the historical roots of church funding and the lasting impact of his reforms.

#ChurchHistory #Charlemagne #BibleStudy

Read more: https://www.kithcartcodeofsilence.com/charlemagne-church-finance/

Studying Matthew 8 5-13

This week we’re studying Matthew 8:5-13, the story of Jesus healing the servant of a centurion. There is another version of this story – we assume it’s the same episode in the life of Jesus – in Luke 7:1-10, which we studied some time ago. [Those notes, which include some background on centurions, are here.] There’s also a version of a story like it in John, John 4:43-54, but the details are so different it seems less like “the same” story told differently, and more like a different story altogether. Here are a very few, hasty notes on this text:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

We’ve moved into the gospel of Matthew, which we’ll recall is the gospel in which Jesus does a lot of lengthy preaching and teaching interspersed with healing and other deeds of mercy, and in which there is a lot of explicit reference made to the way Jesus fulfills Hebrew Biblical prophecy, and fits into his Hebrew Biblical context. So much so that Matthew is sometimes described as the “most Jewish” of the gospels, and some readers see Matthew presenting Jesus as a “second Moses.” Alternatively, or perhaps additionally, Matthew is often seen as the most explicitly Wisdom-oriented of the gospels, presenting Jesus as “Wisdom’s child,” or perhaps even as the embodiment of divine Wisdom.

When we reach our story, Jesus has already done plenty of general “healing.” This may explain why the centurion who initiates the encounter seeks him out; there’s been plenty of word-of-mouth publicity by now. What he hasn’t done is much specific narrative healing, except for that of a man with a skin disease, immediately after coming down from the Mount where he’s just delivered the Sermon on the Mount. In other words, in Matthew’s gospel, this healing of a centurion’s servant is the second healing story we have about Jesus.

It won’t be the last, of course. He’ll right away also heal Peter’s mother-in-law, and many more, and then – not counting the men whose demons he exorcises – a paralysed man and a woman with a chronic hemorrhage (while on the way to raise a little girl from the dead) and two blind men and a mute man, all of which will lead right in to sending the 12 out to be apostles.

All of this is still near the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, which as we know will continue on its trajectory toward the events of Holy Week, passion, crucifixion, death, and resurrection, and beyond.

This story is something we wouldn’t know was in the Bible if all we knew were the lectionary. Actually, more precisely, it’s something we would think was in the Bible, in Luke, since the version in Luke is a lectionary option, in the Luke year. So Bible Content Examinees, definitely be warned.

CLOSER READING

In Matthew’s version of this story, the centurion – a technical term that means a captain of a troop of 100 Roman legionaires – comes to Jesus directly, rather than through intermediaries as happens in Luke’s version. He appeals to Jesus in similar terms, though – using the parakaleo word, the verb that also describes what the Spirit does. And addressing Jesus as Lord, which coming from a gentile, a Roman centurion, presumably a member of the imperial occupying force in the area, is probably remarkable. He will repeat that honorific address again, in v8.

He uses (v6) the same term for his servant as (once) in Luke, pais, a term that has a range of meanings that can include a child, and also an especially dear companion, but which can simply mean a young-ish servant. In this account, this term appears three times to refer to this individual servant (v6, v8, v13). And he goes into great detail about the servant’s malady: he is lying, a verb that literally means “thrown,” paralyzed, grievously tormented.

Jesus immediately offers to come and cure him (v7). [Our published curriculum mentions that one popular translation renders Jesus words here as a question. Well … that’s always a possibility, since the Greek text doesn’t have any punctuation. But rendering it as a straightforward statement is … a whole lot more straightforward.]

This prompts the centurion to deliver a lengthy speech (vv8-9). He’s not worthy to have Jesus come under his roof. The “worthiness” word he uses carries a sense of “not having attained” to something – we could think of those signs at amusement parks that say “must be this tall to ride this ride.” [Or, we could think of Psalm 24, and how the gates have to lift up their heads for the King of Glory to come in. The centurion’s response might that his ceilings just aren’t high enough …]

But Jesus can just speak the word, says the centurion, and his servant (pais again) will be healed. Here, the centurion uses a different “healing” word than Jesus used in v7, a word that arguably calls special attention to the miraculous nature of the healing.

Then the centurion goes on to describe the military chain of command that constitutes his world. He is under authority, and has his own direct reports, and he’s accustomed to giving and receiving orders, and basically, he knows how that works. The response suggests that this centurion assumes Jesus is positioned in a similar chain of command himself, which would mean that he can also give authoritative orders, that will be followed.

Hearing this response Jesus marvels, specifically at the centurion’s faith, which he has not found in Israel,  and then delivers a long speech of his own, addressed to his followers (so, not specifically his “disciples”). Many will come, from east and west – from all over – and will literally recline with the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – so, the honored progenitors of Israel – in the kingdom of the heavens.

We might note that the usage here suggests a view of “the kingdom” as somewhere table fellowship can take place, that is, more a “place” view of the kingdom than an “act” view of it. And we might also note this, about the directions: “east” is Biblically in the direction of exile; which makes “west” symbolically the direction of redemption. Though also of “the sea,” which is more about disorder than redemption. But “west” is, in practical geographical terms, the direction of Rome, relative to Capernaum, and the point of origin of this gentile centurion. Something to think about.

This will happen as the heirs of that kingdom are thrown out – compare the posture of the paralyzed servant! – into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. It seems unlikely to be a coincidence that the thrown-ness of these outcast heirs and the grievousness of their torment is a counterpoint to the specific position and torment of the centurion’s slave. Jesus has a cure for the slave.

We might be meant to notice that Jesus could have a cure for the at-risk heirs, too. And we might be meant to think they will need someone to appeal for them, the way the centurion appeals for his servant.

In v13, this centurion who begins the story by coming is now told by Jesus to go, with the affirming “let it be done for you according to your faith.” And it is, from that hour.

Overall, we can see why we might want to include this story in a quarter in which we are looking at “faithful witnesses.” The centurion becomes an exemplar of a faith in Jesus’ power, and also his kindness, which leads to his willingness to use that power on behalf of another, that makes something marvelous possible. We might well consider how the centurion comes by this faith, and how others might also come by it.

Image: “Feuchtwangen Pfarrkirche – Vorhalle Fresko Evangelist Matthäus” (cropped), Wolfgang Sauber, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

v2, revised 06.30.26 with a couple of additional observations, after I woke up enough to make them …

Alt...

fresco of angel of St. Matthew

Most people walking past the Liberty Bell have no idea. The words on it come straight from the Hebrew Bible. 🔔🇺🇸🇮🇱

“Proclaim liberty throughout all the land.” Leviticus. And the original Hebrew word for liberty runs far deeper than any translation.

But here is what moves me most as an Israeli living in America. This was no accident. Hebrew was taught at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. It still sits on the Yale seal today. The founders studied the Hebrew Bible and built a new nation on its ideas of liberty and law.

The language of my homeland is woven into the foundation of my adopted one. As America turns 250, I made a Fourth of July video about exactly that.

It is live now. Come see the Hebrew hidden in the heart of American freedom. 🎬
https://youtu.be/rs5-GnAvKvI

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #FourthOfJuly #BibleStudy #America250

Simeon—co-founder of the Church Missionary Society—sets a trap for anyone who claims to admire Christ’s love for sinners. Fine, he says: follow the example. Render good for evil to those who’ve harmed you. Feed your enemies. This is what proves discipleship, not the admiration itself. One observes that internet preachers and their preferred leaders tend to admire this love considerably more than they practice rendering good for evil toward anyone in particular.
#christian #biblestudy

Alt...

meon—co-founder of the Church Missionary Society—sets a trap for anyone who claims to admire Christ’s love for sinners. Fine, he says: follow the example. Render good for evil to those who’ve harmed you. Feed your enemies. This is what proves discipleship, not the admiration itself. One observes that internet preachers and their preferred leaders tend to admire this love considerably more than they practice rendering good for evil toward anyone in particular.

Are you between 18 and 35 years old, and want to dive deeper into the Bible?

You're welcome to join our Young Adults Bible Study, every Sunday evening at 18:00. For more information, email youth@bedfordviewmc.co.za

#Bedfordview #BibleStudy

Alt...

A flyer from Bedfordview Methodist Church, advertising a Young Adults Bible Study every Sunday at 18:00 in the Upper Room. Text reads, "Are you 18 - 35? Join us weekly as we reflect, learn, and grow in faith as a community," followed by the venue and day and times, and an email address (youth@bedfordviewmc.co.za) to contact for more information. There are also photos of various people studying and discussing the Bible. The footer of the image contains the church's name, logo, and contact information.

As America turns 250, I made a special Fourth of July video unpacking this beautiful, hidden Hebrew thread woven right into the heart of American freedom.

It is live now. Go watch it, then tell me, did you have any idea the Liberty Bell was carrying Hebrew scripture all this time? 🎬
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs5-GnAvKvI

SEARCH “HEBREW BY INBAL” on YouTube to find it as well.

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #FourthOfJuly #BibleStudy #America250

This is where her story turns. And after everything in this series, you already know the truth: it was never you. It was the what, and the how.

The real fix, learning Hebrew the way your brain actually thinks with someone guiding you so you never quietly get stuck is exactly what my program Practically Speaking Hebrew is built for.

If you're ready to finally get there, comment SPEAK and I'll send you where to start. Or go straight to hebrewbyinbal.com/speak.

No rush, no pressure. It'll be here whenever you are.

#LearnHebrew #LanguageLearning #BibleStudy #Jewish #Hebrew

Here is something most people walking past the Liberty Bell never realize. The words inscribed on it come straight from the Hebrew Bible. 🔔🇺🇸🇮🇱

“Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” That line is from Leviticus, and the original Hebrew word for liberty carries a meaning far richer than most translations capture.

As America turns 250, I made a special Fourth of July video unpacking this beautiful, hidden Hebrew thread woven right into the heart of American freedom.

It lands tomorrow, Sunday at noon Eastern, on my YouTube channel. Set a reminder and meet me there. 🎬

https://www.youtube.com/hebrewbyinbal

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #FourthOfJuly #BibleStudy #America250

Genesis 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxswBSUpfOA

#Creation, #Beginning, #BibleStudy, #BibleTeaching.

What are the “little foxes” that quietly threaten faith, love, and spiritual growth? Explore the deeper meaning behind Song of Solomon 2:15 and its timeless message.

#BibleStudy #ChristianFaith #SpiritualGrowth

Read more: https://www.annettekmazzone.com/the-tender-grapes-the-little-foxes-song-of-solomon-215/

Reflecting on Amos 1 1, 2 11-12, 3 7-8, 7 10-15

This week we are studying several texts from Amos: Amos 1:1, 2:11-12, 3:7-8, and 7:10-15. These texts prompt us to reflect on the prophet’s own background, commission, sense of call, and on the consequences to the prophet himself of his mission.

The focus speaks to this quarter’s study of “faithful witnesses” in the Biblical story. We’ll undoubtedly want to think about the nature of Amos’s faithful witness, and perhaps about what we can gather are the rewards and the costs of that faithful witness to Amos himself. What can we tell about those rewards and costs from these texts, do we think? How does the example of Amos speak to us, do we think? In particular, what does the prophet Amos teach us about what it means to serve the God of Israel, do we think?

Some notes on the texts are here, and also here (from an earlier time). Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about or to discuss in class:

The historical record suggests that the prophet Amos’s message to the people of Israel was not “effective,” if by “effective” we mean “having the result of turning the whole society around and restoring widespread devotion to the God of Israel and to God’s commands.” In light of that, what do we think is the prophet’s responsibility when it comes to communicating God’s warnings and wishes to a people? What is the people’s responsibility, do we think?

What seems to encourage people’s listening to and accepting a prophetic message? What hinders that listening and acceptance, do we think?

More personal: What are today’s prophetic messages? Who seems to us to be articulating them? How are they being received, do we think? What is our own role in articulating, or accepting, or acting on these contemporary prophetic messages? Why is that, do we think?

What seems to be the purpose of the personal information about the prophet Amos that appears in the text? What difference does it make for understanding the prophet’s message to know, for instance, where the prophet comes from, or what his occupation has been? What impressions of the prophet do we get from that information?

What are the implications for people today of the prophet Amos’s background, as shared in the text?

More speculative, but perhaps worth thinking about: What seems to be the difference between a prophetic message and some other kinds of divine message – e.g., an angelic message, a scriptural message, a vision, …? That is: does a prophetic message seem to us to be more or less … believable? Persuasive? Serious? …? Why choose the prophetic mode of communication, do we think, over some other mode of communication? What seem to be the advantages, and disadvantages, of that mode of divine communication, to us?

Image: “The Conversation,” Arnold Lakhovsky, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Alt...

people in thoughtful conversation

Studying Amos 1 1, 2 11-12, 3 7-8, 7 10-15

This week we are studying several texts from the book of the prophet Amos: Amos 1:1, 2:11-12, 3:7-8, and 7:10-15. Taken together, this means we are focusing more on the prophet Amos himself than we are on the substance of the prophet’s message, in keeping with this quarter’s theme of “faithful witnesses.” We can do this because there are things in the book of the prophet that tell us something about “Amos the person,” in addition to the prophet’s message, which makes up most of the book’s content.

We’ve studied this confrontation between Amaziah and Amos once before [with notes here], and also a bit of the prophet’s message [with the notes on Amos 5:18-24 here]. This time around, we might notice that in this confrontation in 7:10-15, the priest [and establishment figure] Amaziah is doing exactly what God complains of in 2:11-12, and Amos is responding entirely in line with the oracle in 3:7-8. But aside from that, here are a few notes on these texts:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

The opening of the book of the prophet Amos (also, one of our texts) gives fairly precise time markers for the “who, when, where” of this prophetic text.

The words of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he saw concerning Israel in the days of King Uzziah of Judah and in the days of King Jeroboam son of Joash of Israel, two years before the earthquake.

Amos 1:1

On the matter of the timing, a nice chronological listing of the kings tells us Amos is conducting his ministry in the mid-eighth century BCE. Historically, this makes Amos perhaps the earliest of the “writing” prophets, along with the prophet Hosea – another prophet to the northern kingdom. [See this equally nice chronological listing of the prophets, along with their approximate dates.]

As for that earthquake, archaeologist Nurit Feig, in an article in the Torah.com, describes excavations in Tel Agol that show evidence of the earthquake, and affirms a date of around 760-750 BCE. There’s more narrative on the earthquake, with some of its theological implications, here.

As for Amos’s hometown of Tekoa, the traditional story – that is, the one I learned in seminary, and the one that is likely to show up in study Bibles and commentaries and notes – is that Amos comes from the town of Tekoa in the southern kingdom of Judah, but prophesies in the northern kingdom of Israel.

There’s an alternative story, however. Gary A. Rendsburg [professor of biblical studies, Hebrew language, and ancient Judaism at Rutgers] argues persuasively [in the article “Israelian Hebrew in the Book of Amos,” in New Perspectives in Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew, a text online here] that the prophet Amos is not, in fact, from the southern kingdom of Judah, but is a more local northern Israelite prophet. He identifies the “Tekoa” of Amos 1:1 with a location in the northern Galilee.

This geographical point might not make a lot of difference to the meaning of the prophet’s message, but it might affect how we tell, and think of, the story of Amos’s call. In the traditional story, God calls someone from a distance to go tell people to whom he is only abstractly related about their imminent doom. [This won’t be the last time. Think of Jonah.] In the revised story, Amos is called to a shorter journey, and a slightly different task: speaking truth to people among whom he himself lives and works. In other words, how we tell this story may influence our understanding of Amos’s mission, and also our own expectations of what we ourselves might be called upon to do and say as agents of the will of God.

I myself tend to read prophetic texts as direct speech from God, mainly because that’s how these texts are typically labeled: e.g., “the vision of Isaiah,” (Isaiah 1:1), with emphasis on the word vision, or “the word that Isaiah son of Amoz saw” (Isaiah 2:1), or the hundreds of occurrences of “thus says the Lord” [like Isaiah 7:7, Jeremiah 4:3, Ezekiel 5:5, Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13, Obadiah 1:1, Micah 2:3 … etc. etc.] This includes plenty of language in the book of the prophet Amos. For this reason, it may be remarkable that the opening of the book of the prophet Amos specifically tells us the book contains “the words of the prophet Amos” (Amos 1:1), albeit words that the prophet “saw” [prophetically]. Maybe this suggests a degree of authorial autonomy that we – well, I, at least – seldom attribute to the prophets.

Amos is the third in the collected works of “the twelve” or “the minor prophets,” depending on how we’ve learned to refer to Hosea-Joel-Amos-Obadiah-Jonah-Micah-Nahum-Habakkuk-Zephaniah-Haggai-Zechariah-Malachi. It seems to be the length of their writing that makes them “minor,” since it takes the works of all twelve of “the twelve” to make up a scroll, relative to the “major” prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, whose books take up whole scrolls of their own. [Not to mention the hard-to-place Daniel, who looks like a major prophet in Christian Bibles and memory work, but whose writing is among “the writings” in a Hebrew Tanakh, and is much shorter than that of Isaiah or Jeremiah or Ezekiel. And definitely not to mention the contentious question of whether Daniel himself penned those writings in the first place in the early exilic period, or someone else penned them in his name in the 2

nd

century BCE.]

The whole [short] book of the prophet Amos breaks down thematically roughly as follows:

1:1

Introduction: What, who, when

1:2-2:16

Divine judgment on the nations, including Judah and Israel

3:1-7:9

Divine judgment on Israel, for reasons, including all the consequences people have totally ignored, and pleas not to ignore this latest dire warning, including “the vision of the plumb line”

7:10-17

Amaziah confronts Amos and Amos answers back (with more who, where, and what)

8:1-9:10

More divine judgment: the basket of summer fruit; destruction of the altar

9:11-15

A concluding promise of future restoration

The vision of the plumb line and Amos’s confrontation with Amaziah is a lectionary option on two separate Sundays in the three-year lectionary cycle, and a handful of other texts from Amos appear in the lectionary as well. The verses from chapters 1, 2, and 3, however, would be things we wouldn’t know were in the Bible if all we knew were the lectionary. So, if Bible Content Examinees – especially those who want to be prepared for that question on Amos’s hometown – be warned.

CLOSER READING

The fuller but still immediate context for Amos 2:11-12 seems to be Amos 2:6-16. God has been pronouncing judgment on the peoples surrounding Israel, including the people of Judah. These prior judgments have established something of a pattern, announcing that God will not continue to pass over judgment, naming a crime, and devoting a verse or two to the consequence, the divine punishment. Now God turns to Israel, and goes into extra fine detail, breaking the pattern established in 1:2-2:5 by adding extra verses describing Israel’s transgression, pointing out what God has done for Israel in the past, and specifying at greater length the consequences of their transgression.

The substance of the transgressions outlined in vv6-8 are the oppression of the poor, maybe especially in the context of idolatrous worship – remembering, for instance, that creditors aren’t supposed to take poor people’s garments in pledge in the first place, and certainly not to lie on in the lewd conduct of idolatrous worship.

This makes vv11-12 a statement of what God has done to make Israel a people God has a special relationship with: raising up prophets and nazirites – that is, individuals who are specially devoted to specific divine commands – from among the sons and young men of Israel. The response of the Israelites has been less than appreciative. They have made the nazirites drink wine – that is, they have forced them to violate their vows – and they have told the prophets not to prophesy – that is, they’ve said “shut up” to the very people who bring a message direct from God.

Not a good way to pursue a close relationship.

Turning to chapter 3, again the larger immediate context for our couple of verses, in v1 God stresses the special relationship between YHVH and Israel. The implication is that this makes Israel’s dismissive negligence of God’s commandments and values especially offensive [or, perhaps, hurtful and intolerable].

There follows a series of questions, reminiscent of our popular culture question “Is the Pope Catholic?” Although, in this case, these rhetorical questions are worded to elicit the answer “no” in every case. No, people don’t walk together unless they’ve made an appointment. No, there are no threatening growls from wild animals unless those beasts of prey are catching something. No, the warning signs of doom and destruction normally don’t leave people unmoved. And no, nothing happens in God’s world without God’s authorization.

Bringing us to the bottom line: God warns; by means of prophets. Who doesn’t fear when the lion roars? Well, not anyone who knows what’s good for them. And who doesn’t prophesy when the Lord YHVH speaks? Well, not anyone to takes what God says to do seriously. Obviously. We sometimes say things like “If you’re not concerned about _____, you’re not paying attention.” That seems to be the spirit of this communication from God.

There’s more detail on Amos 7:10-15 here.

Some questions on the text are here.

Image: Detail of the Prophet Amos, from a fresco by Melozzo da Forlì in the Sacristy of St. Mark, Sailko / CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

Renaissance style Prophet Amos

Are you between 18 and 35 years old, and want to dive deeper into the Bible?

You're welcome to join our Young Adults Bible Study, every Sunday evening at 18:00. For more information, email youth@bedfordviewmc.co.za #Bedfordview #BibleStudy

Alt...

A flyer from Bedfordview Methodist Church, advertising a Young Adults Bible Study every Sunday at 18:00 in the Upper Room. Text reads, "Are you 18 - 35? Join us weekly as we reflect, learn, and grow in faith as a community," followed by the venue and day and times, and an email address (youth@bedfordviewmc.co.za) to contact for more information. There are also photos of various people studying and discussing the Bible. The footer of the image contains the church's name, logo, and contact information.

I am out on a morning hike surrounded by trees and fresh air, and I am still thinking about Hebrew verbs. Some things never turn off. 🌿

My new article is live, all about one verb that does more heavy lifting than almost any other in the language. One verb, dozens of real everyday expressions, the kind that makes you sound more natural and more local.

Nature, peace, and a whole lot of Hebrew. Go read it. 👇
https://open.substack.com/pub/hebrewbyinbal/p/learn-the-hebrew-verb-that-does-everything?r=2at7n8&utm_medium=ios

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Maclaren—Scottish Baptist—holds two things simultaneously: slavery was itself the greatest of all wrongs, and yet Paul still expected the slave to maintain certain duties, ruling out bloody revolt as remedy. Two truths, no contradiction. Contemporary discourse struggles with this skill—discrediting traditions over one error while still quoting Edwards.

#baptist #slavery #biblestudy #christian

Alt...

Black graphic with a portrait of Alexander Maclaren (1826–1910) beside a quote from *The Epistle to the Colossians*: "A superior's injustice does not warrant an inferior's breach of moral law, though it may excuse it. ... Herein lies the condemnation of all the crimes which enslaved nations and classes have done, of many a deed which has been honoured and sung, of the sanguinary cruelties of servile revolts, as well as of the questionable means to which labour often resorts in modern industrial warfare."

What if biblical prophecy, alien theories, and faith intersect in unexpected ways? Explore a unique study blending scripture, imagination, and unconventional interpretations.

#BibleStudy #Faith #Mystery

Read more: https://www.annettekmazzone.com/a-interdenominational-alien-biblical-hypothesis-leisurely-bible-study-lily-among-thorns-part-3-premiere-exclusive/

There is one Hebrew verb that does more heavy lifting than almost any other, and most learners completely overlook it.

Tomorrow morning I break it down in a brand new article. One verb, dozens of everyday expressions, the kind of word that makes you sound more natural, more local, and more confident in conversation.

It drops tomorrow, Tuesday at 8am. Subscribe today so you do not miss it. 👇
https://substack.com/@hebrewbyinbal

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy

Bruce—Free Church of Scotland—draws a tight inference: scripture rates kindness to the poor so highly that God himself must delight in loving-kindness. Teaching love, Jesus simultaneously taught grace—good given to the undeserving, no cleanup required first. This troubles certain quarters as much as kindness to the poor does. Same objection, different target.

#christian #lovingkindness #virtue #biblestudy #grace

Alt...

Black graphic with a portrait of Alexander Balmain Bruce (1831–1899) beside a quote from *Parabolic Teaching of Christ*: "If kindness to the poor have such value in the sight of God, it must be because God Himself is a Being who delights in loving-kindness. In teaching a morality of love Jesus virtually teaches a theology of grace."

It’s live!

You did not fail Hebrew. The method failed you.

If you have ever kept the streak, finished the lessons, and still froze when it mattered, this video is for you. Watch it now and let it take the weight off your shoulders.

👉 https://youtu.be/fRVDB8sK3CY?is=WIAXip-v3Kg7gOmh

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

If you have ever kept a perfect streak on a language app, finished all the lessons, and then sat across from a real person and gone completely blank, hear this. That was not your fault.

My new YouTube video drops today at noon Eastern. You did not fail Hebrew. The method failed you.

Most apps are built to keep you opening them, not to teach you to speak. The streak feels like progress, but it is an illusion. Real clarity and confidence come from something completely different, and that is what I break down today.

https://youtube.com/@hebrewbyinbal

Tune in at noon EST.

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Almost every student tells me the same thing about how they tried to learn Hebrew before they found me. They were completely on their own.

An app cannot answer your question. A video cannot tell you that you almost have it. A textbook cannot encourage you when you are ready to give up. So people studied in isolation, made the same mistakes over and over, and slowly lost the confidence to keep going.

That is the one thing I refuse to let happen. When you learn with me, you are never alone. You ask me your questions. You record yourself and I give you real, personal feedback. Not a bot. Me.

You do not have to do this alone anymore.

hebrewbyinbal.com/speak

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Of all the father-related Hebrew I have taught this week, this is the most meaningful one to close with.

Our Father in Heaven. A phrase at the very heart of faith for so many, spoken in prayer across the world every single day. There is something powerful about hearing it in Hebrew, the language it has echoed in for thousands of years.

Watch the final lesson in my father series. 💙

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #FathersDay #Christianity

There is a phrase in Hebrew that has traveled almost 3,000 years and is still spoken in Israel today.

It comes from the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Modern Israelis still use a shortened version and everyone understands instantly.

This is what I love about Hebrew. A phrase can begin in scripture and still be alive on the street thousands of years later.

Watch today’s lesson and learn it in both its biblical and modern form. 💙

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #BiblicalHebrew #JewishLife

So many of my students come to me after years on the apps. Duolingo, Rosetta Stone, the streaks and the points and the cheerful notifications.

And they all tell me the same thing. I memorized hundreds of words and I still cannot say a single sentence to a real person.

That is not your fault. Those apps are built to keep you opening them, not to teach you how the language actually works. They give you words in isolation with no structure underneath.

That is exactly what I do differently. I teach you the structure beneath the language so you are not collecting random words, you are building real Hebrew and using it in real life.

If the apps left you with nothing to show for it, it was never you.

hebrewbyinbal.com/speak

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Father’s Day is this Sunday, and I saved some of my favorite father-related Hebrew words for this moment.

There is something beautiful about the way Hebrew holds the idea of fathers, not just one dad but the whole lineage, the generations, the men who came before.

Watch this short lesson and bring a little Hebrew into your weekend. And tell me, who is the father figure you are thinking about this week? 💙

#FathersDay #LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #JewishLife

Feeling pressured? Lost someone dear to you?

The latest Bible studies in my #FindHope series point us to Biblical truths that help us in these difficult circumstances.

Why not take a look 👇?
https://downiefamily.wixsite.com/wherebreadisfound/meditations/categories/hope

#hope #biblestudy #christianity

ICYMI:

Read Part 3 of my Substack Series & Learn The Last Two Hebrew Marks That Make Everything Click:
Quotation Marks and the Makaf
Explained! 👇🏻

https://open.substack.com/pub/hebrewbyinbal/p/learn-the-last-two-hebrew-marks-that?r=2at7n8&utm_medium=ios

#LearnHebrew #BibleStudy #hebrewlanguage #LanguageDevelopment #hebrewforbeginners

There is “dad” in Hebrew, and then there is the softer, more loving way little ones call out for their fathers. The tender version, full of warmth and affection, the kind of word that holds a whole feeling inside it.

With Father’s Day around the corner, I wanted to teach you exactly that, because some words are not just words. They are love.

Watch the short lesson and learn the loving way to say it. And tell me what you called your father growing up. 💙

#FathersDay #LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #JewishLife

Reflecting on 1 Samuel 18 1-4 & other texts

This week we’re studying a number of somewhat isolated verses plucked from the longer story that tells us of the legendarily close relationship of David and Jonathan, the relationship that has given the English language the phrase “a David and Jonathan friendship.” Namely, 1 Samuel 18:1-4 [the very beginning]; 1 Samuel 20:16-17, 32-34, and 42 [from the chapter-long account of David and Jonathan’s parting, as David flees from Saul]; 2 Samuel 1:26-27 [a couple of verses from David’s epic lament of Saul and Jonathan’s death in battle with the Philistines]; 2 Samuel 21:7 [in which David spares Jonathan’s crippled son the fate of all Saul’s remaining grandchildren who might potentially lay claim to the throne of the Israelite monarchy].

We are missing a whole lot of context, so our first question probably must be: so, what IS the context for all this? And our next question might be: which context are we talking about? The narrative one, in which these verses fit somehow into a coherent story? The original historical one, in which whatever is going on is part of something that actually happened? The later historical one, in which whatever story is being told here is being told by someone looking backwards, with some perspective shaped by even later events, trying to make sense of everything? [How well we can reconstruct those historical contexts might be something of a question, too …] The theological context, shaped by the history of reception? [Again, which one? The one we read in the New Testament, like in the gospels? The one we ourselves are part of? And just which one is that, would we say? For instance, how much would we ourselves say the project of liberation theology or of feminism provides a context for our reading of these texts?]

Then, perhaps, we will want to think about David and Jonathan’s relationship as an instance of the various relational contexts in which the characters find themselves: family, people, covenant, etc. To whom are these friends loyal, and to whom ought they be loyal? And why, do we think? And when? And with what consequences? And what might we learn from the way their story unfolds?

Some notes on the first text are here; some notes on the collection of texts are here; and here are a couple of other questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class.

Since we are studying these texts in the context of the topic of “the testimony of faithful witnesses,” where do we see “faithful witness” in the story of David and Jonathan? Who is faithful to whom, and how? To what or to whom do the characters witness? How is this a lesson for us?

The prophet Samuel describes David as a man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14). We are told that the Spirit of the Lord is “mightily upon David” from the day of his anointing by Samuel (1 Samuel 16:13). YHWH directly makes David the benchmark for the behavior of the subsequent kings of Israel and Judah. (See, e.g., 1 Kings 11:33, 1 Kings 14:8, 2 Kings 20:5-7) and is presented by the Deuteronomist in at least one place as the gold standard for kingly behavior (see 2 Kings 22:1-2).

How does this treatment by the text affect our understanding of David’s character? How does it influence our understanding of David’s friendship with Jonathan? Why?

David is generally thought of as the ancestor of “the Messiah,” and when Jesus is called Son of David in the gospels (e.g., Matthew 1:1) we understand it to be a messianic reference.

How does this influence our understanding of David’s character? Our understanding of the meaning of David’s friendship with Jonathan?

Image: “Spannende Lektüre,” Walther Firle, 1929, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

So many people tell me the same thing when they first come to me. Hebrew felt impossible. The alphabet looked like a wall. The pronunciation rules made their head spin. And every method they tried was either too complicated or too dry to stick with.

If that is you, hear this clearly. Hebrew is not too hard for you. It was just never broken down the right way.

What my students tell me over and over is that I take the overwhelming and make it manageable. Complex concepts broken into clear pieces that actually click, step by step, at your own pace.

You just need a teacher who knows how to make it make sense.

hebrewbyinbal.com/speak

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Are you between 18 and 35 years old, and want to dive deeper into the Bible? You're welcome to join our Young Adults Bible Study, now on Sunday evenings at 18:00. For more information, email youth@bedfordviewmc.co.za #church #BibleStudy

Alt...

A flyer from Bedfordview Methodist Church, advertising a Young Adults Bible Study every Sunday at 18:00 in the Upper Room. Text reads, "Are you 18 - 35? Join us weekly as we reflect, learn, and grow in faith as a community," followed by the venue and day and times, and an email address (youth@bedfordviewmc.co.za) to contact for more information. There are also photos of various people studying and discussing the Bible. The footer of the image contains the church's name, logo, and contact information.

Father’s Day is June 21st, and ahead of it I wanted to teach you one of the most ancient and meaningful words in the Hebrew language - the word for father.

It has been spoken for thousands of years through prayer, through scripture, through generations of families calling out to the ones who raised them.

Watch the short lesson and carry the word with you into Sunday. And tell me one thing your father always said that you have never forgotten. 💙

#FathersDay #LearnHebrew #Hebrew #BibleStudy #JewishLife

The Hebrew month of Tamuz starts today. The month of seeing. Of vision. Of the eyes. Of how we look at what is right in front of us.

Two people can stand in the exact same life, look at the exact same thing, and one sees a wall while the other sees a door. Same place. Same facts. Completely different sight.

That is the quiet invitation of Tamuz. It is not asking you to change what is in front of you. It is asking how you are choosing to see it.

So this month, notice where your eyes go. You might be looking at something you have looked at for years, and finally be ready to see it differently. 💙

#Tamuz #JewishWisdom #Hebrew #BibleStudy #JewishLife

Boker Tov friends☀️

I have my Iced Americano in hand and I am ready for another Hebrew language teaching adventure. ☕🇮🇱

I sat down in front of these words this morning and they said it all. “The world is your oyster.” That is exactly what Hebrew does. It opens the world to you. Israel. Family. Faith. Scripture in its original language. A whole life waiting just out of reach until the language finally clicks.

What door do you most want Hebrew to open for you? Tell me below and come join me on this journey.

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Whately—Puritan, advocate for the poor—identifies a self-deception: resolving to avoid every evil while neglecting equal determination to perform every duty. Sins of omission; affirmative precepts. These count.

Some today make memes about the danger of complacency with sin. Omissions involving the poor rarely make that list.

#puritan #tencommandments #biblestudy

Alt...

Black graphic with an engraved portrait of William Whately (1583–1639) beside a quote from The Poore Mans Advocate: “Many think themselves sound, if they purpose to cast off every known evil deed, though they settle not in themselves, a like firm determination to perform every known duty. But herein they beguile themselves. He casts not from him all his transgressions, nor hath respect to all Gods commandments, that casts not from him faults of omission, and endeavoureth not to put in practise affirmative precepts.”

What is your Hebrew Question?

Two questions landed in my inbox recently and they are some version of the same thing I hear constantly. How do you read Hebrew without the dots? How do you figure out the dots and lines in the first place? That is where I am stuck

If you have ever felt that exact frustration, you are in very good company

The dots and lines have a name. They are called the Nikud, the Hebrew vowel system, & once you understand what they are actually doing, a huge amount of the confusion lifts. They are not random. They are not decoration. They are the key that tells you how a word sounds, & learning to work them and eventually beyond them is one of the most freeing moments in your whole Hebrew reading journey

Watch the video and then tell me honestly. Where are you most stuck with reading Hebrew right now? I read every single response & these questions often become my next lessons

http://hebrewbyinbal.com/read

#LearnHebrew #HebrewWords #LangaugeLearning #BibleStudy #HebrewLanguage

Did the early church actually practice tithing—or just voluntary giving? Explore how early Christians viewed generosity, scripture, and supporting the church in its earliest form.

#Tithing #ChurchHistory #BibleStudy

Read more: https://www.kithcartcodeofsilence.com/early-church-views-on-tithing/

The public restoration of the man at the Beautiful gate marked the early Church's first major sign, leaving the surrounding community "filled with wonder and amazement" (Acts 3:10 NKJV) at the miracle.

https://ko-fi.com/veggietalesgang
https://www.patreon.com/cw/veggietalesgang
https://linktr.ee/veggietalesgang
https://discord.gg/Knk4bCXKwG
https://youtube.com/shorts/p7iWtTBZx58?feature=share

#Christian #Bible
#Scripture #Gospel
#Biblememe #Christianmeme #Biblestudy

Boker Tov Friends!

The final part of my “Hebrew Marks” series just dropped. Three articles. Everything you need to read Hebrew. This is the piece that makes it all click.

Go read it. 🇮🇱
https://open.substack.com/pub/hebrewbyinbal/p/learn-the-last-two-hebrew-marks-that?r=2at7n8&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=split

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewReading #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

My search continues.

Will someone chime in with a list of bible software they have found useful? I'm using Linux and always on the lookout for new tools. Links would be helpful.

So far I have the applications: Xiphos, Bibletime, Widemargin, and Diatheke.

#Bible #BibleSoftware #BibleStudy #Xiphos #Bibletime #Diatheke #KJV

It is live. 🇮🇱

The Hebrew word for father carries thousands of years of history and today I am taking you deep inside all of it. One week before Father’s Day and this one is for everyone who has a father, lost a father, or simply loves this language.

Watch it here 👉 https://youtu.be/LTH4R3HrMb4

Subscribe and never miss a lesson. 🎬

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #FathersDay #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Father’s Day is June 21st and this Sunday at noon I am dropping a YouTube video unlike anything you have seen from me before.

Israel does not celebrate Father’s Day. But the Hebrew word for father is one of the most ancient and powerful words in the language with thousands of years of meaning behind it.

Watch it, learn it, and share it with someone who loves their dad before June 21st. Subscribe so you are there the moment it drops. 👇

https://youtube.com/@hebrewbyinbal 🇮🇱

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #FathersDay #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

This is what working from home actually looks like. 🐾

Tomorrow - Sunday at noon EST - my Father's Day YouTube video goes live. I filmed it before Father's Day on purpose, so you actually have time to learn, prepare, and show up with your Hebrew ready before the day arrives.

Because that's what this is all about, showing up in the language, not just knowing it exists.

See you tomorrow, go SUBSCRIBE 🎬

#DogLife #WorkFromHome #LearnHebrew #BibleStudy #FathersDay

If you just searched “I want to learn Hebrew” - this is where that search ends.

Native Israeli teacher. Amazon bestselling author three years running. Method built for English speakers. Lifetime personal access. Thousands of students across 30 countries.

Everything you need is right here. hebrewbyinbal.com

#LearnHebrew #Hebrew #HebrewForBeginners #BibleStudy #LanguageLearning

Jacob's sons used a sacred requirement to create a tactical vulnerability, breaking their peace treaty when they "came upon the city boldly" (Genesis 34:25 NKJV) to exact their own justice.

https://ko-fi.com/veggietalesgang
https://www.patreon.com/cw/veggietalesgang
https://linktr.ee/veggietalesgang
https://discord.gg/Knk4bCXKwG
https://youtube.com/shorts/QbPwIwXEkSg?feature=share

#Christian #Bible
#Scripture #Gospel
#Biblememe #Christianmeme #Biblestudy

The Real Outerspace

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ztfH9VXSBA

#Space, #SpaceHistory, #SpaceExploration, #BibleStudy.

Please join @kettingerjason and myself as we look at the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. https://youtube.com/live/bNrlpeZkQK4

#Parables #Jesus #Christianity #BibleStudy

Reflecting on Judges 4 (specifically 4-10, 14, & 21-22)

This week, we are looking at key verses in Judges 4 (specifically, vv4-10, 14, and 21-22), the story of Deborah, Barak, and the defeat of the armies of Sisera, along with the defeat of Sisera himself at the hand of Jael.

Like all Biblical stories, the description of the main characters is spare, leaving a lot to the readers’ imagination. For that reason, it might make sense for us to spend some time looking at our own readerly impressions of Deborah, Barak, Sisera, and Jael. What are those impressions? Where do they come from, as far as we can tell? [That is, where do we see the text itself suggesting or supporting those impressions? Where do we notice ourselves thinking “that’s how it always is …” or “probably she …”? How have we come to our ideas about what’s “always” or “probably” true about characters like these, do we think?]

Ideally, we will be able to compare our impressions to those of others, and see whether there is a range of those impressions, or whether there’s a lot of consensus. What seems to be going on with that, as far as we can tell? [For instance, shared or different ways of reading the text? Shared or different social backgrounds or assumptions? Shared or different experiences? …]

Then, we can look at what seem to be the lesson or lessons for us in the story, based on those impressions of the characters. How do those lessons seem to depend on our thoughts and feelings about these characters?

Some notes on the text are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or discuss:

There is a lot of killing in this story, most or all of it in the service of liberating the Israelites from oppression by the Canaanites. What thoughts, feelings, or challenges does this aspect of the story raise for us? Why?

What difference does it make what form the killing takes – that is, the killing done by Barak’s men, or that done by Jael? Again, why? Would we or would we not say that Jael’s killing is an act of war, part of “the war” between the Canaanites and the Israelites? Why, or why not? What difference would it make if it were? Why?

What difference does who is being killed make for how we think and feel about the killing in the story? Why?

How do we understand God’s involvement in the events of the story? What brings us to this understanding, do we think? What problems arise for us, or are resolved for us, when we understand God’s involvement this way?

Overall, what are our responses to this story? What do we find reassuring in it, challenging, instructive, and so on? Why?

What would we lose if this story were missing from our Bible? What would we gain? Why do we say that?

How would we feel about that? Why?

Image: “Drei Frauen im Gespraech” J.-H. Janßen, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

sculpture three women in conversation

Study Notes – 1 Samuel 1 9-20

We are studying 1 Samuel 1:9-20, for Sunday, September 8, a portion of the story of Hannah and the seemingly miraculous birth of Samuel that opens the book of 1 Samuel. [Some questions about the text are here.] Here are my notes on the text:

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT: The book of 1 Samuel continues the story of Israel in the land of Israel, following the entry into the land in Joshua and the steady decline of faithfulness narrated in the book of Judges. We might think of it as part of the “Deuteronomistic History” that comprises Joshua – 2 Kings, and that presents the history of Israel as a theologically significant set of related events and experiences.

Alternatively, we might think of it as one of the books of the “former prophets” – the way it is identified in Jewish tradition. Christian readers might not think of these as “prophetic” texts, but if we think of Joshua, Samuel, Elijah and Elisha as the prophets associated with these narratives that relate a past as Marc Zvi Brettler would say, then this way of labeling the books may make more sense to us.

Either way, we think that one of the guiding concerns of the overall narrative is the development of the monarchy, and establishing David as the model monarch. Samuel will play a key role in that plot, and Samuel’s story starts with Hannah, his mother, and her desperate plea for a child.

Shiloh, where this part of the story takes place, was the cultic center at this time – well before worship was centralized in Jerusalem (in David’s time) or the Temple was built (in Solomon’s time). I used to think that the Tabernacle was set up at Shiloh, but our text refers to the temple (or palace) of YHWH, which was presumably a more permanent structure. (See the map here for the location of Shiloh.)

The time is “the time of the judges” – of whom Samuel is the last. Samuel anoints both Saul (king of Israel #1) and David (king of Israel #2).

Bible readers will recognize the theme of barrenness in the story from other Bible stories (Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, Samson’s mother – the “wife of Manoah”), so by now this is a plot device, and we know what’s going to happen in this story. (There is an article on barrenness in the Bible at Bible Odyssey.)

Hannah’s fortunes will turn, Samuel will be born, and “given to God” at a young age, and from there will be in a position to deliver bad news to the high priest Eli about God’s unfavorable decision about him and his family, and then to interact with Saul in a complex way, and finally to anoint David.

This story may hook some of our deep feelings about pregnancy, child-rearing, and relationships. Hannah’s vow, in particular – that if only she can have a child, specifically a male child, she will dedicate the child to God – will probably strike other modern readers the way it strikes this one: as profoundly counter-productive. What’s the point of having the child if you turn around and give him away? And if we have any feeling for children at all, we can hardly help feeling miserable for Samuel, who has to go live with Eli, someone we already know to be a lousy father, and his horrible sons. It’s heartbreaking. But all of that is in the future, relative to our story.

The fact that Hannah is a co-wife, seemingly the first wife based on the order in which Elkanah’s wives are listed. Knowing what we might know about when men acquire second wives in cultures where that’s allowed today – namely, when wife #1 doesn’t have children – reinforces this suspicion. This story would have direct personal significance for women in some contemporary cultural circumstances. We might do well to remember that.

CLOSER READING: Picking the story up at verse 9, we focus on the part of the story that features Hannah’s interaction with God and with Eli.

Hannah does most of the action; she has a dozen verbs to Eli’s five. Verse 9 emphasizes the contrast between Hannah and Eli: she arises, while he sits. His seat, literally “on the doorpost” of the temple, is a little curious, but seems to give him a good view of what goes on in the temple. [Which will later, if we remember, make us think that he has to know what his wicked sons are doing, eh? So why doesn’t he do anything about it, eh? Especially since he seems completely willing to make a judgment about Hannah AND to say something to her based on his faulty judgment. What an exemplary character Eli is.]

Also, note that “eating … drinking” in v9 are infinitives – they don’t exactly tell us that Hannah ate and drank. Which makes sense, because in v8 we thought the narrator told us specifically that she was too miserable to eat.

There are a lot of infinitives in this story. I’m not sure what to make of that. Except that Hannah, in particular, is depicted in emphatic terms. She weeps, yes, weeps when she prays in v10, she vows, yes, vows her vow in v11, implores YHWH to look, yes, look on her affliction in that prayer. And then she asks God to remember and not forget – emphasizing the positive and in a sense asking God to stop forgetting, which it seems God has been doing so far.

And then she makes this insane [to my way of thinking, but what do I know] vow that if God will give she will give … which makes her sound like a pagan to me, since my humanities teacher explained that “du et dos” – I give so you will give – was the principle of Greco-Roman worship. The Nazirite features of the vow, that his hair will not be cut, remind us of other dedicated characters; given the setting in time, we will probably think of Samson.

Hannah is emphatically miserable. The story uses lots of different words for misery – affliction – bitterness of soul – etc.

Eli’s conclusion that Hannah is drunk might strike us as a little … puzzling. Do drunk people look and act this way, in our experience? Rashi explains that Eli thinks she’s drunk because people weren’t accustomed to praying silently in those days. I think Rashi is being generous to Eli.

In fact, when Hannah says she has poured out her soul before the face of YHWH, it’s an implicit contrast with drunkenness – spirit being poured out, rather than poured in. Sensitiveness, in contrast with insensibility.

Eli is really hard of hearing – this is going to come up again a couple of chapters on – and his hardness of hearing seems to be a metaphor for spiritual insensitivity. But here, in vv13-17, Eli also seems to serve as a figure for God, so that his inability to hear Hannah’s voice mirrors God’s deafness to her desire for a son, and then when Eli hears her out, and hears her explanation, and her request that he “not take the maidservant before the face [of you] as a wicked daughter”, things turn from bad to good, Eli offers her a positive response, and in effect authorizes her request. I realize that “before the face” construction is an idiom, but it’s an idiom that will make us think of coming before God because that’s how it’s often used, so … it just seems to have a whiff of that idea around it here in v16.

And then, we might know that the happy ending is coming, because in v18, when Hannah says in response to Eli (priest of God) “Let your maidservant find favor in your eyes” she uses a different word for “maidservant” than the one she has been using up till now, and switches to the word used for Hagar and Bilhah and Zilpah back in Genesis, which, if we remember our Bible stories, lets us know that pregnancy is on its way.

Hannah is happy, and the plot unfolds … “and Elkanah knew Hannah, his wife, and YHWH remembered her.”

She names him Shmuel (v20), she says because she “asked him” from God, but honestly, the name Shmuel sounds more like “God heard.”

The title of the lesson in our curriculum is “God Answers Prayer.” Perhaps there is not better title. “God finally answers prayer after a long time of seeming not to, sometimes, if you’re the right person and if your request fits in with God’s agenda” is probably too long and naturalistic a title, though I think it would be more accurate, especially in the context of this story. It’s not that I don’t believe God answers prayer. I do. But we all know that God is not a drive-thru, taking our order and handing us the sack and drink in under 2 minutes. I like John Goldingay’s insistence that when we pray, we really do mean to change God’s mind (contrary to what people and especially we Calvinists often say, that it’s designed to change us). And sometimes God does change God’s mind, too. But not always. Which brings us back around to the difficult question of “why,” and how we try to get the answer to that question … from God, presumably.

Scenes from the story of Hannah: praying in the temple at Shiloh, and after the birth of Samuel

#1Samuel #1Samuel1920 #BibleStudy #Hannah #prayer #readingTheBible #Samuel

Reflecting on 1 Samuel 1 9-20

This week we’re studying 1 Samuel 1:9-20 + 25, the story of Hannah’s prayer for a child – who turns out to be Samuel, a significant character in the history of Israel and particularly in the lives of the first two kings of Israel, Saul and David.

We’ve studied this text before (see questions from that time here), but this time we’re looking at it in the context of our summer quarter study of “the testimony of faithful witnesses.” [Although I confess, this rubric feels like a stretch to me, brought on by the desperate need to find a unifying theme for somewhat disparate texts …]

Anyway, in light of this quarter’s context, we might want to ask ourself what we mean by “faithful witnesses,” and what we think it means to be “faithful,” or a “witness.” From there we can turn to Hannah’s story, and ask ourselves: how, in what way, in this story, does Hannah demonstrate faithfulness, and to what does she bear witness? Where do we see that in the text? What do we ourselves learn from Hannah’s story and Hannah’s example?

What is our overall impression of Hannah and her story, for that matter? What thoughts and feelings do we have about her actions? What strikes us as commendable, what as perhaps less than commendable, where do we applaud her, where do we question her …? Why is that? What do we find out about ourselves in looking at all that?

Some notes on the text are here. Here are a couple of additional questions we might want to think about, or to discuss in class:

In v11, Hannah vows to dedicate the male child she is begging for from God back to God as a nazirite (see Numbers 6:1-21). What is the meaning of such a vow, do we think? What does the vow indicate about Hannah’s state of mind, or about the cultural context in which the vow is made, or about God’s desires and preferences? [That is, do we think Hannah is trying to offer something to God that God would like, as an inducement …? Or is something else going on? What, do we think?]

What thoughts and feelings do we have about this? Why?

[More personal] Have we ever made a vow to God ourselves? What was our experience with that?

What would we say this story is “about”? [That is … we might say “it’s about prayer” or “it’s about Hannah and her relationship with God” or … what?] What do we learn from a story like this? What do we think we are supposed to learn?

Why do we think this story is in the Bible?

Image: “Gespräch vor dem Haus,” Gergely Pörge, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Alt...

painting figures in conversation

Moses future prohecy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-mxiSktQJw

#BibleStudy.

Recent developments in Israel and Jerusalem highlight Prime Minister Netanyahu’s firm stance that Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons, a position... #BibleStudy #LivingAsBereans

https://spearnet.org/2026/06/12/global-watch-daily-june-12-2026/

#ChristianNews #BiblicalResearch #BibleLearning

The Old Testament is not a collection of disconnected stories. It is one unified story pointing to Christ.

Jesus is the Word of the Lord fulfilled in Christ.

📖 Blog: https://www.scottlapierre.org/the-word-of-the-lord-fulfilled-in-christ/
🎥 Sermon: https://youtu.be/zg74q5OenbU

#JesusChrist #BibleStudy #Sermon

My latest #BibleStudy notes on #Genesis20: https://notes.laniecarmelo.tech/shares/puLBoEJCgyPwKalkRc2WFg
#Bible #Christian #Christians #Christianity #Faith #Genesis @christians
Need to get a few things done but might try and do #Genesis21 here in a little while.