Then Samuel took a stone and set it up between Mizpah and Jeshanah, and named it Ebenezer; for he said, ‘Thus far the Lord has helped us.’ So the Philistines were subdued and did not again enter the territory of Israel; the hand of the Lord was against the Philistines all the days of Samuel. The towns that the Philistines had taken from Israel were restored to Israel, from Ekron to Gath; and Israel recovered their territory from the hand of the Philistines. There was peace also between Israel and the Amorites. (Verses 12-14, as given in Bread for the Day)
Other readings:
Acts 9:19b-31 (Barnabas introduces Saul/Paul in Jerusalem) and Psalm 29 (The voice of God upon the waters)
Hymn: "Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing"
Prayer: Almighty God, you grace us with strength in the midst of turbulent days, and where you are, peace abides. Grant us the wisdom to recognize your presence in others, that we may never exclude others who also call you Lord.
Reflection
Well, first of all, I guess this gives a clue finally to the ponderous lyrics at the beginning of the second verse of "Come, Thou Fount...": "Here I raise my Ebenezer: 'Hither by thy help I've come'". That would be a recasting of verse 12 in this passage, where Samuel set up a stone and named it Ebenezer, "for he said, 'Thus far the Lord has helped us.'"
The point in the text--at least as implied by the prayer of the day--is that God provided peace for the Israelites. It's a little troublesome to me, though, because when you read through the whole passage for today (I only have verses 12-14 above, following the lead of Bread for the Day), the "peace" seems to be simply that the Philistines were scared witless to attack the Israelites because "the Lord thundered with a mighty voice that day against the Philistines and threw them into confusion; and they were routed before Israel. And the men of Israel went out of Mizpah and pursued the Philistines, and struck them down as far as beyond Beth-car." (v. 11) It would seem to be the sort of peace of the Cold War--not so much a "real" peace, but a peace based in the fact that either side was afraid to attack the other. Of course, 'history is always told by the victor', and I think that applies even to (perhaps especially to) biblical history, and the Deuteronomistic history in particular (1st Samuel is part of a larger section of the Bible known as the "Deuteronomistic History", extending from Joshua through the end of 2nd Kings, excluding Ruth and arguably including the book of Deuteronomy; it is so named because biblical scholars believe these history-telling books come out of the same tradition or community as the writer of Deuteronomy). So, in this case, as long as Israel is not being attacked, or not losing, from Israel's perspective there is peace.
This is perhaps the classic error in American history, and especially that chunk from the end of the Cold War until 9/11. In America during this time, the overall concern for "world peace" was, in my estimation, pretty low--we, after all, were not getting attacked and lived in little fear of being attacked. So for us there was already peace. As my own seminary Hebrew Bible professor, Dr. Ken Stone, pointed out in a Convocation address the semester after I graduated, one of the things in our present context that the Deuteronomistic history may best do is shine back a not-too-flattering reflection on our own actions (he was speaking specifically of the book of Judges, but it could apply to much of it). This is particularly true of our all-too-often desire to claim God's blessing upon our country or our actions--or at least to say that if we are not getting attacked, for instance, it is because of God's protection (and thus, if we are, that God has removed that protection). Here I share some interesting quotes from Dr. Stone's address:
[D]o those of us who are committed to fostering peace in our world need to consider the possibility that the normalization of violence in the book of Judges, a book that associates violence with both God and the people of God, has some complicated but nevertheless real relationship to the conflicts that continue to rage among branches of the Abrahamic traditions?
[O]ne way of reading difficult biblical texts is precisely to read them as a mirror. If we read Judges as a mirror, we may find in it, first of all, not an occasion for condemnation of either the text or our neighbor, but rather an occasion for critical self-reflection. That is to say, in a world of conflict, how do we, who long for justice, find ourselves acting just like these judges? Where do we see, in the book of Judges, reasons for caution about our own worst tendencies, particularly those of us who, as Christians, wish to heed Jesus’ command in Matthew 7:1-2 not to judge?
For the case of Jephthah, in particular, may suggest to us that being involved in a just cause and being used by the spirit of God are no guarantees against doing terrible and foolish things. Indeed, Jephthah’s story indicates that those involved in just causes and acting under God’s spirit are quite capable of sacrificing persons close to them while refusing to take responsibility for their own harmful acts.I encourage you to read the whole address (follow the link above).
But that academic tangent aside, where does that leave us with the claim in today's prayer of the day, that God "grace[s] us with strength in the midst of turbulent days, and where [God is], peace abides." What kind of peace is this? A 'personal' peace? A 'real' peace? A respite from hate and violence? What are the signs of God's peace breaking into the world already?
Daily lectionary readings from Revised Common Lectionary Daily Readings, ©2005 Consultation on Common Texts. Hymn suggestions and prayer for the day from Bread for the Day 2008: Daily Bible Readings and Prayers, ©2007 Augsburg Fortress.
No comments:
Post a Comment