Deuteronomic Theology and the Gospel of Prosperity

For Old Testament, we students reflect weekly on “some topic, aspect or concept” from the volumes and volumes of assigned reading. I am limited to one single-spaced page each week, and in every case I’ve been forced to cut myself off from writing. So read knowing that my thoughts are manifold!

If you are interested in more selections from my School of Theology Coursework, follow the link to the category of SOT Coursework. I have also set up a new category for these Old Testament reflection papers called OT Weeklies. If all goes well, each new reflection paper will be posted automatically at 2:00 p.m. each Monday, when my Old Testament class convenes.

What follows is my reflection paper from the week of October 4. Enjoy!

————————————————————————————————–

In the midst of warning the Israelites about a litany of curses that could befall them for not upholding God’s Laws, the Deuteronomist pauses to promise broad-sweeping earthly blessings for those who will “obey the Lord your God and keep his commands and decrees” (Dt 30:6 NIV). This basic concept, repeated throughout Deuteronomy with nuance, forms what Victor P. Hamilton refers to as “Deuteronomic theology.”[1] Perhaps the promise of blessings for the righteous is a natural progression that follows the delivery of the Law, wherein God can be understood as the originator of positive reinforcement. Stated another way, God knew his people needed an incentive to obey him. Rightfully so, however, Hamilton astutely notes that the phenomena of blessings and curses in Deuteronomy are not always related to the degree to which one follows the Law.[2] Yet, this reflection paper will examine the application of the basic concept as mirrored by modern popular theology and as found elsewhere in the Old Testament.

Deuteronomic theology forms the backbone of the cynically titled “prosperity gospel,” a message popularized by Joel Osteen and based on the promise of blessing from Deuteronomy (Dt 30:1-10). Osteen pastors a Houston-area mega-church, but is more widely known around the United States for his loosely theological self-help books. Having never heard Osteen speak in person, I must rely on video clips, sound bites and other means of understanding his yoke. However, for a cogent summary of his message, I defer to friend and colleague Andrew Baumgartner, who in 2009 visited Osteen’s Lakewood Church and walked away with a critical assessment. Referring to Osteen’s message, he wrote, “To the untrained or uncaring ear, it could sound almost Christian. It is full of happy platitudes, and some genuinely get comfort from it. But upon further examination and reflection, prosperity is built on the theological sand.”[3]

If this indeed were the case, Osteen would not be the first to build an understanding of God on sand, referencing the saying of Jesus (Mt 7:24-27). Perhaps the most compelling argument against the broad-brush application of Deuteronomic theology comes when God judges against the counsel of Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar and Elihu regarding the reason for Job’s suffering (Jb 42:7-10). Throughout the greater part of the book, these friends attempt to reason that Job lost his material blessings of family, servants, livestock and possessions due to some unrighteous or sinful action hidden in Job’s life. Emphatically, God responds to Eliphaz, “‘I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. . . . Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly’” (Jb 42:7-8 NIV). Not only are Job’s friends wrong, they are also foolish for applying such basic Deuteronomic theology in this instance.

Considering this passage as part of a discussion regarding the authority of the full Bible, Brian D. McLaren concludes that while individual books and passages contain truth, “We speak nonsense when we practice verse snatching from Deuteronomy, the middle of Job, or anywhere else.”[4] McLaren posits that a fuller understanding of the Bible is found in context, conversation, and community. Without these vital clues, it is difficult to understand that the promise of Godly blessing in Deuteronomy may be necessary positive reinforcement to incentivize the freshly minted Law, rather than a verdict on the origin of one’s recent promotion or cancer diagnosis.

[1] Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the Pentateuch (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 446.

[2] Ibid., 450-451.

[3] Andrew Baumgartner, “My Evening at Lakewood Church,” I’m Wide Awake, entry posted October 12, 2009, http://abaumgart.livejournal.com/98075.html (accessed October 3, 2010).

[4] Brian D. McLaren, A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith (New York: HarperOne, 2010), 90-91.

I’m Dreaming of Genesis

What follows is my reflection paper from the week of September 20. Enjoy!

————————————————————————————————–

Within this week’s study of Genesis and Victor P. Hamilton’s commentary, one significant theme that piqued my personal interest was the frequency of dreams and other events discerned in the context of restful sleep. The creative manifestations of brainwaves are recorded not only from the lives of vital patriarchal characters, including Abraham and Jacob, but also from Abimelech, servants of Pharaoh, and other minor players in the grand scope of Genesis. I will briefly recount the varying dreams and deep-sleep revelations presented in the Scripture while discussing my observations and reflections.

Though not specifically called a dream in Genesis, the first deep-sleep revelation comes to the male ‘adam in the context of God’s creation of a female companion (Gn 2:21-23). Shortly after he is awakened from his slumber, the male is immediately aware of the nature of God’s creative act, thereby implying a degree of subconscious understanding on his part. In a similar fashion, Abram receives God’s covenantal plan for the first time by way of a deep-sleep revelation (Gn 15:12-16). The covenant is repeated to Abraham’s grandson after Jacob dreams up a ladder, or stairway, reaching from the ground to heaven (Gn 28:10-17). However, these dreams of blessing contrast distinctly with visions of warning presented to Abimelech (Gn 20:3-7) and Laban (Gn 31:24). For example, the former is cautioned not to have sexual relations with Sarah, who is actually Abraham’s wife, while the latter is admonished to proceed with tact when confronting the fleeing Jacob.

The story of Jacob’s favorite son brings an important evolutionary step in our Genesis dreams, for as Hamilton realizes, “What distinguishes Joseph’s dreams from these is that in all the other recorded dreams…God speaks clearly to the dreamer.”[1] His dreams, of course, entail sheaves of grain representative of his brothers bowing to his own sheaf of grain (Gn 5-7) as well as the sun, moon and 11 stars bowing to Joseph himself (Gn 37:9). But in addition to Joseph’s own creativity in sleep, he is also blessed with the ability to successfully interpret the dreams of others, as he does with Pharaoh’s butler (Gn 40:9-11) and baker (Gn 40:16-17) before progressing to Pharaoh himself (Gn 41:1-7). Joseph correctly predicts that Pharaoh’s butler will be reinstated from prison while the baker is executed; furthermore, Joseph rightfully understands the periods of abundance and drought that are soon to define Egypt.

God never explicitly explains the importance of sleep to man. Perhaps it is a given. However, the variety of dreams in Genesis appears to underscore some of sleep’s not-so-obvious benefits. For example, in the cases of Abram, Jacob, the male ‘adam, and others, sleep gives God an appropriate avenue to communicate, be it with blessings or warnings; through New Testament eyes, modern scholars may view this as a precursor of sorts to the Holy Spirit. Similarly, creative machinations of the mind with no direct connection to God take form in the slumbers of Joseph, Pharaoh, and Pharaoh’s servants. With a little bit of interpretation, these are implied in Genesis as fortuitous foresights into the future.

As Joshua Leibowitz explains, “The dreams in Genesis are very significant: Either they depict the future, or they cause future events. Everybody dreams in Genesis.”[2] The Scriptural message is clear: dreams come from God. Just as Genesis is interested in explaining the reason for mankind’s disconnect with God, the phenomenon of the rainbow, the reason for confusing languages, and the like, the authors thoroughly explore the nature and significance of dreams.

[1] Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the Pentateuch (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 122.

[2] Ariel Knafo and Tziporit Glick, “Genesis Dreams: Using a Private, Psychological Event as a Cultural, Political Declaration,” Dreaming 10, no. 1 (2000): 19.

Inconsistencies in Exodus’ Ten Plagues

For Old Testament, we students reflect weekly on “some topic, aspect or concept” from the volumes and volumes of assigned reading. This last week included the first twenty chapters of Exodus, about 13 chapters of Numbers, and corresponding commentaries. The topic about which I chose to write was inconsistencies in the account of the ten plagues.

I was limited to one single-spaced page, but probably could have gone on for a while longer. For example, the topic of naturally occurring disasters that could explain the plagues intrigues me quite a lot. But, I digress.

What follows is my reflection paper. Enjoy!

————————————————————————————————–

Ten plagues wreaked utter devastation on the Egyptian people, land and spirit before Pharaoh ultimately allowed Moses and his fellow Israelites to proceed out to the desert (Ex 7:14-12:30). In a fascinating fashion, the Exodus narrative simultaneously highlights the power of God over Pharaoh and the forces of nature in a display that Victor P. Hamilton claims will allow all parties – Pharaoh, Egyptians and Israelites – to “indeed acquire knowledge of the true God.”[1] All may not have realized that goal, however, and the account of the ten plagues unfortunately leaves inquisitive readers with as many questions as answers. This reflection paper explores such questions regarding two major inconsistencies in the Exodus reading.

After repeatedly hardening his heart and having his heart hardened by God through four plagues, Pharaoh is once again offered an opportunity to let the Israelites leave. Pharaoh does not respond, and God sends a plague of pestilence upon the Egyptian field livestock – or more specifically, upon “horses and donkeys and camels and on your cattle and sheep and goats” (Ex 9:3 NIV). Shortly thereafter, it is reported that “all” of the Egyptian livestock died, whereas “not one animal belonging to the Israelites died” (Ex 9:6 NIV). Bart D. Ehrman asks, “How is it, then, that a few days later the seventh plague, of hail, was to destroy all of the Egyptian livestock in the fields? What livestock?”[2] Furthermore, the tenth plague relates that not only have the firstborn of Egyptians from all different kinds of social classes and backgrounds been killed, but “the firstborn of all the livestock as well” (Ex 12:29 NIV).

If one assumes the particular view of Biblical inerrancy, he or she might also have to deduce fanciful manners of spawning by Egyptian livestock. Perhaps, however, a more apt explanation is simply lost in translation. In their exploration of the ten plagues as “an aberrant El Niño-Southern Oscillation teleconnection that brought unseasonable and progressive climate warming” to portions of Egypt other than inland Goshen[3], N. Joel Ehrenkranz and Deborah A. Sampson make a decidedly linguistic deduction. “We take ‘cattle’ to be a generic term for two distinct collections of livestock: animals in pasture that are killed in plague 5 and animals destroyed in plague 10 that are located elsewhere – presumably at Egyptian dwellings.”[4] Still, this assumption begs the question: what division of animals died in the hailstorm (Ex 9:21)?

Another significant inconsistency in the account of the ten plagues comes after an irritated Pharaoh orders Moses away following the ninth plague, of darkness. Pharaoh claims that Moses will die if the Israelite sees his face again, and Moses affirms that he will never again appear before Pharaoh (Ex 10:28-29). But depending on one’s reading of the passages that follow, Moses and Pharaoh definitely meet again at least one more time (Ex 12:31-32), and possibly even twice (Ex 11:4-8). And chronologically, on the latter of these two occasions, Pharaoh urges Moses to bless him – a far cry from attempting to kill God’s messenger.

Even with his willingness to bring up – and explain away – criticisms within the source text, Hamilton does not address apparent inconsistencies within the ten plagues narrative. To be sure, the presence of inconsistent textual renderings does not detract significantly from my comprehension of the story, and neither is such a phenomenon limited to these five chapters. However, they do create certain problems for Christians with more lofty views of the Bible.

[1] Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the Pentateuch (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 159.

[2] Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know About Them) (New York: HarperOne, 2009), 10.

[3] N. Joel Ehrenkranz and Deborah A. Sampson, “Origin of the Old Testament Plagues: Explications and Implications,” Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 81, no. 1 (March 2008), under “Abstract,” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2442724/ (accessed September 25, 2010).

[4] Ibid.