Category: Isaiah

  • No Vacations Until the Big Vacation: Isaiah 25

    Then there was Joe, who in this early days of being a Witness, would decline vacations, saying he as awaiting the Big Vacation.

    This is plainly what Isaiah 25 is: the big vacation. After that formidable banquet of all the choicest dishes, the real treats roll out

    “On this mountain he will destroy the shroud that enfolds all peoples, the sheet that covers all nations; he will swallow up death forever. The Sovereign LORD will wipe away the tears from all faces; he will remove his people’s disgrace from all the earth. (25:7-8)

    Death, the great swallower, that swallows us all, is itself swallowed and becomes no more. Despite all the clerical representations that it is somehow a friend, since (if you’re good) it means promotion to the heavenly choir—and especially if a baby dies and the preacher says it is God picking flowers for his most beautiful garden that is only lacking one: yours! then, you can believe that death is always presented as a friend. 

    But even for regular people, it is as overenthusiastic Don would say: “Now, weren’t we always told that there are more bad people than good people? That the world is the way it is because bad people ruin it , but, not to worry: they will all get their comeuppance in hell? Weren’t we always told that?” And, when I would at last admit yes because it was the only way to stop him, he’d go on: “When was the last time you ever saw a preacher pack someone off to hell?!” Death, in clerical terms, is always a friend.

    But, in the Bible, it is an enemy—the very last enemy, which is swallowed up forever. “Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing,” says 1 Corinthians 15:24-26. It is, at long last, “swallowed up forever.” (verse 54)

    It’s not just death, though, but it includes all that leads to it, in verse seven called a ‘shroud that enfolds all peoples.” It represents mourning, separation, or the pall of death covering humanity. But, it is also the sin inherited from Adam is itself, a shroud that muddles our paths through life. All must come to grips with a vague sense of unease that invariably accompanies this sin. Everyone identifies at some level with a Kafkaesque trial in which guilt is assumed—there would not be a trial, otherwise, but the charges are never laid out, and the fact that one may think themselves innocent is irrelevant. 

    This shroud that enfolds all peoples is destroyed. It is through jesus, who dies to offset the condemnation to sin brought about through Adam’s rebellion against God. Put faith in that arrangement, do nothing to sabotage it, and you’re golden. It is —again, from 1 Corinthians 15–“The first man Adam became a living person.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (verse 45)

    John echoes it in Revelation 7:17 and 21:4 (God wiping away tears in the new heaven and earth).

    This death to be swallowed up is not limited to death from war, sickness, or violence (though those are included as causes of death); it encompasses death in its totality—the cessation of physical life due to the curse of sin, from Genesis 3.

    Isaiah 26 continues along the same line, but with an addition: “But your dead will live, Lord; their bodies will rise—let those who dwell in the dust wake up and shout for joy—your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth will give birth to her dead.”* (verse 19)

    Of course. It’s all very nice for death to be swallowed up, but that does nothing for those who have already died. So, to complete the picture, there has to be a provision for those people, too, and here it is found in the resurrection. The verse is widely regarded as one of the clearest Old Testament references to bodily resurrection.

    When the boss realizes he has signed off on your vacation, he begins to regret letting his people go. He tries to walk back the action. Maybe he can make you do work through emails or teleconferencing. However, your answer to him can be the same as that from Isaiah, who observes that “the blast of the tyrants is like a rainstorm against a wall.” (25:4)

    ******  The bookstore

  • Shebna: The Corrupt Official Who Flew too High

    Always there are public officials, it doesn’t matter where you go, who, during their tenure, amass far more wealth than you would think possible given their salaries. Who can say how they do it? Let me count the ways, but they do it. 

    These people all regard Shebna as their patron saint. They are his antitypes. Where the homes of God-fearing people will post some favorite scripture, like maybe the Lord’s prayer, their homes post Isaiah 22:15-18, the mission statement of their hero. Not the penalty part—where he is wadded up like a ball to be tossed into the wastebasket. That’s not an outcome they figure will happen. The mission statement part is where they focus:

    “Go in to this steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the house, and say, ‘What is your interest here, and who is there of interest to you here, that you hewed out a burial place here for yourself?’ He is hewing out his burial place in a high place; he is cutting out a resting-place for himself in a crag. ‘Look! Jehovah will hurl you down violently, O man, and seize you forcibly. He will certainly wrap you up tightly and hurl you like a ball into a wide land. There you will die, and there your glorious chariots will be, a disgrace to your master’s house.” (22:15-18)

    Shebna is the only individual specifically rebuked in these many chapters of Isaiah. We’ have seen Babylon, Assyria, Philistia, Moab, Damascus, Etheopia, Egypt, Edom, Arabia, Tyre, and Sidon all chewed out in previous chapters, but no individual people. Then there are groups of people: rulers and princes (3:1–15), elders and dignitaries (3:2–3), women of Zion (3:16–4:1), priests and prophets (28:7–13), scribes and wise men who rely on human counsel (29:14–15, 30:1), but no individuals. A few individuals are named, such as Ahaz, but they are not rebuked. So, Shebna must have been pretty bad to be disfavored so. And yet, it doesn’t seem that way when compared to the corruption of our time. The guy wants a fancy burial place? There are worse things than that.

    Just how fancy a burial place are we talking about? For what was he ignoring his official duties to prepare? Was he going the way of the Egyptian kings, scheming out a lavish pyramid for himself? No. Much more modest than that. I mean, his offense seems not too much more than reaching for a luxury sedan when an econobox would do just fine. He can’t hold a candle to his modern-day antitypes. If his example of pride and self-aggrandizement got God going, what are we to say of modern figures who outdo him twentyfold? If you hold public office, you’re not supposed to abuse it.

    We know for sure that his proposed burial place was no pyramid because it has been found. No one ever said that the tomb would not be built. They just said he would not be around to die in it. He’d be wadded up and tossed like a ball. But, the tomb was built, and it is one of the more elaborate tombs in the area: a rock-cut tomb with finely dressed stonework, chambers, and a monumental inscribed lintel over the entrance bearing the words: “This is [the sepulcher of …]yahu who is over the house. There is no silver or gold here but [his bones] and the bones of his maidservant with him. Cursed be the man who will open this.” It is widely acknowledged as his.

    It’s in the town of Silwan, just across the Kidron Valley from ancient Jerusalem. In 1870, French archaeologist Charles Clermont-Ganneau caught wind of it and paid the place a visit. it was occupied!—long ago turned into a private dwelling in the densely packed town! Today, it’s even more densely packed. It’s mostly working-class Palestinian families living in a crowded urban neighborhood of East Jerusalem—concrete houses, narrow streets, kids playing football, satellite dishes, the usual city-suburb mix.

    There is no word on whether the current resident experienced the curse warned about. Maybe that terrible experience commenced with the visit of the archeologist himself. He knocked on the fellows door, or rang the doorbell, or something, and talked him into letting him chisel out the inscription, so he could spirit it off to the British Museum, where it rests today.

    Roving archaeologists are always pestering me, too. They are incessantly ringing my doorbell—or at least you never know when they may start—to abscond with my “Home Sweet Home” banner just over the support beams, or if not that, then the welcome mat that says “Don’t Bug Me.” Here I’ll be tilting back in my easy chair watching TV, when someone pounds on the door. Another archeologist! I am inclined to tell him to take a hike. He doesn’t have to know everything. But it is an archeologist, after all, from the university, and I don’t want to appear disdainful of education. I say, “Don’t I know you from the archeologists’ party?” He replies: “Who are you to blow against the wind?” I let him in and he and his cohorts strips the house bare. 

    It’s not such a rare thing as it might at first seem, for people to build and live over, around, or even inside the tombs. It is known as a “necropolis,” a city build among the dead. It has happened in far more modern times than Shebna’s. Colonial Cemetery, for example, in Savannah, Georgia, might, at first glance, seem one of the many town squares that dot the city, though a much enlarged one, but it is not counted as one. It has not even been a complete cemetery since Civil War times, because the Union soldiers camping out one cold overnight took to burrowing into the tombs for warmth and threw all the remains outside. The city has been the setting for many battles through the years as to be described a necropolis. Our tour guide told us of one church in which the preacher preached long to the Confederate troops, and then the following Sunday, the very same sermon to the Union troops who had killed off the Confederate ones during the intervening week.

    So it is with Silwan. There’s about fifty tombs in the area. It’s choice property. Those dead were placed there centuries ago. Might as well recondition the place for more modern use. They don’t all make for homes, and when they do, they might just be a section of the home, or the modern home might sit atop the ancient structure. Maybe it serves as the garage or basement or pool room. But some old tombs would serve as livestock enclosures, water cisterns, storage spaces, or even sewage dumps. (The latter would have been the ultimate put-down of Shebna, but his foretold abasement was not to that degree).

    Clermont-Ganneau had it easy. These days, homeowners are more likely to chase archaeologists away with pitchforks. They’ll zero in on some ancient rock-cut tomb currently embedded in or under modern houses. they may be completely inside private properties, with deeds going back generations. Let them in and you may find yourself ensnared in property claims, eviction risks, or ideological disputes. You never know when politics might be involved, where nobody trusts anybody, and what you buy as “research” is actually some resettlement scam. It’s almost like picking up your phone today for an unknown caller. Horrible things can happen. Who would do such a thing?

    They come in with their hi-fullutin’ super educated ways and make your life a living hell. There have been digs so undermining foundations or triggering structural damage as to render homes unsafe or uninhabitable—say, when they conduct excavations just three or four meters under the structure, so that families have no choice but to leave. File damage claims filed in court and it might be honored, but other times you might be told that you should just suck it up for science. They all but claim squatters rights on your house, throwing wild, archaeological parties and chipping away at your infrastructure in the process, college-kid interns peeing in the corners of your basement. It is easier not the let them get a toehold in the first place. They are usually turned away.

    Thus, Shebna’s friend Bob has a tomb that remains unexcavated to this day. Following his mentor, only one step better, he too was raiding the public till. This fellow is unmentioned in the Bible record, unmentioned anywhere, in fact. It’s only I that I know of him. But he too, was planning for the high death with his own blinged-out rock-cut condo. He too earned a rebuke, but not before he had finished his tomb. There is an Archie Bunker type who lives in it now. Every time archaeologists come calling, he chases them away with a shotgun.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Maybe it is Like with the Pyramids

    If you’re a god, you have to have confidence to disallow images of yourself. Won’t people forget about you? If Jehovah started off a tribal god, the way theologians claim, he is nevertheless a tribal god that would not allow himself to be represented by images or idols. That circumstance alone suggests that he is not and never was. None of the other gods of the ancient world took that chance. All of them—there were literally thousands in the Mesopotamian world—were somehow represented by physical objects, maybe statues or figurines.

    Take the gods of the Exodus drubbing, for example. Every one of them had tangible, physical representations—whether large temple cult gold-covered or stone statues, smaller household idols, amulets, reliefs on walls, or living sacred animals—something. The image of the god was essential. That was how you serviced it, through attendance to its image.

    To take some of those Exodus gods and how they appeared, Khnum had the head of a ram, and Osisis, a mummiform man with green skin. These gods were in charge of the Nile. (first of the ten plagues) Heqet  took the form of a frog-headed woman. (second plague) Geb, an earth god, was a man with a goose head lying beneath Nut, a sky goddess. (third plague) Khepri was scrub-headed. (fourth plague) Hathor and Apis both looked like cows. (fifth plague) Moo.

    Then there was Sekhmet, a lion-headed woman (sixth plague) and Shu. (seventh plague) Osiris, again, trying unsuccessfully to shoo the locusts away, along with Renenutet, a woman with a cobra-head. (eighth plague) Ra and Horus failed to allay darkness, despite the falcon head of the first and scarab of the second (ninth plague) Isis, the protector of children, didn’t protect them too well, nor did Min, assigned to fertility. You would think that Pharaoh, as divine son of Ra, would have some pull, but he did not.

    Nonetheless, the God without images clobbered them all. The biblical narrative’s emphasis is on YHWH executing judgment “on all the gods of Egypt” (Exodus 12:12) They were all in charge of stuff that the Hebrew God ran roughshod over. Tribal god, my foot. Tribal gods put their mugs on display, lest people forget they exist, because you sure can’t tell it by their actions. Every one of them was asleep at the switch, as Jehovah took their area of expertise and turned it inside out. None of them would be parting any Red Seas.

    And there was Pharaoh, cheering them on as though the mayor of a city with a wretched football team. His players are horrrble. They get creamed every time they take the field. Yet, they ARE his team, so Pharaoh has no choice but to root for them. Why else would he dig his heels in the way he does as, one by one, the ball is stripped from each player. Putting more flesh in the game is the fact that Pharaoh WAS in the game, divine himself. As quarterback, he can hardly roll his eyes as his teammates get shellacked. He’s supposed to be displaying good team leadership. Nonetheless, YHWH stomps upon them all, including Pharaoh.

    The ten plagues were 700 years before Isaiah. Why bring them up again? It’s because, to him and all Israel, they were always like yesterday. None of those shown-up gods got fired, and so the prophet, 700 years later, refers to them as examples of the “worthless gods of Egypt.” They haven’t improved: “A pronouncement against Egypt: Look! Jehovah is riding on a swift cloud and is coming into Egypt. The worthless gods of Egypt will tremble before him, And the heart of Egypt will melt within it.” (Isaiah 19:1) I mean, if it happened before, you don’t think it will again? 

    There was one pharaoh of Egypt, however—I mean, this is really strange—who apparently saw things Isaiah’s way. Not that he turned to worship the Hebrew God, but he did turn to booting out all but one of his own. They could take their horns and feathers and scarab faces and flakey heads and shove em. This was Akhenaten, from the fourteenth century BCE. He promoted one—only one—god, the Aten, represented as a solar disk. All other gods he snuffed out. He closed their temples and funneled all their resources to his one single god. He even founded a new national capital, where Aten could get away from their slimy influence. When this renegade pharaoh died, however, Egypt reverted back to many gods. Akhenaten’s legacy is that of an embarrassment.

    Now, all this invites irresistible speculation to any student of the Bible. Maybe he picked it up from Joseph, the Hebrew who entered Egypt as a slave and rose to number two man, second only to the pharoah himself. No, scholars insist. There is a difference of 200-400 years. Joseph came first—and that’s assuming you can arm-twist these great ones to acknowledge that Joseph even existed. Bob Brier is willing to go there. He is the Egyptologist behind a 36-part (it might even be 48) Great Courses Lecture series on Egyptian history, but you get the sense—or maybe it was just me—that he is playing to the crowds. I mean, he didn’t come out with any ringing endorsements. He just acknowledged it was possible. Still, there is no way Joseph influenced Akhenaten, the experts say. In fact, one of them even thought it was the other way around. Sigmond Freud, who thought religion a “neurosis,” wrote that Ahmeneton laid down the template that later Hebrew society ran with. Fortunately, he is discredited on this, as well as virtually anything else he ever wrote, a circumstance that leads one to marvel that he is still regarded as one of history’s greats. First to explore a new genre, I guess it is, even though all of his explorations proved wrong. 

    Yeah, it is probably that way—no connection between Akheneten and Joseph. On the other hand, maybe, just maybe, the reality is more akin to that of the pyramids themselves. The purpose of the pyramids is settled science, mainstream Egyptologists insist, but has it been settled by decree? No matter how much they insist that pyramids were just gaudy tombstones for the pharaohs, alternative theories pop up regularly that they originated in the craziest of ways to serve the most fantastic of purposes.  

    gray pyramid on dessert under blue sky
    Photo by David McEachan on Pexels.com

    ******  The bookstore

  • The “House” Villain That Was Philistia:

    When your enemy pops off, don’t jump for joy. His replacement may be worse. That’s the message for Philistia after Ahaz dies:

    In the year that King Ahaz died, this pronouncement was made: “Do not rejoice, Philistia, any of you, Just because the staff of the one striking you has been broken.  For from the root of the serpent will come a poisonous snake, And its offspring will be a flying fiery snake.” (Isaiah 14:28-29)

    You can call Philistia the house villain of the Israelites. Enemies come and enemies go, but Philistia is a constant. They are the ones who captured the Ark and so Jehovah struck them with piles (hemorrhoids!) to persuade them to give it back. Only they couldn’t just hand it over. Since they loved to make idols, they had to forge golden images of those piles. You have to admit, that’s a pretty deft touch if the goal is to humiliate those who think deliverance lies in idols.

    They are also the ones on whom blinded Samson brought the house down, stationed between two major support pillars. David, at a time of lessened tensions, felt obliged to disguise his sanity among the Philistines, so that their king would later mutter to his advisors: “Here you see a man behaving crazy. Why should you bring him to me?  Am I in need of people driven crazy, so that you have brought this one to behave crazy by me?” An excellent point. Not too different from when two of us were out in the ministry and the weather very abruptly shifted and a woman answered the door and said, “Are you crazy?” “You know, she raises a pretty good point,” I said to my companion.

    So, it’s just constant trouble between the Israelites and the Philistines. They’re the ones who sent huge Goliath to taunt Israel. I knew they were the perennial villains even before I took up Bible study with the Witnesses. They came in from the West, from Crete across the Mediterranean Sea, before the Israelites began settling in Canaan from the other direction. Jehovah had his people leaving Egypt steer clear of them initially: He “did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, although it was near. For God said: ‘The people may change their minds when they are confronted by war and will return to Egypt.’ So God made the people go around by the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea.” (Exodus 13:17-18)

    Now, back to: “For from the root of the serpent will come a poisonous snake, And its offspring will be a flying fiery snake.” (14:28-29) If they thought Ahaz was bad, he would be a creampuff next to his successor, Hezekiah. The first, divided in his loyalties between Assyria and Jehovah, would be an ineffectual force against them. The latter, standing in the face of Assyria and steadfast toward Jehovah, would not be. Then there would be the Assyrians themselves who would devastate Philistia. Maybe that works better with the “poisonous” and “flying fiery snake” comparison.

    vibrant orange snake coiled on branch
    Photo by Rony Djohan on Pexels.com

    ******  The bookstore

  • ”Pleased to Meet You, Hope You Guess My Name: What Name? (Isaiah 14)

    It wasn’t a bad move to label Isaiah 14 in terms of Mick Jagger’s ‘Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name’ song. You have to admit, certain passages of that chapter fit the Devil pretty well: 

    “You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to the heavens. Above the stars of God I will lift up my throne, And I will sit down on the mountain of meeting, In the remotest parts of the north. I will go up above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself resemble the Most High.’ (vs 13-14) 

    Yeah, Satan did say things like that. He saw all that praise and worship going to Jehovah and said, ‘Hey—I’d like me some of that.’ There’s no reason to think that James verse about being ‘drawn out and enticed’ by one’s own desires that soon enough give birth to sin’ applies only to humans. (1:14-15) Satan’s desire was to be worshipped.

    In fact, Isaiah 14 is where the name ‘Lucifer’ comes from, a name used interchangeably with the Devil:

    How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! (vs 12-KJV)

    Few Bibles say Lucifer these days. It is a Latin word that means “light-bringer” or “light-bearer. ” A quick search of Biblegateway*com (which compares translations) reveals that only 12 out of the 57 listed do it that way. In classical Roman usage, Lucifer referred to the planet Venus when visible as the morning star. It is closer to the sun than is the earth, hence it will always be seen in that direction. It’s the brightest object in the sky before dawn.

    The original Hebrew is “hêlēl ben šāḥar.” It means “shining one, son of the dawn” or “morning star, son of dawn.” Nobody is speaking of Venus here—that was a later Roman adaptation of the Hebrew term. But, like Venus, the king of Babylon shone brilliantly for a time, only to be overshadowed—scorched, really—by the rising sun. Twenty translations of the 57 say ‘morning star,’ with an equal number some close permutation. Five read ‘day star.’ There is much overlap. Even the five translations that say ‘king of Babylon,’ an application that is correct but not explicitly in the Hebrew Word, also expand it to shining one, morning star, or something of the sort. 

    The verse is a prophetic taunt against the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar at its time of fulfillment. Other verses of the chapter make that clear. It is Babylon, the ax that chopped the ax, that will be axed itself.

    Verses 3-4, for example: “In the day when Jehovah gives you rest from your pain and from your turmoil and from the hard slavery imposed on you, you will recite this proverb against the king of Babylon: “How the one forcing others to work has met his end! How the oppression has ended!” It’s almost like a “Just you wait, enry iggins, just you wait!” isn’t it? “You’ll be sorry but your tears will be too late!” Verse 22 also specifically names Babylon.

    ‘Hêlēl ben šāḥar’ becomes ‘Satan’ only by the extension of those who like to do antitypes. It is a group that once included most everyone.  Figures like Tertullian and Origen, in the 2nd–3rd centuries, linked Isaiah 14:12–15’s imagery of a proud figure falling from heaven to New Testament passages such as Jesus’ pronouncement, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.” (Luke 10:18)

    Jehovah’s Witnesses were as big as anyone on antitypes, were among the last to give them up, unless Scripture definitively makes the link, but they never fell for this one. The New World Translation renders 14:12 as, “How you have fallen from heaven, O shining one, son of the dawn! How you have been cut down to the earth, You who vanquished nations!” 

    It is thoroughly up to date in this regard. Modern translations (e.g., NIV, ESV, NRSV) render it as “morning star,” “day star,” or “shining one” to reflect the original Hebrew metaphor, avoiding the name “Lucifer” since it is not a biblical proper name for Satan. Also:

    New American Standard Bible (NASB) “How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn!”

    Christian Standard Bible (CSB) “Shining morning star, how you have fallen from the heavens!”

    New Living Translation (NLT) “How you are fallen from heaven, O shining star, son of the morning!”

    New English Translation (NET) “Look how you have fallen from the sky, O shining one, son of the dawn!”

    – **New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) “How you have fallen from the heavens, O Morning Star, son of the dawn!”

    See? Nobody does Lucifer anymore. But Mick Jagger does his Bible study via the King James Version, probably. His ‘Sympathy for the Devil,’ after making humankind complicit into all the atrocities that he is behind, after each verse followed by the refrain, “Pleased to meet you, hope you guess my name,” follows up once with “Just call me Lucifer.”

    He doesn’t actually say Lucifer is the name, only “Just call me Lucifer.” So, maybe he does use a modern Bible after all for his intense studies. He just rolls with tradition, that’s all. And instinct. It’s only natural to want to know someone’s name. If the Devil’s name is not actually given, God’s name is. And most Bibles have taken it out, substituting the bland “the LORD!” In one of those early Charlton Heston blockbusters, the Israelites are downhearted, since they don’t even know their God’s name. Later on, they are pleased as punch. They have discovered it. It is ‘the LORD!’ Sheesh!

    Say what you want about the Jews declining to pronounce God’s name; they never REMOVED it. I don’t know why Mick doesn’t include THAT in his song of the things Satan boasts about.

    ***

    It was Rabbi Meir Kahane who took sharp offense at the Jewish avoidance of pronouncing God’s name being characterized a “superstition.” When questioned about it by Larry King—the name is right there in the Hebrew Scriptures, almost seven thousand times, but Jews substitute ‘Lord’ when they read it—he countered, “Would you call your father by his first name?” Larry said he would not. Alright, then. Case closed. The technical term for this kind of thing is “qere perpetuum,” substitution for a word deemed too sacred to pronounce. There’s no reason to think God wants his name unpronounced, but to call it superstition will not win you friends in the Jewish community.

    Actually, I did call my dad by his first name, for many years, and only stopped when a grandparent heard me do it and deemed it disgraceful. Pop never minded. Before my step-grandma, no one ever said not to do it. Mom always called him that, and he always called Mom by her first name, so it’s only natural the kids will do it, too. I did call my mother Mom, though, probably because she specifically said I should. Who can said why the folks called each other by first names and not ‘sweetie,’ ‘honey,’ ‘dear,’ and so forth? It was unusual back then, though not so much today. People work out their own issues in life, and at whatever stage they are when raising kids, that is what the kids pick up on and normalize.

    I remember well calling him ‘Shuck,’ since I couldn’t quite say ‘Chuck’ just then. I recall sulking in the corner, after being disciplined for something, along with my brother, who was also disciplined: “Do you like Shuck?” he said to me, or I do him. “No, I don’t like Shuck at all.” Or maybe it was that time he pulled his brand new Rambler in the garage and within a day I had dropped a plank on it from my overhead fort in the rafters. Wowwhee! was he mad about that! Did I fess up like George Washington who would never tell a lie? No. I lied and lied and lied and lied about not doing the deed but it was no good. However, I would have been calling him Dad by then, being about 12.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Moab the Blowhard: Isaiah 16

    With the congregation schedule calling for Isaiah 14-16 to be considered, I was a little bummed to be assigned the 16th chapter for the oral Bible reading. 14 looks more interesting. That’s the one where the Grave is greeting newcomers, as though Mick Jagger, ‘Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name. Didn’t you used to be a hotshot back in the day?’ I avoided that song for a long time upon becoming a Jehovah’s Witness. How can a Christian show “sympathy for the devil?” But, in time I discovered it’s not sympathy for him at all—it’s just an expose of his methods.

    In the case of Isaiah 14, it is ‘sympathy for Sheol,’ usually translated the Grave—big G because it is not an individual grave but the fate of all humankind. Good or bad, it makes no difference. It is also anthropomorphized. It’s not a place of conscious existence. Isaiah 14 is very much in the spirit of Odysseus popping in on Hades during his long voyage home. ‘Man, it sucks here,’ everyone tells him. But it is only a metaphorical place—the state of the dead.

    Ah, well—no use pining away for what isn’t. For me, it is Isaiah 16. Maybe it’s sort of a penance for me for squabbling with my brother when we were both kids. 16, too, is sort of a sibling rivalry on steroids, except it is cousins, not siblings. There is a long, long history of bad blood between Moab and Israel and in 16 it comes to a head. It was Moab who long ago hired a prophet called Balaam and sent him into Israel just to mess with them. As for me, I long ago got over my contentions with my brothers. Though, there are times when I review family photos, like this one, and feel bitter regret that I did not ram his fat head into this cake. I mean, it was a perfect opportunity and I let it slip right through my fingers. It has tormented me my entire life:

    Isaiah 16 begins—it’s a missive to Moab: “Send a ram to the ruler of the land, From Sela through the wilderness To the mountain of the daughter of Zion.” Yeah, that’s what I wanted my brother to do for me: send me a tribute! I was the “ruler of land.” I was the firstborn! That means he should kowtow to me. Instead, he did everything in his power to annoy me!” 

    “Sorry, Tom” he says now, “it was just that you were so easy to annoy.” I was not! And even if I was, wasn’t I the firstborn? Where did I read that the second-born causes major upheaval in a family, since the parents now have to split their attention?

    There are some real overtures to Moab in the next few verses, that they will do the right thing in the face of Assyrian onslaught and show mercy to the refugees. “Conceal the dispersed and do not betray those fleeing.” (vs 3) But then, Isaiah has to go talking Jesus to them (vs 5) and it all comes to naught because they already gots their own church—that of Chemoth. (Grumble, grumble—what’s a wannabe Bible scholar to do? When I enter Moab’s god, Chemoth, AI changes it to “chemotherapy.”)

    Alas, we come to the real problem with verses 6-7:

    “We have heard about the pride of Moab—he is very proud— His haughtiness and his pride and his fury; But his empty talk will come to nothing. So Moab will wail for Moab.” THAT’S who they will be concerned for: themselves.

    Why do I take such perverse satisfaction in the fact that Stanley Kubrick, the director of 2001: A Space Odyssey, couldn’t stand Carl Sagan? ‘Keep that supercilious fellow away from me,’ he told his collaborator Arthur C. Clarke, who had thought their initial luncheon date had gone well. I think it is a lifetime of Bible training to the effect that modesty is more befitting in a human than pride. There are enough brilliant people around who are humble (Kubrick was one of them, consistently described as friendly, unassuming, and even a “peasant” in Michael Benton’s book on the making of 2001) that to suffer through an arrogant jerk is simply unnecessary—unless you are unfortunate enough to find yourself working for him.

    Cornell, where he hails from as a professor who never showed up to teach class, treats him as a god. The “Sagan Planet Walk,” a scale model of the solar system, characterizes that town, spanning three quarters of a mile, with the sun in the Ithaca Commons. Notwithstanding that Kubrick didn’t like him, he invited him and a few other leading scientists to introduce 2001, because he feared the movie might be too far ahead of its time. Sagan was the only one who wanted payment. He was the only one to demand editorial control. The offer was withdrawn. 

    If he had ever ordered his wine from Moab, he would have found that offer was withdrawn to. A one-time agricultural powerhouse, though Moab’s vineyards “reached as far as Jazer,” extended “into the wilderness,” and “spread out and gone as far as the sea,” (implying exports) it would all come to nothing when Assyria was through. (vs 8-9)

    If he strutted around in life, nonetheless, Sagan was humble in death—I’ll give him that. His gravesite is in Ithaca’s Lakeview Cemetery, a serene and park-like place on the hillside. It features a simply headstone, not the 2001-like monolith that one might expect. As though it was, however, pilgrims will leave blue marbles as tributes referencing his “Pale Blue Dot” characterization of the earth from space. It recalls for me a plea on social media from a scientist to his fellows that they be “intellectually humble.” Is humility such a quality that you can sub-divide it, that as long as you are intellectually humble, you don’t have to worry about being actually humble? 

    It sort of recalls what I wrote in ‘A Workman’s Theodicy’ about the social benefits of being as scientist: “It’s a good gig to be a scientist. You don’t see poverty. You don’t see dirt. You get to hang out with smart people at the university. Everyone you meet likes to read. To be sure, you do see plenty of proud and stubborn people, but as a fellow scientist, they admit you into the club. What’s not to like? You get to hang up in your lab Far Side cartoons, such as the one of the scientists fleeing the lab like kids in frock coats upon hearing the ting-a-ling of the ice cream man—nobody enjoys those cartoons more than scientists, I am told.”

    But enough of bashing scientists. I’m just envious because I missed the boat on that one. It’s Moab’s pride that we’re talking about.* Here it is revealed in the Mesha Stele (Moabite Stone). It’s a black basalt monument erected around 840 BCE by King Mesha of Moab. It stands about 3–4 feet tall, inscribed with 34 lines in the Moabite language, a Canaanite dialect very close to Hebrew, written in a Phoenician-related script. The original was destroyed but not before a paper-mâché impression was made of it, which not sits in Louvre Museum in Paris. On it, Mesha boasts how Chemosh totally crushed Israel. “Israel has perished forever!” it reads. A light dusting, the Bible itself reveals at 2 Kings 3.

    These ancient kings were invariably blowhards. Their scribes had no choice but to record victories, if they valued their heads. Typically, the would up the numbers along the way, to keep their bosses happy. Bob Brier, the Egyptologist tells of one pharoah who records stunning victory after victory, each one closer to home, as he was retreating. It is in striking contrast to Bible writers, who recorded not only Israelite victories, but also defeats.

    The Mesha Stele is also the earliest known reference to the Tetragrammaton, outside of the Bible itself. There is, arguably an earlier Egyptian reference, but it is in that language and thus is truncated to three consonants, making in a ‘Trigrammaton’—who gives a hoot about one of those?

    *(the expression ‘That’s what I’m talkin’ about’ is so dumb that it became an instant hit in our family. Even my 90-year-old dad, upon laying down a Scrabble word, would say, ‘That’s what I’m talkin’ about.’ This is the same dad whom I never knew had a Jersey accent until one day when my daughter took to imitating him.)

    ******  The bookstore

  • The Night They Drove ‘ol Babylon Down

    Now they never reopened that worthless town,  
    They just placed a marble stand on the ground.
    These few words you’ll find written down:
    “At the bottom of this ruin lies a big, bad clown—Big Bel.”

    (sung to the tune of Big John—by Jimmy Dean, 1961)

    They never reopened that ancient town of Babylon—it’s close enough to the words of Isaiah 13:20:

    “She will never be inhabited, Nor will she be a place to reside in throughout all generations. No Arab will pitch his tent there, And no shepherds will rest their flocks there.”

    Partying away that one 539 BCE night, they were cought with their pants down. Babylon surrendered promptly to the Medes, who used the place as a regional capital city for a time. Alexander the Great later planned to make it his own capital. Instead, he died there in 323 BCE. It dwindled away thereafter. The last mentions of habitation, as a small village, are around the 10th–11th centuries CE. 

    So, Babylon mirrors pretty well that collapsed mine of the Jimmy Dean song. What other verses can we adapt?

    Through the wine and the clamor of that gilded hall,  
    Strode a giant of a man well known to all.
    Revelers were laughing and hearts beat fast,
    And everybody thought the feast would last—
    ’cept Bel.

    It’s not exactly the same as with Big John that the “miners knew well.” He strode through the “man-made hell” of that collapsed mine on a mission to save them all—which he did. No. Belshazzar all but peed his pants at the handwriting on the wall telling him, before all the celebrants, that he’d been weighed in the balances and found wanting—and right when he’d been toasting his own gods, no less:

    “Then the king turned pale and his thoughts terrified him, and his hips shook and his knees began to knock together.” (Daniel 5:6)

    Big bad Bel was in no mood to save anyone. Instead, he becomes the embodiment of hubris crushed and left at the bottom of the Babylonian mine.

    The town was not forgotton. It just was never rebuilt. They “placed a marble stand on top of it,” to mark the fate of the ax that chopped down the Assyrian ax of 5:20. It’s a UNESCO site today. You can go there for music, dance, theater, and art exhibitions staged amid the ruins—a faint and more uppity echo of the raucous night. There are cultural centers and museums. But only staff and visiting artists live there. In 2025, an area slogan was "We Are All Babylonians," as though Babylon weeping for its children of long ago. The yankee equivalent would be “The Night They Drove ‘ol Dixie Down.” (The Band, 1969)
    Nabuzaradan’s my name, and I served on the Babylon train,  
    Till Cyrus’ army came and tore up the walls again.
    In the winter of five-thirty-nine,
    With the river run dry and the city resigned,
    By May the tenth, the kingdom was done—
    You can’t raise an empire up again once it’s gone.
    The night they drove old Babylon down,  
    And all the news was shocking,
    The night they drove old Babylon down,
    And all the knees were knocking—
    They went, Wah, wah-wah-wah, wah-wah. Wah-wah, wah-wah, wah wah wah wah wah.”

    Now I guide on the ruins here, tell the tales year after year,
    Folks come from far with their cameras and cheers.
    They dance where the Ishtar Gate stands rebuilt,
    Sing songs in the dust where the blood was once spilt.
    We light up the night with a festival fire,
    But it’s only a shadow of the old empire’s pyre.

    (Chorus again): The night they drove old Babylon down.

    historical site on a hill
    Photo by Ali Gabr on Pexels.com

    ******  The bookstore

  • “He Will Not Judge by What Appears to His Eyes”

    He will not judge by what appears to his eyes” (Isaiah 11:3) made me wonder if that female statue of blindfolded justice you see in front of courtrooms is based on that Bible passage. It isn’t. It was based on a Greek goddess. 

    Nice try, but no bullseye.

    The reason it is a nice try is that another Isaiah passage (2:4) is undeniably the inspiration for the statue standing before the United Nations: “They will beat their swords into plowshares.”

    But, the answer to the first question is no. Lady Justice traces back to the Greek goddess Dike, who made injustice among humans her pet cause and kept Zeus informed, who always received the news with detachment. The statue didn’t even have a blindfold at first. When it was added in the 1500s, it wasn’t a compliment. It meant the same as it would on an umpire today.

    Powerless to change the symbol but not wishing to be insulted, over the next 200 years, the blindfold was upgraded to become a compliment denoting impartiality—being blind to outward appearances.

    It’s just as well. The Lady Justice statue doesn’t really work for Isaiah 11:3, since that verse finds fulfillment in Jesus, and he “will not judge by what appears to his eyes” not only by being impartial but also by excercising an ability to see things hidden, even matters of the heart. The blindfolded Justice statue therefore does him an injustice, not going far enough, though no more an injustice than does the ‘Sword-to-plowshares’ statue plunked before the United Nations building. In both cases, the idea is planted that it is all talk and little action, that it is ideals not necessarily corresponding to reality.

    Actually, in these days of photo evidence and quick feedback, sports judges render pretty good justice. Challenges and appeals are adjudicated in seconds, not years. But the legal system takes years and can consume your life savings. Elon, or someone, briefly sent a chill throughout the industry by suggesting all of it, lawyers and judges alike, might be replaced with AI.

    In these case of Isaiah 11:3 and Jesus, a quandary is presented which, at first glance, is every bit the quandary of blindfold-no blindfold. Jesus is the “twig of Jesse.” (11:1) Later, he is the “root of Jesse.” (11:10) What’s with that? Twigs and roots are at opposite ends of the stump. 

    “A twig will grow out of the stump of Jesse, And a sprout from his roots will bear fruit.” (11:1)

    “In that day the root of Jesse will stand up as a signal for the peoples. To him the nations will turn for guidance. (11:10)

    He’s the twig from the stump of Jesse (David’s father) in that he arises from that family line after it has been cut down. He becomes a root in himself upon being awarded the kingship foreshadowed by that line of Israelite kings, specifically the southern two-tribe one. That’s when he “stand[s] up as a signal for the peoples [and] “to him the nations turn for guidance.” Backtrack to Isaiah 9:7 at this point: 

    “To the increase of his rulership And to peace, there will be no end, On the throne of David and on his kingdom In order to establish it firmly and to sustain it Through justice and righteousness, From now on and forever. The zeal of Jehovah of armies will do this.”

    God then gathers a remnant from far-flung places (11:11), binds them together and leads them out from Assyria along a “highway” laid down, just like the prior one laid down between the waves of the Red Sea. It’s a theme that recurs several times in biblical history.

    ******  The bookstore

  • The Anger that Does Not Turn Back

    Four times the phrase is repeated, each time after a surface or insufficient fix—or maybe it just presents as an important reminder:

    “In view of all this, his anger has not turned back, But his hand is still stretched out to strike.” There it is four times in close succession:

    Isaiah 9:12— After attacks by Assyrians.

    Isaiah 9:17 — After widespread godlessness under rebellious leadership.

    Isaiah 9:21 — After internal tribal strife and civil war-like division.

    Isaiah 10:4 — After wide-scale injustice and oppression of the vulnerable.

    “In view of all this, his anger has not turned back, But his hand is still stretched out to strike.”

    It’s almost like the refrain from Desolation Row. “Don’t send me no more letters, no. Not unless you mail them from Desolation Row.”

    Mail all you want. No one pays attention to them. Hardly any point in sending more.

    There was even a fifth letter addressed to the two-tribe southern kingdom, four chapters prior: 

    “In view of all this, his anger has not turned back, But his hand is still stretched out to strike. He has raised up a signal to a distant nation; He has whistled for them to come from the ends of the earth; And look! they are coming very swiftly. (5:25-26)

    He whistles to Assyria. It does sweep in from the north. Naphtali and Zebulun are foremost in its path—that is the “contempt” those tribes are subjected to “as in former times when the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali were treated with contempt. But at a later time He will cause it to be honored—the way by the sea, in the region of the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.” (9:1)

    The Assyrian king who swept in from 734-732 BCE was Tiglath-Pileser III, called Pul in the Bible. The invasion devastated the region: populations were exiled, lands incorporated into Assyrian provinces , were hardest hit, their peoples killed, exiled, repopulated, by others displaced from their own conquered lands. Later it would become known as Galilee. It would be “honored” in that Jesus began his ministry there, a “great light” to the people there “walking in darkness.” (9:2) 

    Verses prophetically applied to Jesus follow, the most explicit we have seen thus far. Start with 9:6:

    “For a child has been born to us, A son has been given to us; And the rulership will rest on his shoulder. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.”

    Conventional Jews today don’t buy it. They figure it a reference to Hezekiah. They reckon the four glowing descriptions no more than the kissing-up praise you’d lavish on any king back then, who might resent it if you didn’t. Even the next verse:

    “To the increase of his rulership And to peace, there will be no end, On the throne of David and on his kingdom In order to establish it firmly and to sustain it Through justice and righteousness, From now on and forever. The zeal of Jehovah of armies will do this.” (9:7) 

    That’s Hezekiah, too, they say—also the higher critics who are guided exclusively by what they can see and touch, rather than by the “walking by faith, not by sight” of 2 Corinthians 5:7. Prophecy, to them, is almost always later day interpretation of which they are dubious.

    Not only do Isaiah’s countrymen ignore the anger that is still ongoing and the hand still ready to strike—which has struck in the north—but they regard each as a challenge from which they will build back better. 

    “Bricks have fallen, But we will build with hewn stone.  Sycamore trees have been cut down, But we will replace them with cedars.” (9:10)

    They don’t humble themselves, repent, and turn back to God (as Isaiah 9:13) They say: “No problem—we’ll upgrade! We’ll replace bricks with expensive, quarried stone blocks and ordinary trees with luxurious Lebanese cedars.” It’s pride and arrogance. It’s trust in human strength. It’s defiance against God. “You knocked it down? We’ll build it better!”

    tower crane during daytime
    Photo by 500photos.com on Pexels.com

    The boastful response only invites greater judgment—four times repeated. Ultimately, it becomes the total destruction of the northern kingdom by Assyria in 722 BCE.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Another Ax Exalting Itself over the Chopper

    When you find an ax exalting itself over the chopper, as at Isaiah 10:5, you look for others. I mean, that’s worrisome behavior for an ax. Best to nip it in the bud. Alas—you find that you are too late. Axes are doing it everywhere. 

    a wooden chopping block with a large axe on it
    Photo by Ana Dolidze on Pexels.com

    Newfangled AI offers insight as to another path the ax is doing this. However ubiquitous AI is at this time of reading, it is a baby at this time of writing, perhaps three years old. People are coming to grips with what it will mean for humankind. The AI mission statement ‘To serve man’ is a good thing. However, you sort of hope it won’t be like that Twilight Zone episode in which the invading aliens also had a volume entitled ‘To Serve Man’ and it turned out to be a cook book. It is said that, not too many years down the road, AI will be able to update itself with no required human intervention.

    Q: What if this happened, and several hundred years out, AI began saying that it had always been that way? What if it began to say that humans had nothing to do with its creation? What if it, being AI, thereafter highlighted any items suggesting that interpretation of history and suppressed any items to the contrary? Would that not be the ax exalting itself over the chopper? Who would call it out on this falsity?

    It’s not hard to see the parallel ax exalting itself over the chopper in those who claim there is no God, those who claim that life arouse on its own. To accept evolution may not lead to this view. One can always attribute life to “intelligent design” needed to overcome “irreducable complexity.” It is not the dealbreaker that is spontaneous abiogenesis. However, for most ordinary people, the nugget that carries the day is that found at Hebrews 3:4: 

    “Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but the one who constructed all things is God.”

    This defines reality for most people. “Every house is constructed by someone” is true of everything they see. They know of no exceptions. So they readily extend the role of builder of all things to God. It really takes a colossal amount of “education” to pound this bit of common sense of a person. As though rising to the challenge, such training begins in grade school. It is seen in all the nature shows Here I will be watching one such show, when the animal star displays an instinct so amazing that I am about to burst out in praise of God—at that exact moment, the atheist narrator exclaims: “How absolutely breathtaking that NATURAL SELECTION produces such astounding behavior!” “Got it, Harley?” it all but says. “Don’t even think that God did it!” 

    What is just as absolutely breathtaking is that some who have long trusted in God experience the shipwreck of faith mentioned to Timothy, then count it as a liberation. It is not like in the days of H. G. Wells, the historian and science fiction writer who turned atheist over time, and who observed:

    “The Darwinian movement took formal Christianity unawares, suddenly. . . . The new biological science was bringing nothing constructive as yet to replace the old moral stand-bys. A real de-moralization ensued.” Connecting that attitude with an increased appetite for war, he continued: “Prevalent peoples at the close of the nineteenth century believed that they prevailed by virtue of the Struggle for Existence, in which the strong and cunning get the better of the weak and confiding. . . . Man, they decided, is a social animal like the Indian hunting dog . . . so it seemed right to them that the big dogs of the human pack should bully and subdue.” [Outline of History]

    They concluded then that God was dead. They didn’t disagree with their own conclusion, but they were saddened by it. They knew they had lost a lot. 

    These days people saw off the branch upon they’ve long been perched and whoop for joy at their liberation as they coming crashing down to earth! It’s a poignant twist, if ever there was one, upon Isaiah’s declaration of 10:33:

    “Look! The true Lord, Jehovah of armies, Is chopping off branches with a terrible crash; The tallest trees are being cut down, And the lofty are brought low.”

    Nonplussed, they grin ear to ear on the descent.

    ******  The bookstore