Author: mgteal

Our discussion about Revelation was one of my favorite lectures this semester. Reading it is extremely confusing, but hinges mostly on one’s knowledge of horses and the number 7. For some reason, I never knew that the number 666 originated in the Bible, I just knew it as a demonic symbol. In my personal experience, my mother and pastors believe in the prophetic aspect of this book. It’s terrifying. Blood, anguish, and monsters dominating the earth pales in comparison to the pandemic and climate change we’re going through now. Whether you read it as a literal prediction of events or an epic metaphor for the end of times (whether a certain time period or the end of the earth in general), it’s still a lot to process especially in comparison to the stories of hope preceding it. The New Testament often talks about the hope of Jesus and the early church, so this is a stark contrast through the images of pain and judgment.

Before class today, I wasn’t really aware that there was a dichotomy among Christians about James, Paul, and Jesus’ siblings. Of course, I knew that there was somewhat of a rift involving whether good deeds are of saving quality or if they just come with the Christian faith. I was taught the latter in my church, and it makes sense that it mostly focused on Paul’s teachings as well. I can understand where both are coming from, since you can’t have a change of heart without acting upon it, because to me that doesn’t really signal a change. Falling out of old habits is hard, but necessary and that goes along with growing as a Christian, in my experience of the spiritual side of Christianity. Growing up I was also taught that Jesus was not an only child (obviously he was in the sense of being God’s son of by the Holy Spirit) and had siblings through his earthly parents. However, James was really the only one we talked about. I suppose that’s what the Bible focuses on and perhaps that explains it. I’m glad this class has given me an opportunity to learn about different belief systems and denominations so that I can more respectfully converse with those outside of my own tradition.

Looking at Paul’s letters from a new perspective is a bit strange. Paul didn’t intend for these letters to be published in a book of scriptures, he just meant to provide some guidance to churches that were struggling nearby. His words weren’t meant to be a universal fix for all Christians like they’re used today, especially not when they’re studied out of context (which is also common). Finding out that some of the canonized letters of Paul may not even be Paul’s writing further complicates this study! Since I researched Paul and his words about women in the church, then realizing they may not actually be his words, I’m understanding now more than ever how Biblical research has been operating for so long. I thought this was all cut and dry, studied and found to be legit, and canonized afterwards. Who knew there were still so many pieces of the puzzle being put together? I have decided I can no longer rely on devotional study of the Bible and I really need to have a historical account to supplement this as well. It amazes me how my church did so little contextualization of passages like this and now curiosity is getting the best of me!

As a woman growing up in the church, I have always wondered what my specific role is. The Old Testament surely sets up women with a confusing life, with fully subservient and abused wives in the early patriarchy, then praise in Psalms and Proverbs. The New Testament isn’t much clearer, with women being featured, but with little information on them and a lot of information about their husbands. In writing my controversial topics essay, I learned a lot about the Scriptures that are commonly used to promote quiet women in the church, but these aren’t universally accepted as genuine letters of Paul. Usually, Paul praised women for what they did to help the church, through volunteering and funding.  I like to think that the early church shunned the gender expectations of the time, because I believe that the death of Christ makes us all forgiven and all equal. Everyone has their own way of interpreting the Bible, and I’m glad many people make efforts to understand the women that were underrepresented in the early forms of the Bible. Furthering the lack of inclusion for anyone is far from what the church is about, and using that information to supplement the Bible’s information is very helpful to all kinds of readers.

Growing up in church, the dichotomy between the “Gospels” and the “Synoptic Gospels” was never emphasized. I had no idea who wrote what beyond the names on the front of the book. My church just said they were divinely inspired and they were all eyewitnesses and called it a day. You can imagine how surprised I was when I found out there’s a whole diagram for the sources of Gospel writings. The JEDP sources were mind-blowing to me, and the Q source was the icing on the cake. The idea that the authors may not entirely be just Mark or just Matthew is still pretty novel to me (who knows why I thought it was just a bunch of modern Bibles copied from a piece of scroll that Mark wrote and hid away, ask my church). This makes me wonder why churches don’t do more contextualization in terms of culture or history of how we got the books in our hands. Who translated, copied, and edited the sources is becoming much more important to how I understand the Bible, which was never ever mentioned in my church services. The divide between academic study and everyday Bible study is very steep (in my own experience) and becoming increasingly evident as well.

As with many subjects in this course, the Gospels have much more to them than what churches tend to emphasize. I never knew that “gospel” means “good news,” and that fact adds much more meaning to the stories within them. Every Christian knows the story of Christmas and how Jesus’ family had to flee–but not the fine details. One interesting thought I also learned from class was who figured out what the “good news” was going to be. Kings and royalty from Jesus’ area had access to scriptures and books and census information, but it was the “lowly” shepherds who witnessed this momentous occasion. Even from a secular, academic approach, this is an important theme in the stories of the Bible.

Even though different translations tell unique stories, the Gospels give readers another chance to interpret what they want from the text. Certain aspects of the retellings (Joseph’s visions, Mary’s Song, etc) are slightly different or nonexistent across the other books. One of the defining features of the Bible is its translations, and everyone finds meaning in the passages that speak to them.

An important conversation that arose within class was the Bible and its relationship to “covers” of songs in pop culture. I never realized how important the role of ancient language was in the interpretation of Psalms. Originally, these were written to rhyme in ancient language, which explains how the meaning has evolved over time. Many different translations try to match the rhyming quality of the original author, skewing the definition of the word slightly. This is a lot like covers of songs in modern society, as different techniques and genres of the remakes can completely change the experience for the listener. I never thought of this analogy before, and also often forget that there is music in the Bible at all. Hearing the same passages in Christian pop rock in the same few songs on the radio, it’s hard to remember that these Psalms are part of a larger work, with much more context.

One of the most striking parts about our discussion in class today was the universality of proverbs. Since my English teachers always taught me to avoid cliches and overused language (since that’s what they can easily become), I haven’t really thought about them much. Proverbs are meant to be universal, and that thought had never crossed my mind before. So many cultures have variations of other short sayings, and I vaguely remember that from Spanish class also. It makes sense that proverbs would be shared between different cultures around Israel. It’s amazing how distinct cultures can have shared values that can be communicated through similar epithets. 

I also thought a lot about how wisdom writings often contain at least part of stories like Job’s. In order to have wisdom to pass on, authors need the experience to make it more than just knowledge. This has a poetic meaning to me, and lots of people find encouragement from Job’s story and the tales of hardship and advice in Proverbs. 

Once again, my mind was blown in class discussion. I always thought of Christianity (and in my limited knowledge, Judaism) as monotheistic. What I was missing was the wording of “thou shalt have no other god before me.” Moses, by the inspiration of God, is telling the Israelites to forsake the worship of other gods. By doing this, he leaves open the possibility of other gods. 

In my personal opinion, this is a lesson on tolerance for believers of the Bible. This passage could mean that there are more gods, and that followers of the Bible should simply place God before them–not hate, not go to war, not start an argument in the comment section. His commandment is simply to place their own God first, and that’s all that’s necessary. This allows for tolerance of other religions by acknowledging their existence and simply saying to follow the one that you feel is almighty. 

There is also the possibility of interpreting this as forsaking other idols that humans commonly place before God (money, cars, other relationships, work, etc). This still fits the same meaning, in my interpretation, because the Commandments are effectively telling people to fix their eyes on what’s important and mind their business.

Revisiting the role of archaeology in the Bible reminds me of how much information about the Bible was lost, and how important it is to make sense of what is left. For example, the site of Jericho being near fault lines that would have commonly caused seismic activity makes a lot of sense with the biblical story told about it. This, to me, doesn’t discredit any of the biblical meaning of the story, it just adds another layer to it. From a believer’s perspective, this shows the dependency of the natural world on God and his plan. In a literary sense, having this information alongside the story is a little ironic. This case is also thought-provoking, considering the amount of information gleaned from both modern archaeological sites and ancient writings handed down from the time period of their origin. So many buildings, artworks, and writings have been lost over time and we don’t even know it! There could be hundreds of stories or even pieces of pottery that alter entire religions, and there just hasn’t been a shard to wash up or a slip of paper to slide out from behind something. It’s amazing to think about how much hard work has gone into the Bible that we know today.