friday five: favorite verses

At RevGals Songbird writes: Twenty years ago, I was on a Pastoral Search Committee, and one of the questions we asked the ten candidates we interviewed in the first round was to tell us their three favorite passages of scripture. I loved hearing the variety of verses quoted and even learned some that I didn't know...

For today's Friday Five, list your five favorite passages/verses from the Bible and tell us something about why you love them.

Except for the first verse below, I really had to stop and think about these! Once I did I had a hard time narrowing down my selections. There are so many riches in scripture that offer inspiration, comfort, hope, challenge and peace.

1) He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8) 

This has been a long-time favorite of mine. For me it summarizes who we are to be as people of God. I especially like that two of  the "requirements" touch on how we are to act on behalf of and toward others, and just one touches on ourselves. I also love the emphasis on justice.

2) Be still and know that I am God. (Psalm 46:10)

I don't usually have trouble settling into stillness, but I do err on the side of forgetting to turn to God in all things. This verse serves as my plumb line when life gets chaotic.

3) Now the word of the LORD came to me, saying,  "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,and before you were born I consecrated you... (Jeremiah 1:4-5a)

On the days that I despair that I am in the wrong place, missing God's message or misunderstanding his voice, this passage brings me peace.

4) Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. (Philippians 4:8)

I don't know that I have a specific reason for liking this verse, I just do. It is especially meaningful to me, however, because it was the favorite verse of a very dear friend who died a few years ago.

5) How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation... (Isaiah 52:7)
This verse connects me to my Quaker roots with its reference to peace and the simplicity of the barefoot messenger. It also evokes landscape, which is a spiritual metaphor in my life.

image from Hope Reformed Church, Grand Rapids, MI

the bs report

Our book study group met yesterday. We are reading Peter Gomes' The Good Book, which offers insight about reading and interpreting scripture. Yesterday's discussion was on the bible in America. I confess that when I first read the chapter heading I didn't think I would read anything new. Silly me.

As one might imagine, any discussion of scripture will include the perils of interpretation. Gomes alerts us to three particular danger zones in this area. He refers to idolatry of the book itself, the literal meaning of the text, and the imposition of culture on the text. He challenges the conservative who resists change, and the activist who promotes change, to reevaluate how we might be guilty of one or more of these idolatries as we read and interpret scripture.

I've got to say that his challenge got my attention, and in so doing raised a significant question. If we are to beware of our bias and dismantle the lens(es) through which we read the text, what lens do we now use to understand and interpret it?

When parables, allegory and metaphor are used it would seem clear that stepping back from any literal interpretation is the only way to look at the text and seek meaning from it (unless, of course, one is a literalist,). But don't we often take literally other aspects of the text? I am of the camp that understands scripture to be the story/history of God's relationship with his people. In the telling of that story what is important is not what is said, but what is being communicated. In other words, the story doesn't have to be true in order to communicate a truth. The details of a story may or may not be accurate, but in the details we find clues to what is important about the story.

It's amazing to me, actually, that the Christian tradition lacks what the Jews knew was essential years ago: the Talmud: rabbinic discussions of the text that address the details as well as the ambiguity of it. I can't say this with certainty, but my understanding is that literalism is not an option in Judaism, even for Orthodox Jews. (Please correct me if I'm wrong).  The Talmud has been around since roughly 500 BCE.

I'm not sure that it's possible to strip away the influences that we bring to our reading of scripture, and hence, our interpretation. And although I initially thought Gomes was suggesting we do that, I think he is really warning us to keep our minds open to evaluating our interpretations against the possibility of bias. I do think I try to do this. As a self-professed liberal/progressive, for instance, I can hold in tension the difficult texts used to excoriate homosexuals while still affirming my belief that God desires for all humanity the experience of mutual love, committed relationships, and yes, sex within that context. I think I will forever live left of center, but I can still hear and understand how the text can be understood differently by others who hold different values.

In the end (or maybe I should say, at this point, since I'm not knowingly at the end of my life) I am most heavily influenced by my first and earliest experiences of recognizing the holy in my life: through the Holy Spirit. Through her I accumulate what I presume to be knowledge about God, and my experience, including the reading of scripture, is constantly sifted and weighed against that accumulation. It is all a piece. The biggest challenge seems to be when the weight of something new tips the balance of what has been. That's akin to what Gomes refers to as the guiding force of Martin Luther King, Jr.: "The trumpet shall sound...and we shall all be changed." (I Corinthians 15:52)

mama and puppy are doing fine

She's a love. And she's keeping me on my toes! She's full of curiosity and wants to check everything out--the emery board on my desk, my iPod ear pieces, the scrap of paper behind the waste basket that missed its target... Right now she's too small to play much with Rigel. He only has two speeds: zero and sixty, and when he's at 60 he can't stop himself from running over her frightening her to death. The saving grace is that when she is up on the couch with me and they can be nose to nose--then they nuzzle and poke at each other like old friends. In a few months when she's a bit bigger and they can play together they will wear each other out. Can't wait! She's also learning to take care of business outside, which is, of course, fabulous.

In other news, we had another intense Bible study session yesterday. We are reading Genesis. I mean really reading it. Line by line, just about, letting the text tell us what it says rather than us telling it what it says. We're noticing all sorts of things and asking lots of questions. For instance:

• Since when are animals shrewd and cunning like the darn snake/serpent (don't be a smart aleck and say "since Genesis"--this contradicts the earlier description of the limitations of animals)?
• And what's in it for him for duping Eve into partaking of the fruit (this one really stumps me)? Furthermore, there is no temptation going on here. Eve hands the fruit to Adam and he eats of his own volition. And by the way, it was to Adam that God gave the "do not eat" instructions in the first place.
• And why are there only two trees of significance (the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) tucked into the garden? How are our heroes supposed to come by other knowledge (such as how to treat a bee sting)?
• And why does God care that Adam and Eve might partake of the tree of life and live forever? If he wasn't interested in that possibility then what's the tree doing there?

The God depicted in chapters two and three so clearly reflect an agenda-driven author/editor after the grace of creation in the first chapter. Sort of makes one suspicious...

The grist for my mill, however, is this: if humanity's relationship with the soil is supposed to be about toil and burden forever more (Gen 3:17b), then how is it that some people find their heart's content in "toiling" in the earth? I contend that this reality transcends the curse of God, and if that is the case, then what can also be transcended is the curse that man would be the ruler of woman and restore women to the status of partner according to Gen. 2:20b. Hah! Strike a blow for women against patriarchy!

Back to more mundane things. I REALLY need to spend most of today on taxes. Time is running short and tackling Ken's business records will be an enormous task. There might just be a filing extension in our future!

And on that quasi-cheerful note, have a great day!