+Z’ev

I’m sorry this didn’t get posted this morning: it’s still not done! I shall try again tomorrow.

Today’s assigned readings:

1 Samuel 15:24-35, Acts 9:32-43, Luke 23:56b-24:11

Moreover the Glory of Israel will not recant or change his mind; for he is not a mortal, that he should change his mind.
1 Samuel 15:29

The traditional Christian view of God is usually expressed in “Omni” terms: Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent. God is all-powerful, all-knowing and present in all places. One can derive these images from various passages of scripture - including this verse that I’ve cited at the head of this post. But there is another image of God that is equally found in the scriptures - including in the rest of this story (of Saul) that we’ve been reading for the last week or two.

When the film, Trembling Before G-d, opened in 2001 at the SF Jewish Film Festival, I and three friends went. There was a reception after and a panel discussion with, among others, a couple of Rabbis who had appeared in the film. One was Rabbi Steven Greenberg, a gay, Orthodox Jewish Rabbi.

Rabbi Greenberg shared a comment on the Creation Story in Genesis. Noting that when the Holy One wanted a partner for the Adam creature, the first thing done was not to create another human, but rather to bring all the animals, one by one. When none of these were found to be appropriate, then was Eve created. Beginning with this passage - and weaving in others - some commentators have drawn a picture of a deity who is learning from us as we grow.

The was a radical idea to the Christians in our little group, but not so radical to the Jews.

And, certainly, there are some - even among Christians - who feel that this idea of the “Three Omnis” might rather be an Hellenic interpolation, woven into the Christian tradition from non-Jewish sources and then read backwards into scripture. Yet, to be fair, the omnis are also present in the Hebrew text, albeit in later additions and not so much in the early parts.

For me it was a radical (too-the-root) idea because it answered one of the on-going debates within Christianity: how to you have an Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent deity and humankind with free will? If you have a deity with free will and a creation with free will, together they may develop and learn. Such ideas - when drawn out more fully by people who are far better thinkers - resut in the teachings of Open Theism, a school which I find somewhat attractive.

It’s a punch line: this is one of those memory verses that gets quoted by those of us who memorise Bible verses. “God is not a mortal, that he should change his mind.” Amen, preacher. Of course like all memory verses it’s out of context. And so, Samuel says, “The Glory of Israel will not recant or change his mind; for he is not a mortal, that he should change his mind.” But how are we to read that? With in this very story, God says “No King…” “Ok, you can have a king and it’s going to be Saul.” “Nope, I don’t like Saul any more: someone else will be the king I don’t want.” Is Samuel’s line about “not changing his mind” to be taken as a serious declaration (as some say) or is it really a kind of ironic relief to be read with a slightly Yiddish accent as in the Borscht Belt?

It’s rather like yesterday’s punch line/memory verse: “to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams” (1 Samuel 15:22). I’ve heard that quoted often and sung even more (Keith Green did a very beautiful version of it). I’ve heard it quoted and sung so often I’d kind of envisioned it as just a proverb, floating alone in space. The irony being that “Obey” here means “kill every one of our political enemies whom God happens to also hate as much as we do.” Convenient, that, eh? Obeying this deity who never changes his mind - who happens to hate the folks Samuel does - might just as well mean that today our enemies are also God’s enemies. Nothing has changed, let’s go kill them all. (And sadly, we’ve heard political fundamentalists who take that approach, telling Christians it’s OK to kill people - either for the state or in the name of the state.)

The empty tomb (the Gospel reading for today) is the answer to all this irony about God. It’s not enough to obey (or to sacrifice). Our theology matters not. This is how much God loves us. What are we going to do in return? It matters not if you believe it our you think it’s all “an idle tale”. This is how much God loves us.

Interestingly, this God would not be confusing “rescuing the holy land” with his forgiveness of those who had pierced his hands and feet. This God would not confuse the “defence of Constantinople” with evangelism-by-deed. Nor would he confuse “revenge for 9/11″ with “bless those who curse you”.

Where do we go to live with the God of Love, rising from the dead, trampling down death by death… rather than the vengeful deity that makes his prophets and priests-not-from-the-right-tribe kill his enemies before him?

Or maybe they are the same God? Learning from our mistakes as much as we are?