𝐘𝐀𝐇 𝐎𝐍𝐋𝐘 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐒 𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐌| 𝐂𝐋𝐈𝐂𝐊 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐊 𝐁𝐄𝐋𝐎𝐖

https://youtube.com/live/uqNC2l8NEaM?is=b2t6kfpMphAFAnM8

𝐘𝐀𝐇 𝐎𝐍𝐋𝐘 𝐓𝐕 100 𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐌 | 𝐂𝐋𝐈𝐂𝐊 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐊 𝐁𝐄𝐋𝐎𝐖

https://youtube.com/live/GAfryDWrn3A?si=sHdU5mWjmTGlZatR

"#Exodus: The Genesis of God’s People, published in July 2025 by #ZviGrumet, is a thoughtful and engaging study of the #biblical book of Exodus that illuminates how the #Israelites transformed from families of enslaved people into a nation following their understanding of God. #Rabbi Dr. #Grumet, a veteran educator and scholar of the Bible, brings more than four decades of teaching experience to his work.

Grumet serves as Director of Education at the #LooksteinCenter for #Jewish Education at #BarIlan #University and as editor-in-chief of Jewish Educational Leadership."

https://www.sdjewishworld.com/2026/04/26/book-on-exodus-is-mind-expanding-and-enjoyable/

𝐘𝐀𝐇 𝐎𝐍𝐋𝐘 𝐓𝐕 100 𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐌

https://youtube.com/live/3-k_cXECsR4?si=-p7DS9VGqWecAEz6

Sheol

This is in the Hebrew Bible (the Tanakh). Sheol is the underworld, or the place of the dead. This is a place of stillness & darkness & dust, which is death.

Within the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible), there are a few, brief (& nondescript) mentions of Sheol. Sheol wasn’t a punishment or reward. It was the great equalizer. Whether King or beggar, wicked or righteous, every single person went to Sheol. Irregardless of their moral decision in their mortal life.

Even though such practices are prohibited, the residents of Sheol can, under certain circumstances, be summoned/called by the living to the mortal realm. Like when the infamous Witch of Endor makes Samuel’s spirit show up for King Saul.

It’s often pictured as being “down.” Either deep under the earth or the floor of the ocean.

The residents of Sheol were called Raphaim (shades or ghosts). They weren’t exactly “alive” per se. But they weren’t totally gone either. They exist in a state of extreme lethargy, cut off from the living & importantly, often pictured as being cut off from active communion with God.

As Jewish thought evolved, particularly during the Second Temple period (circa 500 BCE to 70 BCE), the idea of Sheol began to change. Sheol began to be viewed as having “compartments.” Like a pleasant area for the righteous (often called “Abraham’s Bosom”) & a separate place for the suffering of the wicked.

When the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek (the Septuagint), Sheol was almost always translated as Hades. By the time the New Testament was written, the focus shifted further toward Gehenna (a place of fiery judgment) & Tartarus. So in the New Testament, Hades is both the underworld of the dead & the personification of the evil it represents.

Sheol is mentioned 66x throughout the Hebrew Bible. The 1st mentions of Sheol within the text associate it with the state of death & eternal finality. Jacob says that he’ll “go down to Sheol,” because he was still mourning the apparent death of his favorite son, Joseph (of Technicolor Dreamcoat fame).

Later in Genesis, the same scene plays out for a 2nd time when Jacob’s sorrow is repeated when another 1 of his sons, Benjamin, couldn’t return to him with his other brothers.

Sheol shows up again during Korah’s story in the Book of Numbers. After Korah attempted to provoke the Israelites to rebel against Moses, Moses vows that Yahweh will prove his legitimacy by splitting open the earth to hurl Korah & his conspirators into Sheol. Sure enough, after Moses stops talking, Yahweh splits the earth open. This causes Korah, his family, & all of his earthly possessions to “enter Sheol alive.”

In Deuteronomy, Moses sings that the anger of Yahweh is a flame which burns in the “depths” of Sheol, consuming the entire earth from the bottom up.

Later mentions of Sheol in the Tanakh picture it as a representation of death. Suggesting that entry into Sheol is an unavoidable consequence of dying.

I Samuel describes Yahweh as the 1 who brings souls down to Sheol. II Samuel further cements Sheol as humanity’s ultimate postmortem destination. I Kings uses “going down to Sheol” as a metaphor for death. Describing those who go do it both “in peace” & “in blood.”

Isaiah, the prophet, explains Sheol at great length during some of his “sermons.” He personified it as possessing an ever-increasing hunger for living people, with a great propensity for the souls of sinners, & where pleas to Yahweh cannot escape.

Ezekiel, during his prophecy of Egypt’s downfall, described Egypt metaphorically descending into Sheol as a dead person would, where all the spirits of the dead, as well as other fallen empires, such as Assyria, jeer & mock its fall from might.

The remaining mentions of Sheol are in the poetic literature of the Hebrew Bible. Job mentions Sheol in several of his laments, calling it his “home” as he lies in anguish & yearning for death to take him there to put an end to his suffering. Sheol is also mentioned in several Psalms as the grave of humanity.

Other biblical names for Sheol were/are: Abaddon (“ruin,” Psalms 88:11; Job 28:22; & Proverbs 15:11) & Sahat (“corruption,” Isaiah 38:17 & Ezekiel 28:8).

Owing to the evolution of its interpretation, some aspects of Sheol seem to contradict each other:

• Those who are in Sheol don’t remember anything. Not even Yahweh. But elsewhere, in Sheol, its residents have an otherwise impossible perception of earthly events. Even those that happen AFTER their demise.
• Pleas to Yahweh cannot escape Sheol. Yet, Yahweh stays its unmistakable master.
• Those who go to Sheol can’t escape. Yet Yahweh raises souls from it.

Despite the abstract nature of Sheol, there’s some physicality to it. Because it was clearly understood to be underground, which is further supported by the term bor (“pit”, Isaiah 14:15 & 24:22 & Ezekiel 26:20).

It’s a “land,” has “gates,” has sections (think Dante’s Inferno), & there are multiple mentions of its “deepest depths” & “farthest corners.”

The concept of both the righteous & unrighteous eventually going to Sheol seems to be an unspoken assumption in the Hebrew Bible. With the codification of Rabbinical Judaism & the Talmud, Jewish theology concerning the afterlife largely rejected the idea of a single place for EVERYONE after death.

It adopted what we recognize today. It maintains a place of reward for the righteous & punishment for the wicked called Gehinnom. As a result, Sheol, Abaddon, Bor, Shakhat, & other related terms were reduced to synonyms for a realm of punishment.

In Mandaeism, the World of Darkness (the underworld) is sometimes called Sheol in the Ginza Rabba & other Mandaean scriptures.

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

Or enter a custom amount.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Curse of Ham

Author’s Note: This post talks about some very racist ideas. We here at Spirituality & Religious Studies DO NOT agree with ANY racist rhetoric at all, EVER! If this post triggers you, please move on to 1 of our other posts. Thank you.

In the Book of Genesis, the curse of Ham is described as a curse that was imposed upon Ham’s son, Canaan, by the patriarch Noah. It happens in the context of Noah’s drunkenness & it’s provoked by a “shameful” act that was perpetrated by Noah’s son, Ham, who “saw the nakedness of his father.”

The exact reason for Ham’s transgressions & the reason Noah cursed Canaan when Ham had sinned has been debated for over 2,000 years.

The story’s original purpose may have been to justify the biblical subjection of the Canaanites to the Israelites, or a land claim to a portion of the New Kingdom of Egypt, which ruled Canaan in the late Bronze Age.

In later centuries, the narrative was interpreted by some Jews, Christians, & Muslims as an explanation for black skin. As well as a justification for the enslavement of black people. Many Christians, Muslims, & Jews now disagree with such interpretations. Because in the biblical text, Ham himself isn’t cursed. Race or skin color isn’t even mentioned in the text at all, anywhere.

The idea of this curse has its beginnings in Genesis 9:20-27. The story goes:

Noah began to be a farmer. He planted a vineyard. He drank some of the wine that the vineyard produced & enjoyed the drink a little too much. Noah was naked in his tent. Ham (the dad of Canaan) saw Noah’s nakedness. Ham told his 2 brothers. Shem & Jepheth took a garment & put the garment on both their shoulders & covered Noah’s nakedness, while they walked backwards. They kept their faces turned away from Noah so they didn’t see him naked.

Noah woke up from his drunken stupor. He knew what Ham had done. “Cursed be Canaan. A servant of servants will be to his brothers. Blessed be the Lord God of Shem. Canaan will be his servant. God will enlarge Japheth. He’ll live in the tents of Shem. Canaan will be his servant,” Noah said. (Genesis 9:20-27)

The objection of the story may have been to justify the subject status of the Canaanites (the descendants of Ham) to the Israelites (the descendants of Shem). The narrative of the curse is replete with difficulties. It’s uncertain what the exact nature of Ham’s offense is.

In verse 25 of the Genesis story, Noah refers to Shem & Japheth as the “brethren” of Canaan. However, in verse 18, they’re identified as his uncles.

The Table of Nations introduces Canaan & Mizraim (Egypt) among the sons of Ham. The Table of Nations is a genealogy of the sons of Noah & their dispersion into many lands after the Flood. In the Psalms, Egypt is identified with Ham.

A land claim on Canaan, which fell under the rule of the New Kingdom of Egypt in the late Bronze Age, has been suggested as a motive for the curse on Canaan & the association with Ham via Ancient Egypt’s rule over Canaan.

It’s important to realize that the curse was placed/made by Noah, not by God. The curse of Ham (& his descendants) wasn’t confirmed by God. Because the text would mention that, or at least you’d think it would if God had confirmed it. And if God had actually confirmed the curse, then why was the “promised land” called Canaan?

A pesher (interpretation) of the Book of Genesis found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, explains that since Ham was already blessed by God, it made Noah’s curse null & void (Genesis 9:1).

The Book of Jubilees also tells the tale. Jubilees gives a bit more info that Ham had assigned to Canaan a land west of the Nile. All of Noah’s sons agreed to invoke a curse on anyone who tries to seize land that wasn’t assigned to them. Well, Canaan violates this agreement & instead chooses to squat in the land set forth to Shem & his descendants. So Canaan brought on himself the full force of this second curse.

In the past, some groups have claimed that the curse of Ham was a biblical justification for imposing slavery & racial discrimination.

In the 15th century, Dominican Friar Annius of Viterbo invoked Ham’s curse to explain the differences between Europeans & Africans in his writings. Annius doubled down on the racism. He claimed that due to the curse imposed on black people, they would inevitably remain permanently subjugated by Arabs & other Muslims.

Similarly, the Catholic mystic Anne Catherine Emmerich said in her visions that she discovered that black people are, in fact, descendants of Ham.

In 1835, Joseph Smith (founder of the Mormon faith) published a work called the Book of Abraham. Get ready, it’s going to be a very bumpy & cringy ride. This is your trigger warning.

This “work” states that the Pharaoh was a descendant of Ham & the Canaanites. Pharaoh ruled justly & was blessed with wisdom, but was barred from getting into the priesthood because of the curse on Ham. According to the Book of Abraham, ALL Egyptians descended from the Canaanite lineage.

The Book of Abraham was eventually made into Scripture by the Mormon Church. And it is still in active use today. This passage is the only 1 found in any Mormon scripture that bars a particular “lineage” of people from holding the priesthood.

While there’s nothing in the Book of Abraham that explicitly states that Noah’s curse was the same curse that is mentioned in the Bible, or that the Egyptians were related to other black Africans. Some leaders later used the verses of this text as justification for the church policy with regard to the priesthood ban.

The 2002 edition of the Doctrine & Covenants Student Manual pointed to Abraham 1:21-27 as the reason why highly melaninated friends of the male gender weren’t given the priesthood until 1978. That’s 148 years, y’all. Really? That’s almost 150 years, guys. We can’t. We just can’t. And here’s the kicker: they also said that those who tried to abolish slavery were going against the decrees of God.

Make a one-time donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Make a monthly donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Make a yearly donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Nephilim

The Nephilim are mysterious beings or humans mentioned in the Bible. Traditionally understood as beings of great size & strength, or alternatively as beings of great power & authority.

The 1st biblical reference to them happens in Genesis 6:4. According to Numbers 13:33, 10 of the 12 spies reported the existence of Nephilim in Canaan before its conquest by the Israelites.

Interpretations vary vastly across traditions. Second Temple texts like 1st Enoch & Jubilees picture the Nephilim as offspring of fallen angels (Watchers) & of human women, portraying them as evil giants whose corruption led to the flood that’s told in the book of Genesis.

Some viewed the Nephilim as the descendants of Seth intermarrying with Cain’s lineage. Just to put this into perspective, Seth & Cain are biological brothers (half or whole, depending on the story). Their descendants married each other. It would be like marrying your cousins. Not 1st or 2nd cousins. But cousins nonetheless.

While others support the fallen angel theory. This was later supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls. Islamic tradition links them to the giant tribe of ‘Ad. While other theories link them with the Sumerian Apkallu myths or elite Canaanite warriors.

Over time, the Nephilim have been reimagined in popular culture: they appear in novels, films, video games, & conspiracy theories unrelated to religion. They are often pictured as powerful hybrids, ancient gods, or remnants of a lost superhuman race. Or the race of giants that Goliath descended from.

In the Bible, 3 interconnected passages refer to the Nephilim. 2 of them are in the Torah (Old Testament). The 1st appearance in Genesis 6:1-4. This is immediately before the Noah’s Ark story. Genesis 6:4 says: The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, & also after that when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men & they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.

A few things hit differently in this passage:

• Heavenly beings can have biological human children? How is this physically possible? If, after all, they’re spiritual beings?
• Why would God give/allow these “angels” the ability to even have kids in the 1st place? In modern times, we don’t think of angels as having the ability to have kids. Even the fallen ones. We do tend to think that Satan himself is the only 1 that can somehow have kids (the Antichrist).
• Who, exactly, were these “men of renown”? Like we, personally, just want 2-3 of the names. Is it some guys we’ve never even heard of? Or would it confirm some names we already know? Like yep, our fav demigod Hercules made the short list. But some decisions happened on the editing room floor. Sorry Herc!

“Those days” were a period when the human population on the earth had started to really take off. This was when people began “to be plentiful on the Earth.”

The 2nd is Numbers 13:32-33, where 10 of the 12 spies describe the Anakites (a Rephaite tribe) as descendants of the Nephilim. Outside the Pentateuch, there are 1 more passage indirectly referencing nephilim & this is Ezekiel 32:17-32.

The earliest translation of the Bible (the Septuagint), which was composed in the 3rd or 2nd century BC, gives the said word as gigantes. In Greek mythology, the gigantes were beings of great strength & aggression. But not necessarily of great size.

The Vulgate (compiled in the 4th or 5th century AD) transcribes the Greek term rather than translating the Hebrew nefilim. From there, the tradition of the giant progeny of the sons of God & the daughters of men spread to later medieval translations of the Bible.

From the 3rd century onwards, references are found in Enochic literature, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Jubilees, the Testament of Reuben, 2 Baruch, Josephus, & the Book of Jude.

The New American Bible commentary draws parallels between the Epistle of Jude & the statements in Genesis. This suggests that Jude refers implicitly to the paternity of the Nephilim as heavenly beings who came to earth & had spicy adult time with human women.

The story of the Nephilim is elaborated in the Book of Enoch. The Greek, Aramaic, & main Ge’ez manuscripts of 1 Enoch & Jubilees acquired in the 19th century (held in the British Museum & the Vatican Library) connect the origin of the Nephilim with the fallen angels, & in particular with the egregoroi (watchers).

In this tradition, the kids of the Nephilim are called the Elioud. They’re considered a separate race from the Nephilim. But they end up sharing the same fate as the Nephilim.

Some believe the fallen angels who sired the Nephilim were cast into Tartarus (II Peter 2:4, Jude 1:6), a place of “total darkness.” An interpretation is that God granted 10% of the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim to remain after Noah’s deluge, as demons, to try to lead the human race astray until the Final Judgment.

The Book of Jubilees also says that ridding the Earth of these pesky Nephilim was 1 of God’s purposes for flooding the Earth in Noah’s day. It describes the Nephilim as being evil giants.

A long-held view in some Christian sects is that the “sons of God” were the formerly righteous descendants of Seth (Adam & Eve’s 3rd kid) who rebelled. While the “daughters of men” were the unrighteous descendants of Cain. The Nephilim were their offspring. This view dates to at least the 1st century AD in Jewish literature. It was found in Christian sources from the 3rd century.

Some individuals & groups (including St. Augustine, John Chrysostom, & John Calvin) take the view of Genesis 6:2 that the “angels” who fathered the Nephilim referred to certain human males from Seth’s lineage. They were called sons of God in reference to their prior covenant with Yahweh (Deut. 14:1, 32:5). In these sources, these men had begun to pursue bodily interests, & so took wives of “the daughters of men.”

This view is also held by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. This is supported by their own Ge’ez manuscripts & Amharic translation of the Haile Selassie Bible (1 Enoch & Jubilees also), which count as canonical by this church. The “Sons of Seth” view is the view presented in a few extra-biblical, yet ancient texts.

In these sources, these kids of Seth were said to have disobeyed God by breeding with the Cainites & producing wicked kids “who were all unlike.” This angered God into bringing about our boy Noah’s flood.

If you subscribe to the ancient alien theory, then you’ll be familiar with Zacharia Sitchin. In his The Earth Chronicles series, Mr. Sitchin makes the claim that the Nephilim were an extraterrestrial race called the Anunnaki. The Anunnaki came down from the 12th Planet (Nibiru) & mated with (or at least genetically messed with) human women. They also gave humanity a few things: civilization, makeup, weapons, warfare, & farming. (Our founder is currently reading The 12th Planet right now, as of the date this posts. They are about done with it, like 2 more chapters!)

Make a one-time donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Make a monthly donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Make a yearly donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

"Not you. You guys are cool."

https://piefed.social/c/historymemes/p/1897049/not-you-you-guys-are-cool

Exposed and Naked: We are Unsafe

“‘Dear Lord God, I wish to preach in your honor. I wish to speak about you, glorify you, praise your name. Although I can’t do this well of myself, I pray that you may make it good.’”[i]

Introduction

We are not in control; this bothers us. Further, we are not safe, to others or to ourselves; this angers us. To be out of control is one thing, but to be wildly unsafe, too? Offensive. So, we do whatever we can to create an atmosphere around us that feels safe, that causes us to feel okay, like everything is fine. But it’s not; nothing is fine. As politicians and pundits spin narratives and weave tales causing our attention to be diverted from the real problems plaguing our land and location, we hide behind our own mythologies and cover ourselves up with our various blankets of ignorance. The heavier the blanket, the safer we feel; the taller the myth, the more secure we think we are. We vacillate between having to know increasingly more (the more we know the more we can control) and not wanting to know anything and sticking our heads in the sand (if we can just not know we will regain some sense of safety and maybe even comfort). But this drive to cover up and hide from that which causes us to feel unsafe means that our community with others breaks down: as we hide from and deny the disasters swirling and twirling around us, we—ourselves—become our biggest problem not just to ourselves but especially to our neighbors, the ones fighting for their right to live in this world, the ones most visibly threatened by nationalism and extremism.

So, our lack of control wedded to our being and feeling unsafe makes us feel hopeless. In a world where it feels that World War III is always one strike away, where unstable and erratic egos leave more death in their wake than life, where one’s power and privilege are more valuable than the life of the least of us, our sensations of feeling unsafe surge. Surely, if they are coming for my neighbor…then am I next? In this surging feeling of unsafety, our hypervigilance turns to hyperarousal, and we lash out at anyone and anything. Humans need to feel safe; it’s the fundamental level of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The divides and divisions caused by viewer driven news rooms that plague our communities get worse because we must view everyone else as a threat and patch-work some modicum amount of safety no matter how tattered that sense of safety is. But this makes us exceptionally unstable creatures and no mythology (no matter how it glitters and sparkles in the light) will cause use to feel and thus to be safe (to ourselves and to others). We are always just one moment away from complete break-down. We are nuclear weapons charged and ready to go off at any moment. Our lack of control bothers us; our unsafety angers us.

Is there any help for such as these?

Exodus 17:1-7

Moses[ii] begins by telling us of a journey and of a problem, From the wilderness of Sin the whole congregation of the Israelites journeyed by stages, as the Lord commanded. They camped at Rephidim, but there was no water for the people to drink (v1). Being without water is no small issue. Rephidim is the last stop before entering the terrain of Sinai.[iii] Thus, being without water here—about to travel through the terrain of mountains and sand dunes in a climate that is demanding being of high elevation and often cold—is life threatening. In normal circumstances a person can survive 3-5 days without water, add in exertion, a challenging climate, and tough terrain, and that number falls.

The Israelites have every right to be disturbed by this, as Moses tells us, The people quarreled with Moses, and said, “Give us water to drink,” (v 2a). Humans without water (assuming they did not have much water to begin with as they embarked on their journey) become easily angered as dehydration sets in; thus, quarreling makes sense as a characteristic of dehydration and the fruit of the fear that is setting in. They feel unsafe and thus they are becoming unsafe to themselves and others. However, Moses appears to be rather unphased by the dire situation. His reply? “Why do you quarrel with me? Why do you test the Lord?” (v2b). Not the most pastoral response.

So, the people ramp up their complaints against Moses, and it’s understandable. With no foreseeable way to get water, and with a leader who seems to consider their needs to be mere “quarreling” and disobedience to God, the Israelites escalate—which happens when fear and anger are not addressed but exacerbated. As the Israelites feel the impending doom of their being unsafe, they respond from that place of fear and anger and the situation gets worse. As Moses, tells us, But the people thirsted there for water; and the people complained against Moses and said, “Why did you bring us out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and livestock with thirst?” (v 3). If Moses doesn’t act now, he’ll be facing a full-on uprising and rightly so. Can we blame the Israelites for their reply of desperation?

Here, Moses senses just how serious the problem is and does what any good leader of God’s people should do (even if a moment delayed): call on God to help. Our text tells us, So Moses cried out to the Lord, “What shall I do with this people? They are almost ready to stone me,” (v4). The narrative doesn’t really give a glimpse of how bad the situation is until Moses mentions to God that the people “are almost ready to stone me.” The community—the people and its divine appointed leader, Moses—are in a tenuous situation. Death threatens to rear his head, anger and fear are the emotional monarchs, and the situation is far from safe; it’s perilous. So, in this moment, Moses throws himself at God’s feet in desperation; he’s failing to deescalate.

Thankfully, God does step in and instructs Moses to cause water to flow,

“Go on ahead of the people, and take some of the elders of Israel with you; take in your hand the staff with which you struck the Nile, and go. I will be standing there in front of you on the rock at Horeb. Strike the rock, and water will come out of it, so that the people may drink. Moses did so, in the sight of the elders of Israel. He called [Rephidim[iv]] Massah and Meribah, because the Israelites quarreled and tested the Lord, saying, “Is the Lord among us or not?” (vv5-7)

Seems God does not have a problem providing God’s people with water to drink; what if anyone had just asked God? Moses accuses the people of testing God; it seems to me that Moses is the being tested. The people did demand to see that God is present by invoking quarrels with Moses because they were thirsty;[v] thus why Rephidim is then called “Massa and Meribah”, being wordplays on quarreling and trying from v2.[vi] However, the people are also asking a deeper question of Moses: Are you with us? Do you see us? We are about to die of thirst, and do you care? Ignoring and dismissing the needs of the people is not the right way of faithful leadership; it is the slipperiest of slopes to the people devising not only their own solutions and building their case for disbelieving God.[vii] God’s chosen leader must represent God to the people and the people to God; Moses failed this test in this moment. Moses could have heard their cry (the voice of an unsafe situation from people who are scared and angry) and have asked God to help him and them. But now Moses’s leadership is being questioned and doubted. Notice that there are elders to be selected to go with Moses to witness[viii] the striking of the limestone rock that causes the water trapped within to flow;[ix] God is aware that the people need to see (and know) that not only is God with them but God is with Moses thus Moses must be with them. These witnesses will be testament to the reality that both God and Moses are with the Israelites, through thick and thin, in good and bad, when things flow with milk and honey and when water seems scarce.

Conclusion

The Israelites are caught in their fear and anger because the situation they find themselves in is precarious: they are unsafe and they become unsafe to themselves and to others. Fear and anger are born here and cause stones to be lifted to make one’s point known; fear and anger when things are unsafe do not know any limits and boundaries, the rational and reasonable components of the human intellect and mind are bound and gagged. The human being, whether ancient Israelite or post-postmodern person, cannot overcome, on their own without intervention, their anger and fear born from feeling and being unsafe. Trapped in unsafety, the human being will resort to their primal instincts and fight, like any trapped animal would.

As it was for the Israelites, so it is for us.

Lent commands us into a state of being exposed and naked, into an honesty that will peel back our facades and remove our masks, bringing us to a very naked state that will feel like complete and total death. We are brought to our most dreaded confession: we are not in control, and we are unsafe creatures, afraid and angry. But it’s out of this death, this confession, out of this naked and vulnerable place, where God’s word liberates us out of death and into life by God’s love. This word that brings this divine life to dead creatures, God preaches through God’s son, Jesus the Christ; it is this incarnate word that becomes the source of our sure ground when we are at our most unsafe, most exposed, and most naked. It is the very source of our new life, new love, and new liberation. God is coming to clothe God’s own in the righteous garments of divine love, life, and liberation so they can become creatures who have new eyes and ears to see and hear the pain around them, bringing love where there is indifference, life where there is death, and liberation where there is captivity.

[i] LW 54:157-158; Table Talk 1590.

[ii] Using Moses as the traditional author because it is both easier and makes for more interesting story telling

[iii] Jeffrey H. Tigay, “Exodus,” The Jewish Study Bible Jewish Publication Society Tanakh Translation, eds. Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler (Oxford: OUP, 2004), 142. “Rephidim, the last station before Sinai…and, to judge from v.6, near Sinai.”

[iv] Tigay, “Exodus,” 142. “The place, Rephidim, not Horeb.”

[v] Tigay, “Exodus,” 142. “Try. i.e. to test, demanding proof that God was present among them and controlling the events.”

[vi] Tigay, “Exodus,” 142. “Massah and Meribah, meaning ‘The Place of Testing and Quarreling.’ These names, playing on the verbs ‘quarrel’ and ‘try’ used in v.2, became by words for Israel’s lack of trust in God.”

[vii] LW 11:55 “For to tempt in the hearts is something else than tempting in words. The children of Israel in the wilderness always doubted that they had been led out by the hand of the Lord indeed, they did not believe it…They came to this unbelief because they argued form a human point of view: ‘If the Lord were with us, and if we had been led out by the hand of the Lord, would we be bothered with hunger and thirst in this way? Would we thus lack everything? If the Lord had done it, we would undoubtedly have everything we want, and we would be in a land flowing with milk and honey, as He promised us. But no, since everything is opposite, it is not true that the lord has led us out, but you have done it.”

[viii] Tigay, “Exodus,” 142. “Moses is to take some of the elders, perhaps as witnesses, and set out for Horeb (Sinai), ‘the mountain of God’ 3.1), to obtain water.”

[ix] Tigay, “Exodus,” 142. “Strike the rock: In the Sinai there are limestone rocks from which small amounts of water drip, and a blow to their soft surface can expose a porous inner layer contained water. A similar but enigmatic episode, with differences suggesting that its an oral variant of this one, appears in Nu. 20.2-13…”

Cyrus the Based

https://piefed.social/c/historymemes/p/1737373/cyrus-the-based