What gives?

What was with the Daily Lectionary this morning? The Old Testament readings from the Daily Lectionary over the past few weeks have been going through the Book of Job. Job is one of my favorite Old Testament books for many reasons. However, yesterday, we finally had the last chapter of Job. And I assumed we were done with it. But today, we had a random reading from the 28th Chapter of Job.

While a beautifully poetic passage, I was curious why the Lectionary felt it needed a rebuttal, particularly this one, to the closing chapter yesterday? I know bible scholars go bananas over the "happy ending" in Job that many believe is a sanitized later addition to the text. I am not completely sold on those arguments because, like most Biblical Textual and Source Criticisms, there is an awful lot of hearsay and conjecture, but scant, if any, actual proof that would stand up in any court of law, or what I call a "House of Cards" exegesis.

But, even if we had to end the Job readings with another section other than the text's actual ending, why this particular text? In my mind, this is actually reverting back to a time in the story line when Job is still whining and challenging God to a fair trial. This discourse happens before God descends in the whirlwind to "pin Job's ears back" as we say down South.

I just don't understand why the Lectionary chose this one text with which to end the readings. It seems out of context to me.

Any thoughts?

Comments

TLF+ said…
If the critics are trying to balance out what they perceive to be a false "happy ending," then they are hoist with their own petard. They've used the lectionary to concoct an "ending" that suits them - as you say, they've appended a rebuttal.

You are right - it is a beautiful passage and I reread it at least once just to savor that. But why not leave it where it should be in the course readings of the text?

Ironically, it's because we reject the whole thrust of the lesson and decide that we see the truths that God missed!
9/16/2010 9:47 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Thoughts on the 'Connecticut 6'

For some weeks, I have had several friends (mostly non-Episcopalians surprisingly) wanting me to voice an opinion on this Connecticut 6 (sounds like a fleabag motel) business. If you are unfamiliar with this fiasco, for lack of a better term, let me describe it as best as I understand it. There is so much spin going on (from both sides I might add) that I have been having trouble discerning fact from fiction. As I understand the situation, the Rt. Rev. Andrew Smith is the Bishop of Connecticut. Well, at least he has a pointy hat, I do not think he is particularly acting like one. Likewise, as I understand, there are Six rectors of churches (at least they have collars, but likewise are not acting like it) that have applied for DEPO oversight (i.e. another Bishop to oversee them.) The best way I know how to describe the hoohah is as follows: The Feloniously Rev. Smith is trying to defrock the Superciliously Reverend Rectors. Darth Smith claims they have abandoned communion and has shadil...
Read more

My board gaming journey, pt. I

Image
     Something a bit different today than my normal reflections. I thought I would delve a little bit more into a topic that is not necessarily theological in nature. I am a real person, and not some ethereal doctor in an ivory tower who gets to smoke a pipe and contemplate the infinite mysteries all day. So, today, I thought I would delve into one of my personal hobbies: board gaming.      Now, do not tune me out because you hear "board gaming" and immediately default in your brain to your brother overturning a table with Monopoly money flying everywhere because the game has gone on for hours and overturning the table was the only option left other than murder. Most people, including myself at one time, thought of board games as those boring or frustrating games that seem stuck in 1952. You know the usual suspects: Clue!, Monopoly, Scrabble, Chess, maybe even more saccharine games like Life or Candy Land, i.e. those games that everyone owned at some p...
Read more

The History of the Football helmet

Image
NCAA.com put out an interesting editorial about the evolution of the football helmet that can be found here . This is in part due in my estimation to the current buzz (one might go so far as to describe it as hysteria) about concussions in contact sports, particularly football. I have always found this an interesting evolution. Long gone are the days of strapping on your leather helmet: In the 50's and 60's, the helmet evolved into, basically becoming a metal then hard plastic version of the leather helmet with the addition of a rudimentary face mask (which was really just a bar at first): Gradually, the helmet's face mask itself began to evolve: Combines with new space age style lightweight plastics and foams, the helmet mask ultimately became a type of full, goalie style face mask (This little number costs just under $1000 to purchase new): Ironically, being a military history major, the football helmet evolution followed the pattern of design that helmets worn...
Read more