Mujerista Theology: Listening to the Voices of Latinas

Course: BTI 534: Selected Readings with Dr. Jo-Ann Badley: Salvation and Women in Luke-Acts (Feminist Hermeneutics)
Paper Author: Jacqueline Cuayo
Date: Spring 2010. March 15, 2010

LATINA THEOLOGY & MUJERISTA THEOLOGY:
SITUATING THE LITERATURE ON LATINAS’ RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE

Introduction:  The Necessity of Diverse Voices

In her inaugural presidential address to the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) in 2004, Sharon H. Ringe proclaimed the need for more intentional inclusion in the field of scholarly work those members who are outside of the dominant cultures in Western Europe and North America.[1] Ringe referenced another pivotal innaugural presidential address given over a decade before by Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza, the first female president of SBL, who also called for this intentional inclusion.[2] Within the field of biblical scholarship, it is no longer disputable that the reader and the context from which (s)he comes crucially impacts her/his process of interpretation and theological work. Among others, the social, cultural and economic contexts of the reader drastically impact the questions (s)he asks of the text, the way in which (s)he works with the text, and her/his subsequent interpretation and application of the text. A multiplicity of voices brings about a full and flourishing body of work in biblical studies and theology, and that for the good of all peoples.

Thus in her speech, Ringe shared with SBL members her joy at the vast increase in bibliography from women and culturally diverse voices since Schussler Fiorenza’s speech. Continuing on, however, Ringe also noted clear and explicit ways in which non-dominant groups and cultures are prevented from full inclusion and free movement within the field. She effectively ended her address with an ominous statement of concern that, another decade from now, someone else would stand, again praising the “progress” that has been made and yet lamenting, as she did, “how small are the increments of change, and how slowly they come.”[3] Let us now, in light of the prophetic callings of these influential women, be quick to embrace the voices of those who have been “on the margins” of our field but who are of incalculable value. Indeed, as Ringe stated, “the future of our discipline and our community of conversation” depend on exactly this.[4]

Latinas are one such invaluable group of people whose voices have not been heard well by the Western European and North American academic world. The past two decades, however, have seen a growing body of work emerging from Latinas’ unique and varied perspectives, with mujerista theology being the most cohesive vein of this body to date. This paper will show how Latina theology, and mujerista theology in particular, are situated within the broader field of theology. Attention will be given to the major goals, methods and tenants of mujerista theology.

Situating Latina Theology:  Its Context and Terminology

Latina/o Theology

Edwin David Aponte describes the diversity that exists within the field of Latina/o theology in his introduction to the Handbook of Latina/o Theologies. Aponte writes:

Hispanic theology can be defined as the distinct theologies that emerge out of the social and cultural contexts of Latino/a peoples…There is no such thing as one one single, unified Hispanic/Latino/a theology, but rather a multiplicity of perspectives within the diverse Latino/a communities that articulate distinctive and relevant Hispanic viewpoints.^[5]

Aponte does acknowledge that there are some shared characteristics within Latina/o theology. The common traits he sees include theology as a communal endeavor that is “scholarly, pastoral, and organically connected to grassroots communities.”[6] Indeed, the theological work that comes from Latinas reflects grassroots communities. In fact, one can trace many of the themes found in Latina theology to the daily lives and values of Latinas. Theirs is a faith that is rooted in the everyday.

The Terms Hispanic and Latina/o

In the literature describing Latinas/os’ religious experience, various authors use various terms, encapsulating the cultural, racial, and national diversity of Latinas/os. The terms Hispanic and Latina/o are both terms typically used by non-Hispanic and non-Latina/o persons to describe men and women in the U.S. from Spanish-speaking countries. As Ada María Isasi-Díaz notes, rarely do Latin American and Caribbean men and women use these terms to describe themselves. More typically, we would describe ourselves with the national adjective of the country in which we were born or the country our ancestors were from: Dominican or Cuban, for example. These descriptors help convey our varied histories, traditions, races (many different races can be found in each Latin American country), and languages (there are many forms and dialects of the Spanish language).[7] After all, a generalization like Hispanic or Latina/o is akin to putting together people in the U.S. from Portugal, Scotland, and Lithuania with the term European. These generalizations undeniably occur and are, at times, both unavoidable and useful; even in our own writings we use the terms Hispanic and Latina/o to explain some general things about ourselves to the U.S. and European academic world.[8] One must simply note these gross generalizations as such. One must also acknowledge that use of these terms by the dominant culture can subtly lump unique and different cultures together, with the result of controlling and assimilating people from other countries, albeit unintentionally at times.[9]

Latinas and Feminism

This concern of being controlled and assimilated is cited by Isasi-Díaz as one of the reasons Latinas have yet to decide on a single term with which they will refer to themselves, some using the term Hispanic Women, others Latinas, and still others Hispanic Americans. She states, in her 1993 book En La Lucha (ELL), that this is not about avoiding a decision but claims, rather, that it is premature for Latinas to choose one term for themselves. She believes our communities will eventually gain more power and will at that time decide how to refer to ourselves.[10] Thus she uses Hispanic Women and Latinas interchangeably. Within this paper, we will follow suit.

Latina theolgians also wrestle with terminology around feminism and liberation theology. Theological writing by Latinas often contains elements of both. Isasi-Díaz notes the option of using terms for themselves and their field like feministas hispanas, feminist Latinas, feminist Hispanic theology, and Hispanic Women’s liberation theology. She asserts the importance of a name, stating that a name “provides the conceptual framework, the point of reference, the mental constructs that are used in thinking, understanding, and relating to a person, an idea, a movement.”[11] One of the issues that arises regarding use of the term feministas hispanas is the fact that many Hispanics see feminism as the particular concern of non-Hispanic women. Even though Latinas see the sexism prevelant in our communities, we still have not named ourselves in our fight against this form of oppression.[12] Susan A. Ross summarizes Isasi-Díaz: Feminist “carrie[s] too many white-middle-class connotations,” and womanist has been “adopted by African-American women theologians.”[13]

Complicating this issue further is the marginalization of Latinas within the non-Hispanic feminist community “because of our critique of its ethnic/racial prejudice and its lack of class analysis.”[14] In her 1988 essay “A Hispanic Garden in a Foreign Land,” in which Isasi-Díaz writes from her own experiences[15] of working within the feminist movement, she expresses the division that often comes between “Euro-American feminists” and “racial/ethnic women.” She speaks of the fact that Euro-American feminists are part of the dominant culture in the U.S. and that they have not (at least at the time she wrote her essay) truly opened their movement to include the priorities of Latinas.[16]

Given all of these intricacies, Latina theologians have not chosen a term with which to categorize themselves or their field as a whole. Isasi-Díaz coined the term mujerista and mujerista theology in the early 1980s “to convey something of the cultural and linguistic distinctiveness of U.S. Hispanic women’s approach to theology.”[17] However, as we will see in the next section, this term refers to a specific vein of research and theological work. Thus, according to Ross, the term mujerista “has been widely—although not universally—adopted as a way of referring to the socio-theological location of U.S. Latina theology.”[18] This essay will use the term Latina theology to refer to the general body of theological work written by Latinas.

Mujerista Theology:  The Body of Literature and Its Timeline

Amidst the growing web of work from Latinas, mujerista theology has arrived on the Western academic scene. Mujerista theology falls within Latina theology as the only cohesive body of research and theological work from the perspective of Latinas. Other Latina theology seems to simply be written by Latinas about Latinas. Mujerista theology, on the other hand, carries out research with Hispanic Women, has specific goals and methods, and has at its heart the goal of Latinas’ liberation and flourishing.

The world heard the first major rumblings of mujerista theology in 1988 when Harper and Row published the book Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (HW). At the time, rather than mujerista theology, authors Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango used the term Hispanic Women’s Liberation Theology. Interested in doing theology from the perspective of everyday Hispanic Women, they presented their first body of work. HW included several pages of verbatum sections of interviews with a diverse spectrum of Hispanic women. Isasi-Díaz and Tarango also laid out their vision for Hispanic Women’s Liberation Theology, describing it as a synthesis of cultural theology, feminist theology, and liberation theology that, greater than the sum of its parts, “gives birth to new elements, to a new reality.”[19]

Isasi-Díaz followed up this work in 1993 with her book En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology (ELL). This work reiterated, added to, and nuanced the work Isasi-Díaz and Tarango had presented five years earlier. This work also replaced the term Hispanic Women’s Liberation Theology with the term mujerista, coined by Isasi-Díaz as previously noted;[20] (the two terms, however, refer to the same, singular body of theological work). Besides some other writings, Isasi-Díaz has continued to write about and develop mujerista theology. In 1996, Orbis Books published her work Mujerista Theology: A Theology for the 21^st Century. This compilation of essays laid out further her understanding of theological themes in Latinas’ religious experience. In 2004, La Lucha Continues: Mujerista Theology carried on exploration of theological and ethical themes in Hispanic Women’s lives. Finally, in 2003 and 2004, ELL and HW, respectively, were republished. One finds layers of the same themes, explored in the next section, running throughout all of these books, including the original work, HW.

Mujerista Theology:  Goals, Methods, and Themes

Mujerista theology “insists on [the] personal experience [of Latinas] as the starting point in the process of liberation and, therefore, in the doing of theology.”[21] The goals of mujerista theology are best summarized by Isasi-Díaz in the introduction to her book Mujerista Theology. They are:

to provide a platform for the voices of Latina grassroots women; to develop a theological method that takes seriously the religious understandings and practices of Latinas as a source for theology; to challenge theological understandings, church teachings, and religious practices that oppress Latina women, that are not life-giving, and, therefore, cannot be theologically correct. In developing a method to do theology that uses religion of grassroots Latinas as its source, mujerista theology puts into practice a preferential option for the oppressed.[22]

In the beginning stages of their work, Isasi-Díaz and Tarango had hours upon hours of conversation with Hispanic Women, some of whom they had known or had contact with previously, others of whom they had not. The Latinas involved were all living in the U.S. and were of either Cuban, Puerto Rican, or Mexican/Mexican-American origin. These three ethnicities were choosen because they are the three largest sub-groups of Latinas living in the U.S. (For more on Isasi-Díaz’s and Tarango’s choice to limit mujerista theology to these populations, please see my book report on ELL).

In addition to one-on-one conversations, Isasi-Díaz and Tarango hosted group self-reflection weekends in which women could get away, on retreat of sorts, with other Latinas and converse about their lives and various topics posed by Isasi-Díaz and Tarango. Topics discussed ranged from Latinas’ satisfaction with life and the most difficult decisions they have had to make, to their understandings of God, prayer, Jesus and the Bible, to their families, communities, and ancestors. Questions were always posed in such a way as to avoid religious terminology so that the women would not feel pressure to offer what they perceived might be the “correct” or “religious” answer. For the most part, discussion occurred in a free-flowing, stream-of-consciousness manner. As explained in both HW and in ELL, much care and attention was given to creating an environment that was as natural as possible, a process which would contain little to no manipulation,[23] and which would be truly reflective of the voices and stories of those who participated.

One of the most important aspects of mujerista theology’s research methods rests in a major theme of mujerista theology—the self-definition of Latinas. In no way does mujerista theology desire to speak for Latinas. Rather, the highest value is placed on listening, with as little interpretation or analysis as possible, to the voices of Latinas as they speak about life, faith and God. Isasi-Díaz and Tarango acknowledge with great awareness, though, that some interpretation will inevitably occur. The choice of which women would come to the conversations weekends, which portions of the interviews they choose to publish, the way they translate the women who speak in Spanish, and their reflections on and coagulations of the themes they see in the interviews all constitute interpretation of sorts. Isasi-Díaz and Tarango also acknowledge and affirm their own subjectivity and motivations as they come to this theological pursuit,[24] just as Schussler Fiorenza and Ringe opt for the unavoidable, invaluable location amidst one’s own subjectivity; indeed, any notion of “objectivity” is really only the subjective stance of the dominant culture. In addition to their desire for Latinas to be self-defining, Isasi-Díaz and Tarango also desire Latinas’ liberation from oppression and an environment which promotes Latinas’ self-determination.

As Latinas move more and more intentionally towards their own liberation from oppression, they will inevitably do so with the motivation that comes from the values they hold close to their hearts. Chief among these values, as seen within mujerista theology’s research is the importance of community. The individualism which plagues Western European and North American cultures has not yet seeped into Latin American and Carribean cultures. (Unfortunately, as Isasi-Díaz notes in LLC, Latinas living in the U.S. constantly find themselves pulled to participate in hierarchical power structures, individualistically rising through the structures towards “success” at the expense of their own people).[25] However, the aspect of community still runs through Latinas’ veins. Their personal identity and function is found in la comunidad. “Good morality” for Latinas revolves around their obligations to the people of the community and their own dependence on the community.[26] La familia (the family) and el barrio (the neighborhood), as well as some aspects of la iglesia (the church) all “provide an important focus for the development and maintenance of the sense of community among Hispanics.”[27]

This brings us to another theme within mujerista theology. La iglesia, though a very important aspect of Latinas’ social and community connections, is not typically the nexus of Latinas’ spirituality. Most of the Latinas presented in HW spoke of their connection to the church but stated popular religiosity (though not utilizing that phrase), relatives and home life, and their own sentimiento (feeling) as being that which forms their spirituality. We will explore these three themes one at a time, beginning with popular religiosity.

Popular religiosity, referenced in many other sources of Latina/o theology, including the Handbook of Latina/o Theologies and Así Es: Stories of Hispanic Spirituality, is “an intrinsic part of the daily lives of Hispanic Women.” For our purposes, popular religion can simply be described as the cultural result of Spanish conquistadores bringing Christianity to Latin America. Due to historic details too great to delve into here, the “culturization” of Christianity took place in Latin America; that is, “Christianity became culture…This cultural expression called Christianity is…“a rich tradition of religious beliefs and practices that fuses Christian, Amerindian, and African religious traditions and is the most operative ‘system of symbols’ used by Hispanic Women in establishing ‘powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations’ in their lives.”[28] Things like ancestor worship and praying to saints, gods, and goddesses are some of the prevailing practices of popular religiosity. Isasi-Díaz and Tarango assert that this is similar to the fusion of, for example, Greek philosophical ideas with “official” Christianity in the Greco-Roman world.[29]

Relatives—living and dead—also play an important part in Latina spirituality. One finds frequent mention of grandmothers, mothers, and other relatives who were influential in formation of Latinas’ view of God, love, justice, and commitment to family. Finally, Latinas’ frequently mention sentimiento as they speak of God and their beliefs. Theirs is a united being, not a dichotomized being like that found in much of post-Enlightenment Western Europe and North America. Isasi-Díaz and Tarango saw in their conversations with Latinas “how very intimately they relate to the divine” and saw that “what makes sense to [Latinas] regarding God is that the divine is with them, intimately with them; so sentir, which they consider more intimate and a more rounded, complete sense than knowing, is [the word] they use [when describing God and their relationship with God].”[30] The lack of duality in the lives and souls of Latinas’ makes their connection with the divine flow right into their movement in the world to help the poor and oppressed in the daily lives. Again, Isasi-Díaz summarizes well in LLC, asserting:

Our religious beliefs and practices challenge the rationality of modernity that has so miserably failed the poor and the oppressed. They also challenge the non-rationality of postmodern thought that, though centered on the singularity of each person, proposes an individualism beneficial only to the rich and powerful. The non-rationality of individualism is countered by the acknowledgment of human sociality. It is the need for community and the recognition of common interests that moves us to true solidarity. It is precisely Hispanics’/Latinas’ commitment to family and community that makes hope flourish … We seek to transform ourselves by taking responsibility for our reality, by seeking to transform it so we can live fully.[31]

Conclusion

Having described some of important themes in mujerista theology, it should be noted that works by other Hispanic Women seem to contain similar themes to those of mujerista theology, as well as other themes. Over and over again one will notice Latina theologians mentioning the lack of dualism in Latinas’ spirituality and their spirituality’s mingling with their everyday lives. Arlene Dávila has writen on a theology of the body for and the imago dei in Latinas.[32] Anita de Luna has writen on popular religion.[33] Gabriel A. Salguero converses with womanist theology,[34] and scholars like Elsa Tamez and Nancy Pineda-Madrid have also contributed important work to the field of Latina theology. Future exploration of these works is called for, as is further analysis of their similarities to and differences from mujerista theology.

Additionally, analysis of ways in which Latina theology and mujerista theology are situated in comparison and contrast with post-colonial, local, postmodern, and liberation theologies would be beneficial. Also beneficial would be inquiry into why Yolanda Tarango only worked with Isasi-Díaz on the first of several books on mujerista theology, as well as why other Latina theologians do or do not consider themselves mujerista theologians.

Finally, exploration of works written in Spanish about religion and spirituality, especially works published within Latin American countries for each of their national audiences, will yield a fuller, more rounded understanding of Latinas’ religious experience. The vitality and insight which these diverse perspectives bring to biblical studies and theology is invaluable to the fields and will, most importantly, draw us all into movement towards liberation, justice, and love for all people, in particular, for Latinas. As Isasi-Díaz and Tarango wrote in the prologue to their seminal work, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church, “We are simply asserting that our voices are an intrinsic part of the human voice and therefore should be an intrinsic part of all theology.”[35] I myself, in discovery of this new galaxy of Latina theology (new to me, that is), have somehow already found a greater strength in my own voice and a more heart-felt belief that my voice truly does matter … that indeed I have much to offer the world.

(Word Count: 3670)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aponte, Edwin David. “Introduction: Theological and Cultural Competence en Conjunto.” In Handbook of Latina/o Theologies, edited by Edwin David Aponte and Miguel A. De La Torre, 1-7. St. Louis, MI: Chalice Press, 2006.

Dávila, Arlene. Latinos Inc.: The Marketing and Making of a People. California: University of California Press, 2001.

de Luna, Anita. “Popular Religion and Spirituality.” In Handbook of Latina/o Theologies, edited by Edwin David Aponte and Miguel A. De La Torre, 105-113. St. Louis, MI: Chalice Press, 2006.

Isasi-Díaz, Ada María. “A Hispanic Garden in a Foreign Land.” In Inheriting Our Mothers’ Gardens: Feminist Theology in Third World Perspective, edited by Letty M. Russell, Kwok Puilan, Ada María Isasi-Díaz, and Katie Geneva Cannon, 91-106. Louisville, KY: Westminster Press, 1988.

Isasi-Díaz, Ada María. En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993.

Isasi-Díaz, Ada María. La Lucha Continues: Mujerista Theology. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2004.

Isasi-Díaz, Ada María. Mujerista Theology: A Theology for the Twenty-First Century. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996.

Isasi-Díaz, Ada María and Yolanda Tarango. Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church. San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988.

Pérez, Arturo, Consuelo Covarrubias, and Edward Foley. Así Es: Stories of Hispanic Spirituality. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1994.

Ross, Susan A. “No Title.” Review of Mujerista Theology: A Theology for the Twenty-first Century, by Ada María Isasi-Díaz.” In Journal of the American Academy of Religion 66, no. 4 (Wint. 1998): 953-955.

Salguero, Gabriel A. “The Mañana of Womanist Theology: Conversaciones Con Sus Hermanas.” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 58, no. 3-4 (2004): 225-229.

Schussler Fiorenza, Elisabeth. “The Ethics of Biblical Interpretation: Decentering Biblical Scholarship.” In Journal of Biblical Literature 107, no. 1 (Mar. 1988): 3-17.

Society of Biblical Literature Publications. “Changing Demographics in Biblical Studies.” Society of Biblical Literature. http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?ArticleId=54 (accessed February 1, 2010).

LoMásTV: Free Spanish Lessons. “Lesson 158: -ero, -ista, — Working with Suffixes.” LoMásTV. http://lomastv.com/lessons.php?lesson_id=170 (accessed March 12, 2010).

---

FOOTNOTES

[1] Society of Biblical Literature Publications, “Changing Demographics in Biblical Studies,” Society of Biblical Literature, http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?ArticleId=54.

[2] In Elisabeth Schusser Fiorenza’s 1988 inaugural presidential address to the SBL, Schussler Fiorenza convincingly proclaims the importance of including voices from non-dominant groups, such as women and persons of other races and countries, in the field of biblical scholarship and theology. She reminds SBL members of the prevailing mindset during the 20^th century in the field of biblical studies and theology. For the majority of the century, the prevailing mindset believed that good biblical interpretation is only possible when scholars distance themselves from the text with “radical detachment, emotional, intellectual, and political distanciation, … step[ping] out of their own time” (Schussler Fiorenza 1988,10-11). Referencing persons in the 20^th century who have voiced the importance of shifting away from this perspective, Schussler Fiorenza calls for a “decentering of this rhetoric of disinterestedness and presupposition-free exegesis” in order to “recover the political context of biblical scholarship and its public responsibility” (Schussler Fiorenza 1988, 11). The influences of cultural anthropology, literary criticism and postmodernism, which had been gaining momentum in the 70s and 80s, are clearly seen in her speech. Schussler Fiorenza argues that only by including voices from “feminist scholars in religion, liberation theologians, theologians of the so-called Third World, and others traditionally absent from the exegetical enterprise” will the field of religious studies and theology exist in the world as it should, “constitut[ing] a responsible scholarly citizenship that could be a significant participant in the global discourse seeking justice and well-being for all. The implications of such a repositioning of the task and aim of biblical scholarship would be far-reaching and invigorating” (Schussler Fiorenza 1988, 17).

[3] Society of Biblical Literature Publications, “Changing Demographics in Biblical Studies,” Society of Biblical Literature, http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?ArticleId=54.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Edwin David Aponte, “Introduction: Theological and Cultural Competence en Conjunto,” in Handbook of Latina/o Theologies, ed. Edwin David Aponte and Miguel A. De La Torre (St. Louis, MI: Chalice Press, 2006), 1.

[6] Ibid., 1.

[7] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 2.

[8] In this paper, as in much of the literature, the terms Hispanic and Latina/o will be used interchangeably.

[9] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 3.

[10] Ibid., 3.

[11] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 2.

[12] Ibid., 4.

[13] Susan A. Ross, “No Title,” review of Mujerista Theology: A Theology for the Twenty-first Century, by Ada María Isasi-Díaz,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 66, no. 4 (Wint. 1998): 953.

[14] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 3.

[15] In the same essay, Isasi-Díaz elaborates on her experience in the Womanchurch movement during the 70s and 80s. She worked with and learned from the other women involved in this struggle against sexism in the Roman Catholic Church. However, Isasi-Díaz claims that as she attempted to, as she says, “claim a space in the Euro-American feminist garden to plant her own flowers” she experienced ethnic/racial prejudice. She asserts that Euro-American feminists were unwilling or unable to acknowledge their prejudice, and that the “patriarchal understanding of power is operative even in the feminist movement” with Euro-American women controlling access to power within the movement. Isasi-Díaz argues strongly that this mode of being will only do violence to the feminist movement and that power absolutely must be mutually shared: “Euro-American feminists need to remember that, in order to undo patriarchy, we must create societies in which people can be self-defining and self-determining. To achieve that, power has to be transformed and shared…Mutuality asks us to give serious consideration to what the other is saying, not only to respect it but to be willing to accept it as good for all…All women committed to liberation must work together on deciding the priorities for the movement” (Isasi-Díaz, 1988, 95-97).

[16] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, “A Hispanic Garden in a Foreign Land,” in Inheriting Our Mothers’ Gardens: Feminist Theology in Third World Perspective, ed. Letty M. Russell, Kwok Puilan, Ada María Isasi-Díaz, and Katie Geneva Cannon, (Louisville, KY: Westminster Press, 1988), 95-97.

[17] Susan A. Ross, “No Title,” review of Mujerista Theology: A Theology for the Twenty-first Century, by Ada María Isasi-Díaz,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 66, no. 4 (Wint. 1998): 953.

[18] Ibid., 953.

[19] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), xiii.

[20] Mujer is a noun which means “woman” in Spanish. Ista is a suffix in Spanish that can be added to a noun in order to denote someone who works, often professionally, with said noun. For example, batería means drum; the term baterista, then, is a drummer. (LoMásTV: Free Spanish Lessons, “Lesson 158: -ero, -ista, — Working with Suffixes,” LoMásTV, http://lomastv.com/lessons.php?lesson_id=170).

[21] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), xiii.

[22] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, Mujerista Theology: A Theology for the Twenty-First Century (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996), 1.

[23] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, En La Lucha: In the Struggle, Elaborating a mujerista theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 86-88. Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), 12-14 and 114-115.

[24] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), xv – xvi.

[25] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, La Lucha Continues: Mujerista Theology (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2004), 6.

[26] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), 89.

[27] Ibid., 6-7.

[28] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), 67.

[29] Ibid.,68.

[30] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), 51.

[31] Ada María Isasi-Díaz, La Lucha Continues: Mujerista Theology (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2004), 4.

[32] Arlene Dávila, Latinos Inc.: The Marketing and Making of a People (California: University of California Press, 2001).

[33] Anita de Luna, “Popular Religion and Spirituality,” in Handbook of Latina/o Theologies, ed. Edwin David Aponte and Miguel A. De La Torre (St. Louis, MI: Chalice Press, 2006), 105-113.

[34] Gabriel A. Salguero, “The Mañana of Womanist Theology: Conversaciones Con Sus Hermanas,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 58, no. 3-4 (2004): 225-229.

[35] Ada María Isasi-Díaz and Yolanda Tarango, Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church (San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row, 1988), xv.

CATEGORIES: Post Author, Course Title/Number

Hey MHGS paper posting friends.

Just thought we could add some organization to our site by using Categories.

When you post a paper, create at least two categories for it:
one category: Your Name (author)
one category: The Course Title & Course Number that the paper was for.

Just a thought!  ~jacqueline

Theology of Beauty & Worship from My Name is Asher Lev

Beauty & Worship Research Paper

fully alive

What does it mean to be a human being who is fully alive?  The Bible is fraught with verses talking about losing life for the sake of finding it, and that Jesus suffered on the cross for the joy set before Him.  However, the journey towards life is often so painful that one begins to wonder if they do not serve a God who is sadomasochistic at heart.  Why is life and joy associated with death and suffering?  If God promises pain and suffering, why does humanity work so hard to avoid it?  Humans tend to live day-to-day life in a hazy stupor of ignorance and deadness, working hard to avoid suffering and feeling anything “hard,” and in the process, extinguish the life of their heart in isolation.  God has made the way to life and joy pass through the road of pain and suffering; being a human being who is fully alive means summoning the courage to face pain and heartache in the context of relationship.

“True growth is stunted because desire is shackled, because in our moral ineptitude we dread giving up the present ego to become a self we do not know.  The uncharted sea unnerves us.”[1] Becoming a human being who is fully alive requires a coming into desire.  People are terrified of desire because it requires them to give up their illusions and masks that provide a sense of safety from the unknown.  The unknown is the real self, the image of God that has been uniquely placed within each person.  A person cannot know God without knowing their self, and one cannot know their self without knowing God[2]; hence, there is no movement towards God without some sort of movement towards the self, towards desire.  Christians believe that God, who is not fully unknowable and inexhaustible, is revealed to them in Jesus Christ, and that it is after His image that they are made.[3] “The God-image comes more into focus the more [I] die into fuller selfhood.”[4] Dying into fuller selfhood requires a liberation of desire that is not simply getting what one thinks one wants; desire is much bigger than simply something hungering to be filled.  Desire is a fullness needing relationship and a finding of true self.  As a person moves toward desire, they move towards God.  However, to numb the chance that desire will go unmet, humans tend to cope with themselves and the world by strategies of seduction, aggressiveness, and withdrawal; but even in these coping mechanisms, there is a longing for God, for where there is seduction, there is the longing for intimacy; where there is aggressiveness, there is the desire to belong without being swallowed up; and where there is withdrawal, there is hope for a true identity in God.[5] Real desire requires an acknowledgment that one is incomplete and in need of something to become more fully self, to become more fully alive.[6] Impure desire assumes having everything together, that one is not in need of anything, but is put together and important; it is a consuming of other things to prevent being consumed by real desire, which shows a person the need to find their true identity in and with others.[7] Real desire longs to grow in knowledge of and become more rooted in truth.  Impure desire, if it can even be called desire, involves a numbing of the self to murder the painful longing of real desire.  Real desire lives with God in the painful longing of the heart, and accepts that the hunger within the heart is part of being human, and cannot be dealt with or understood by trying to ignore the pain and suffering of life.[8]

The Apostle Paul spoke of suffering and the Christian life more than any other writer in the Bible.  Throughout his epistles, Paul speaks of partaking in the sufferings of Christ to know Him more and for the sake of others.  The suffering Paul speaks of though goes far deeper and more intimate than outward physical suffering.  During his time in Corinth, Paul began to understand suffering in a way that required people to become aware of their own human powerlessness if they were to make room for the dynamics of God.[9] Therefore, weakness serves as a way of preparation for God’s work.  Paul and the other apostles frequently did things that showed great evidence of God’s power in them, and time and again they were reminded of their own human insufficiency.[10] “Thus, always and everywhere, God manifests His power in an ambiance of human weakness.”[11]

Pain is a problem for many humans.  They do not like it.  They do everything they can to avoid it.  So when the Apostle Paul talks about rejoicing in his sufferings and filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions in his body[12], many people are apt to turn their eyes another direction.  C.S. Lewis reminds though that while pain may be a problem and something people want to avoid, to “try to exclude the possibility of suffering which the order of nature and the existence of free wills involve, and you find that you have excluded life itself.”[13] To exclude suffering and pain is to exclude life.  Humans must keep in mind that what seems good to them may actually not be good, while what seems evil may actually not be evil.[14] What may seem like God being hurtful, cruel, and evil may actually not be so, but may be God’s way of trying to get a person to actually see Him, instead of turning away towards false illusions of security and self-sufficiency.  “Pain insists on being attended to.  God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pain; it His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.”[15] To avoid pain in one’s life is essentially to avoid God’s voice.  Pain removes the veil people have crafted to hide themselves and to hide desire.  Pain shatters the illusion that all is well; it shatters the illusion that what one has is working for them.[16] C.S. Lewis states, “The full acting out of surrender to God therefore demands pain.”[17] If one desires God, if one desires to live as a human being who is fully alive, pain is guaranteed.  The question is if a person will be brave enough to look deep enough to find God, to look deep enough into the abyss within the heart, which is the dwelling place of God.[18] It is not a coincidence that in those moments where the pain is most vivid, something within the human heart is roused to presence, to come out from behind the veil of which it has been hiding.  In that presence, humanity is called to “a reflection of the Divine life, a creaturely participation in the Divine attributes which is far beyond our present desires…whether we like it or not, God intends to give us what we need, not what we now think we want.”[19] Pain does not feel good, but it is what God uses to cut through humanity’s sleepy masks and wake them up to real desire.

God created human beings in His image[20], and intended for humanity to fully live into that image, “being transformed from degree of glory to another.”[21] Living into longing and choosing to not squash the pain of unmet desire is where humans become more fully themselves.  However, the purpose of living into pain is not simply because God wants humans to suffer in some way.  The road through desire and pain is also the same road that leads to joy.  Living a life where one is willing to feel pain is the only way one will feel joy; and joy is the ultimatum.  But unless joy is the goal, pain and the desire become an arena for masochists.[22] Pain and suffering must be looked at to see the glory and promise of joy that God has made to humans.[23] Joy is related to humanity’s deepest desires, and if humans are to experience joy, they must learn to live with the fact that they are not entirely home in themselves, and that finding their way home is the most important thing they have to do.[24] “Joy…must have the stab, the pang, the inconsolable longing.”[25] If humans can live fully into their pain and suffering, they will come face to face with love, with the joy of new life; the joy of new life is only possible though in a state of total vulnerability[26], a state in which one’s desire is allowed to exist without being murdered.  The sign of joy and love is found in weakness, for it was a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger that was called the glory of God.[27] The fact that pain leads to joy is the ultimate paradox of Christianity, yet it is a paradox that Jesus Himself lived into, “who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame.”[28]

It is easy to speak of desire, pain, suffering, and joy as necessary components for coming to life, but putting such huge categories into practical application is a monumental task.  Even in trying to think about application, people primarily move towards something like therapy, that such an awakening could only happen in the context of some sort of counseling.  Yet, the task of living as a fully alive human being is not relegated to people who supposedly need therapy; it is a task that God calls all of humanity to, and in a sense, could be called the very essence of community.  The church has too often settled for a covering over of the brokenness of its people.  It is time for the church to move into the preaching of a messy gospel, a gospel that invites authenticity and brokenness for the sake of joy.  The leaders of the church must summon the courage to face desire and the pain of unmet longing in their own lives, and show the flocks they shepherd that there is such a thing as a joy that is real and fulfilling, but that it comes at a price.  The journey towards becoming fully alive should never be faced alone.  People need each other, or else they become trapped in themselves, and the pain of the contradiction felt within the self is translated into despair; humans needs one another to help interpret the hurricane swirling within.[29]

Becoming a human being who is fully alive is a process of saying goodbye to self-sufficiency and choosing to no longer ignore the stirrings of the heart.  “There must be something in all of this goodbye business for us to know.  There must be something that God wants to tell us in the last place, something that can be said only after we have said goodbye in the first place.”[30] The courage to risk living fully does not come easily.  A person must take the uncertain step towards desire, and then be able to live into the turmoil and pain caused by unmet desire.  God promises though to bless those who embrace weakness in order to find the joy He has placed in the Imago Dei that resides within every human being.  He has made the path to life and joy the path of suffering and pain.  Humanity must fight to live a life that feels pain, for it is the only way they will experience joy.

---

[1] Stephen J. Duffy, Elisabeth Koenig, & William Loewe, “Jesus the Liberator of Desire by Sebastian Moore, 1989,” Horizons 8, no. 1 (1991): 97.

[2] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985): 170.

[3] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 26.

[4] Stephen J. Duffy, Elisabeth Koenig, & William Loewe, “Jesus the Liberator of Desire by Sebastian Moore, 1989,” Horizons 8, no. 1 (1991): 97.

[5] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 36.

[6] Ibid., 93.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 93.

[9] Ahern, Barnabas, “Fellowship of His Sufferings,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 22, no.1 (Jan. 1960): 7.

[10] Ibid., 8.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Colossians 1:24 (English Standard Version); All Scripture references are from the English Standard Version unless otherwise noted.

[13] C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York: HarperCollins, 1940): 25.

[14] C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York: HarperCollins, 1940), 27.

[15] Ibid., 91.

[16] Ibid., 94.

[17] Ibid., 98.

[18] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 33.

[19] C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York: HarperCollins, 1940), 46-47.

[20] Genesis 1:27

[21] 2 Corinthians 3:18

[22] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 22.

[23] Ibid., 23.

[24] Ibid., 93.

[25] C.S. Lewis, Surprised By Joy: The Shape of My Early Life (New York: Harcourt, Inc., 1955), 72.

[26] Henri J. Nouwen, Intimacy (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1969), 32.

[27] Luke 2:12-14

[28] Hebrews 12:2

[29] Alan Jones, Soul Making: The Desert Way of Spirituality (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 90.

[30] Robert Benson, Between the Dreaming and the Coming True (New York: Penguin Putnam, Inc., 1996), 34.

seeing faces

From the beginning of time, man was created to be in relationship with one another.  God tied man to Himself when the Spirit breathed life into Adam.  God looked upon the being He had created in His own image and said, “It is not good for man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18 English Standard Version).  When God spoke these words, it was forever determined that man would live in relationship with one another and with God.  When sin entered the world and threatened to destroy relationship, God went so far as to kill His only Son to begin the restoration of relationship.  Humanity, which has been fabricated in interconnection to one another and to God, does not know who they are apart from relationship; it requires the face of another embodying Jesus Christ for a person to learn the lines and contours of one’s own face.

The creation story in chapter one of Genesis asserts that all human beings are first and foremost created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28 English Standard Version).  When Adam and Eve ate the apple in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:6 English Standard Version), the perfect Imago Dei that resided in both of them became distorted, resulting in the contortion of God’s image in humankind forever.  The end of the story did not result in a completely distorted image of God within the human heart though.  McFayden (2000) states that “the image may therefore be corrupted but not lost, and for this reason we should think of it as an ontological structure of being” (p. 20).  Even though the image went awry, it remains living and active, for humanity would cease to exist if God were removed from its core soul.  God’s image is firmly anchored within the nucleus of the human heart, and though the image is subject to being twisted out of shape by sin, because of God’s unchanging and constant faithfulness and goodness, the sweet truth remains that His image within humanity cannot be destroyed (Barth, 1960, p. 347).  Because God has placed His image within His children, He chooses to be bound integrally to physical body and soul (Moltmann, 1985, p. 15).  It is in the person of God’s Son, Jesus Christ, that God’s pursuit of humanity and His commitment to be with us in all joy, suffering, and death is made manifest to the world.  Because God has chosen to bind Himself to humanity, it is impossible for humanity to have any sort of physical or spiritual existence outside of God.

Barth (1960) explains man’s dependence on God for existence in saying, “Man really is, is ontically and therefore noetically dependent on the fact that he is not without God.  Man without God is not; he has neither being nor existence” (p. 345).  It is impossible for humanity to exist apart from God in spirit or as a mass of matter; man is wholly dependent upon the breath of the divine Creator for all things of life.  Simultaneously, man cannot come to understand himself without relationship, which is shown in the divine relationship of the Trinity.  Jurgen Moltmann (1985) states,

If we cease to understand God monotheistically as the one, absolute subject, but instead see him in a Trinitarian sense as the unity of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, we can then no longer, either, conceive His relationship to the world He has created as a one-sided relationship of domination.  We are bound to understand it as an intricate relationship of community – many-layered, many-faceted and at many levels (p. 2).

God exists in perfect relational unity with the Son and Spirit in the Trinity; hence, the intimate interconnection of the Father, Son, and Spirit serves as the perfect example of how humanity was meant to exist in relationship with each other.  If it were not for the relationship of the Trinity, Christianity would cease to be Christianity.  Similarly, apart from relationship with each other and God, humanity ceases to be humanity.  Being without God is ontologically impossible.

Human beings are only human as they surrender themselves and exist in relationship.  The I-Thou encounter is the place where humanness is fully realized. Martin Buber (1970) states “The I is actual through its participation in actuality.  The more perfect the participation is, the more actual the I becomes” (p. 113).  In the I-Thou encounter, one fully becomes the I one was created to be because the I has come into contact with another.  Humanity is created within the perfection of the I-Thou encounter, but because of the fall, the tendency is for people to treat each other as objects, or Its, that are to be experienced rather than fellow subjects, or Thou, that the other is supposed to live in participation with. While the I-It relation is necessary for life and survival, if one lives solely in the It realm, one begins to travel on a path of the destruction of self.  Despite the It tendency in interpersonal encounter, the heart was created for contact and perpetually longs to face each other in an I-Thou moment.  The longing for contact proves how humanity has been designed for interconnection with one another.  Buber asserts that “The longing for relation is primary, the cupped hand into which the being that confronts us nestles” (p. 78).   From the moment a baby comes forth from the womb he has nestled so warmly and comfortably in for months, he is reaching out his hand for contact, hoping that a cupped hand will be there to bring comfort to the intense longing for the touch of another in his soul.

The extraordinary longing placed within humans since childbirth calls for humanity to strive to live in genuine meeting with one another.  Embodying the face of Christ in relationship through sacrifice and surrender of self is required for genuine meeting to occur.  The importance of removing all obstacles that obstruct the view of the Imago Dei in the other is critical.  Being conscious of the Imago Dei makes it possible to want to honor and hold the other person’s heart, because one becomes aware that the live and beating heart they hold in their cupped hand contains the very face of God.  Buber (1970) acknowledges, “The purpose of relation is the relation itself – touching the You.  For as soon as we touch a You, we are touched by a breath of eternal life” (p. 113). The purpose of relationship is not simply realizing one’s humanness; it also to experience the transcendence of the living God.   Buber metaphorically describes the transcendence of God as a “breath of eternal life.”  Incarnational relationship invites humans to approach each other in mutuality and reciprocity in hopes of meeting the Transcendent.  For a human being to accept the invitation to mutuality, one must be brave enough to not squash the desire that resides within the heart for genuine meeting.

Ignoring the desire for a You is detrimental to the potential for genuine meeting to occur between two people.  The killing of desire can result from many stories that reside within each person’s heart.  More often than not, the justification for the murdering of longing results from interpersonal relationships that have gone deeply awry.  D.B. Ehrenberg (1992) states that in his work,

The apparent denial of desire seemed to stem from toxic experiences and relationships, usually long-standing, in the past, particularly in early life.  These relationships seemed to influence the patient’s ultimate relationship to his or her own desire in profound and often devastating ways, and this in turn influenced the capacity for relationship, in a dialectical way. (p. 2).

The longing for contact to a You is influenced by past relationships.  The desire within a human heart for connection is correlated to the degree one has had the experience of genuine meeting.  Destructive relationships for people simultaneously results in a slow death of the self if the destruction is not met with occurrences of genuine meeting.  The end result is the ruination of existence for a person who does not have the life-giving chance of seeing his or her own beautifully crafted face.

Genuine meeting cannot occur without surrender, which calls one to try to live in a state of choosing to continually give up any objective presuppositions, while inviting the other to the same.  A meeting where two people embody the incarnation and approach each other in mutuality and reciprocity involves a messy sacrifice of self.  So many pollutants contaminate the air between two people that tries to inhibit surrender.  Everything one holds onto must be given up to clear the air and make way for a meeting that goes deeper than the surface.  The Imago Dei within each person must be drawn into presence and kept at the forefront of engagement to continue in a risky stance of surrender of all things seemingly known and familiar.  Barsness (2006) puts words to the risk, saying, “It is in the space of the not-knowing that we risk the transcendent.  It is in the active defense of what I know that we run the risk of never experiencing God at all” (p. 46).  If there is a lack of surrender, it will be very hard if not impossible for God to be experienced, thus resulting in the inability to see the true contours of each other’s faces.  However, as objective pretenses are given up, the heart now has a sweet invitation to have its light and dark places exposed for the potential of healing.

Pain, heartache, joy, and love are held in the act of listening.  Listening does not solely include the act of absorbing and responding to words; listening happens in the willingness for silence to become white hot; listening involves being attuned to internal reactions and inner voices of the Holy Spirit.  Edwin Singer (1994) states, “Genuine listening represents a highly active process; it requires concentrated attention to stimuli and to the inner reactions prompted by them; an absorbed awareness both of the speaker and of oneself as listener” (p. 56).  Genuine listening, like every other aspect of genuine meeting, requires the act of surrender, and it is only in surrender that the transcendent God is brought to the present, and by looking into each other’s faces, the real face will be beheld in the Imago Dei.  Paradoxically, it is because of God’s immanence that humanity must engage in relationship to experience Him (Barsness, 2006, p. 45).

The therapeutic relationship, like any other relationship should be, is one that invites the other into an alliance that facilitates genuine meeting out of desire for the presence of God; the hope is that it will be in the presence of God that both will start to see the truths that have become distorted about God and the magnificent face they have been created with.  The loss of self and identity is a natural occurrence for any human being (Safran & Muran, 2000, p. 92).  Safran and Muran assert that “By providing a holding environment for the patient and by empathizing with the totality of the patient’s experience without being overwhelmed by it, the therapist can bring to the surface a buried well of authenticity and vitality” (p. 93).  The holding environment Safran and Muran describe is an environment where the recovery of the true self, the Imago Dei, is made primary in hopes of the obstacles that block one’s view of God, Christ, and love are broken down and removed.  Once barriers begin to be moved, an authentic self that is reflective of Jesus hopefully begins to emerge.

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness…So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.  And God blessed them” (Genesis 1:26-28, English Standard Version).  From the outset, God had the intention of creating male and female to bear His own image, and thus binding Himself to them.  After creating humans, God bestowed a blessing upon them.  The specific blessing that was bestowed is not mentioned in the telling in Genesis 1, but perhaps the blessing was one of relationship.  God, in His immanence as the Three in One, determined that it would be through relationship with each other that humanity would experience His presence.  In an act of grace and repentance that requires the cross of Christ, humanity is called to sacrifice self and turn toward each other in order to glimpse the living God, while discovering the unique image of God that has been imprinted within the lines and contours of each individual face.

Exegesis of 1 Kings 19:9b-14

BTI 503 Exegesis Paper

Hilary Golden

Showing up in obedience

That night Jacob got up and took his two wives, his two maidservants and his eleven sons and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. After he had sent them across the stream, he sent over all his possessions. So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.” But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” The man asked him, “What is your name?” “Jacob,” he answered. Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome.” Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.” But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there. So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel, and he was limping because of his hip.

Genesis 32:22-31 NIV

As we ponder what the epitome of a faithful servant resembles, our first thoughts would probably lead us toward the example of Jesus Christ, the servant leader. Who could be more fully dedicated to the will of God besides the one who said to the Father “yet not my will, but yours be done,” and in obedience was crucified?[1] In Christ we see a prime example of one who was in full accord with the will of God. As such, it might be presumed that in order to be a good Christian one must not fight the will of God, but be a willing and pleasing sacrifice. Is this not what churches try to teach children in Sunday school, to be obedient? And although it is desirable for us to live harmoniously with God, we must ask how this truly happens. If one is a willful and unruly person, how can obedience genuinely be assimilated? We must also bring to account the difficult portions of scripture which seemingly defy notions of conventional compliance to God.

In stark contrast to this mode of religious submission, we have the story of Jacob at the Jabbok River. Here we have a major patriarch, the father and namesake of the 12 tribes of Israel, who literally fights God. What lessons can we draw from such an encounter? How does Jacob’s conflict correlate with Christ’s obedience on the cross? And if we are to follow after Jacob’s example, does this mean we ourselves should take on his unruly attitude and fight God? In observing Jacob’s encounter at the Jabbok River in the context of his life, the canon as a whole, and how his encounter anticipates Christ, we will discover bold answers to these questions. Answers which declare that the life God desires is not a spineless one, but one filled with passion and presence, one that God can grapple with. We will see that it is precisely because of Jacob’s passionate disposition that God makes him a recipient of God’s covenant blessing and legacy.

From the beginning of Jacob’s life, he has been viewed as an unscrupulous and opportunistic individual – cheating his older brother of his birthright, stealing for himself the blessing Isaac intended for Esau, obtaining both Leah and Rachel as wives instead of settling for Leah, fathering many children through the contention of his wives and through his wives’ maidservants, and swindling Laban to gain many livestock and subsequent wealth in more servants – living up to his name as “the supplanter” (bq[y, Ya`aqob).[2] Jacob had always been portrayed as an opportunist and as Fredrick Buechner colloquially asserts, “the go-getter,” whereas in contrast Esau was listless and willing to live an inconsequential life.[3] It seemed as if nothing would stop Jacob from doing and getting what he wanted. That was until God himself showed up to stop Jacob, however, only to reaffirm Jacob’s passion and push him forward in victory, God’s victory. The peculiarity lies in how and why God decides to choose Jacob over Esau as the inheritor of blessing and father of the nation of Israel. As we look to the details of Jacob’s encounter at the Jabbok River we will discover why Jacob was the chosen one.

After having fled from Esau, Jacob was on his way back towards the land of his ancestors to obtain his inheritance, and before crossing the Jabbok River he fights a stranger alone in the night.[4] The narrative explains that Jacob fought hard, was injured, and lost, but ultimately won. Through this struggle it is easy to see Jacob’s relentless character and perhaps it would be too easy to say that it is because of this marked characteristic of his that he is blessed. However, there is more to understand about why Jacob was blessed and why it was so extraordinary.

What if Jacob decided that the opponent was not worth fighting and fled? God probably would not have even showed up to encounter him, and even if God did show up, the fleeing Jacob would not be there for God to wrestle with. And if God did encounter Jacob and he didn’t fight back, he would have either been beaten up or let go without harm, but in each situation left without a blessing. The fact that Jacob continued to fight with the assailant instead of pleading for mercy or fleeing shows that Jacob, true to his nature is a go-getter, but just as much, it can be affirmed that the fight was inescapable. We must remember that the fight happens at a very inopportune time for Jacob, alone and in the dark of the night. Perhaps after sending all of his family and belongings ahead past the Jabbok River, Jacob had wanted to rest or have some time for solitude. Yet instead of a peaceful night he is attacked by a stranger. In contrast to the many endeavors toward obtaining blessing in his life, this was not a choice he had initiated. Who chooses to get jumped in the dark? Clearly this encounter was planned out by the assailant.

The length of the struggle throughout the night, into daybreak, and Jacob’s displaced hip also demonstrate some significant details about Jacob’s and the stranger’s intent. What if the assailant did not cripple Jacob? If Jacob lasted the fight uninjured he would believe his victory was by his own strength. Accordingly, it is observed that the simple touching and resulting dislocation of Jacob’s hip in the very last moments before daybreak served as an illustration to Jacob that his opponent was in control during the whole struggle. Had the opponent wanted, he could have easily defeated Jacob early on, and now that Jacob had been injured his resulting limp would serve as a reminder to him and his descendents of how he was defeated.[5] Additionally, it was the opponent’s desire to wrestle Jacob at length. Whoever this attacker is, he seeks a complete and lengthily engagement. On the other hand, as persistent as the assailant was, Jacob also sought full engagement. Jacob never broke out of his opportunistic and passionate character. Unwilling to let go of his opponent before daybreak, and even after injury, he asks for a blessing.[6] What could Jacob have wanted from this mysterious opponent? Did Jacob not realize it was God who he was fighting? At this point the text doesn’t state that Jacob had any realization of the divine character of his opponent. What we can assert is that Jacob realizes his opponent had chosen to contend against Jacob at length, easily prevailed, is powerful, and as such may have something of value to offer Jacob.

The opponent decides to bless him, but before that, he renames Jacob. This is of paramount importance and must be noted because Jacob’s identity and strivings thus far in the narrative have been, in a sense, a worldly struggle. Worldly in the sense that Jacob sees his own desires and strength as the primary causes of success. However as he is renamed Israel, meaning “God prevails” (larXy, Yisra’el), his identity is joined with victory resulting from his own “prevailing” (lky, Yakol) over God! [7] How can one possibly defeat God? Victory is only possible if God is the one who, in the willingness to struggle with man, hands over the victory. By telling Jacob that his new name is Israel, Jacob is marked as a victor, albeit a crippled and begging victor. Now the primary causes of success are no longer derived from Jacob himself. Now Jacob’s passion, strength, and successes are associated with God’s willingness to offer Jacob victory. Now, the culminations of blessings in His life have a new connotation as blessings from God. Buechner writes, “Power, success, happiness, as the world knows them, are his who fight for them hard enough; but peace, love, joy, are only from God.”[8] With this bold act of renaming Jacob, the stranger had just associated their struggle as a struggle not only with mortals but also with God.

At this point Jacob may have realized he wrestled with God and wanted confirmation of it by having the opponent identify himself as God. This may very well be the reason why after the renaming, Jacob asks the opponent for his name.[9] The opponent does not speak his own name but fittingly blesses Jacob like the victor of the wrestling match offering the gold medal to the loser. It is after this renaming and blessing that Jacob, now Israel, realizes who he had contended with and renames the place Peniel, which means “facing God” (lawnp,, v. 30), saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”[10] Curtis writes:

The incident at the Jabbok brought him to the awareness that the fulfillment of the promise must be the work of God rather than the work of Jacob. He came to see the difference between receiving the inheritance as a gift and gaining the inheritance through his own power…God struggles with Jacob, and in the process Jacob prevails – not in the sense that he overcomes God but rather in the sense that by recognizing his dependence on God he is now able to receive the promise and the blessing of God to Abraham.[11]

The fact that Jacob the at the Jabbok River transforms to Israel at Peniel underscores a pivotal moment in the narrative where – before setting forth to claim his inheritance, the land that Israelites will occupy after the Jabbok River – Jacob finally understood that he encountered the presence of God and desperately needed God’s enabling if he were to successfully lay hold of his inheritance.

What must be noted is that in contrast to the highly detailed account of Isaac’s blessing to Jacob, the text does not describe any details about the blessing from God to Jacob at the Jabbok River.[12] Instead it goes to great length in describing the conflict. As such, we are drawn into this peculiar section of the text and ask why the details of the conflict supersede the details of the blessing. Perhaps it is because the most important part of the story is not in the blessing itself but exists in encountering God. We must remember that the historical narratives which make up the genre of the book of Genesis, particularly those regarding the patriarchs, served as reminders to the Israelite worshiper’s legacy and their inseparable bond with God, and as such, any outstanding literary devices take on special meaning. Hays writes:

The stories about the patriarch in Genesis function at two levels simultaneously. At the simplest level, they are to be read as they appear – that is, as stories about those heroic individuals whom God mysteriously and inscrutably called out of Mesopotamia and brought to the promise land…But at a second level, these stories map out a quite different terrain…Rather, what we witness in the book of Genesis is the delineation of Israel’s character, a character intimately tied to the very identity of God.[13]

Therefore, the story of Jacob’s encounter at the Jabbok, and his origins as the namesake of the nation of Israel, illustrate two important points for those who read this narrative, especially for those meditating upon their legacy as it is written in the Torah. Firstly, that God is ultimately the one who encounters and gives blessing. And secondly – as supported by the absence of a description of the blessing bestowed upon Jacob, yet with an emphasis on the struggle between God and Jacob – these blessings are given to those with strong a desire to claim their birthright from God, as Jacob had. Whereas those who despise their birthright and the covenant promises of God, like Esau, are unfit for God’s blessing and more importantly God’s presence.[14] Buechner writes, “The world is full of Esaus, of suckers, and there is no need to worry about giving a sucker an even break because the chances are that he will never know what hit him anyway.”[15] Moreover, Dillard and Longman III, in speaking of the historical nature of Genesis, write, “The function of history contained in Genesis is to provide a prologue and foundation of the fountain nation of Israel and the giving of the law in the book of Exodus.”[16] So we can affirm that this account of Jacob at the Jabbok River acts as crucial reminder to the Israelites of their faith heritage and speaks to the attitude in which they are to engage God in worship – one which through a passionate struggle desires to obtain victory solely from God. As the people of God look to their namesake, Israel (larXy, Yisra’el), a magnificent story exists to remind them of how specifically they have “prevailed” (lky, Yakol) and are to continue in this exercise of engaging God as their benefactor.

Jacob’s encounter at the Jabbok River also includes special significance as it correlates to an eschatological anticipation of Christ. As Israel moved towards its destiny in the Promise Land, so we move towards our destiny in awaiting the promise of Christ in the last days. And as Jacob endured the struggle to obtain victory from God, so we endure to obtain victory in Christ. The book of Revelation greatly emphasizes the importance of such a passionate engagement with God in the life of the church. In the beginning of Revelation, the Angel reproaches the church in Laodicea, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.”[17] Much like Esau, this church is accused of being passionless, in that they neither seek to be intentional in their faith nor do they recognize their need for God. Like Esau, they have squandered their birthright and as such, will be rejected by God as bearers of His legacy. The Angel continues, “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.”[18] In contrast to being rejected, God seeks to encounter those who overcome and are willing to encounter Him. The word used by the Angel for “overcome” (nikao, nikao, vv. 20-21) is used 15 times in the book of Revelation in regards to the believers as well as Christ. [19] And in the eschatological context of Revelation, wherever “nikao” is mentioned it implies endurance and an ensued blessing or gift. Gifts such as: being able to eat from the tree of life, being given hidden manna to eat, being clothed in white garments and being assured that the name of the victor will not be erased from the book of life, inheriting the things of God and being adopted as God’s son, and so forth as mentioned in Revelation.[20] Here the blessings are described in vivid imagery and great detail; yet however extravagant and symbolic the imagery may be, they are all blessings which speak to fellowship with God. Achtemeier et al. writes, “The visions of Revelation depict in graphic and fantastic ways the reasons not only that endurance was needed, but also that the dulled sensitivities of Christians needed to be sharpened: the world in which first-century Christians lived was not always what it seemed, and there were real threats, both subtle and obvious, to holding steadfastly in God.”[21] Consequently it is fitting to see Jacob’s struggle and how he “prevailed” (lky, yakol, Gen 32:28) at the Jabbok River as a precursor to the enduring nature of those who “overcome” (nikao, nikao, vv. 20-21) with Christ in the book of Revelation. The blessings of God are only fit for those who in passion are willing to contend to the very end despite great hardship.

We have analyzed Jacob’s story and drawn out how it holds great significance for the believers during the time in which Genesis 32 was written, down through the ages and to us today. God is connected with His passion. Doesn’t it say in the 10 Commandments that God is a jealous God who desires our desire for Him in worship?[22] Consequently we should be people who are connected with our deepest desires – the desire that tells us we should never commit intellectual, emotional, and spiritual suicide in compromise because we are recipients of something grand that can only come from God. Isn’t this part of what it means to love the Lord with all our heart, mind, and strength, and not feebly?[23] Should God encounter us in the dark of the night, would we be fully present? Would we struggle with this zeal or would we halfheartedly kneel down for the deathblow to be delivered? If we seek to be in accord with God’s will, how can such synergy occur if our will is absent, leaving God with nothing to be in accord with? How can we submit our will to God if we have no will in the first place? Would it not be an empty sacrifice? For those who seek a dedicated religious life, the encounter at the Jabbok poignantly illustrates how we cannot be those who overcome and prevail to receive the blessings of God if we ourselves are detached from our own personal struggles, live passionlessly, and never struggle with God. Lest we miss God’s presence, we must ask ourselves if we have forgotten our birthright and as such live tepidly.

Our identity must be reshaped as believers who truly “overcome” (nikao) and “prevail” (lky, yakol), and this happens only as God is in the midst of our struggle bestowing full victory upon us, then we can be considered as part of Israel (larXy, Yisra’el). Like Jacob’s encounter, full compliance to God and blessing results from the initiation of God, a struggle, passionate relentlessness, a crippling touch, and a dependence on God. Arends writes, “I don’t know that it ever feels good to have our own strength overcome. But if we want to be blessed, if we want to relocate from living in our own resources to resting in the middle of God’s goodness, power, and provision, sometimes a little dislocation is necessary. Just ask Jacob.”[24] It is through gritty struggle that God’s will is accomplished.

Jacob at the Jabbok River and Christ with the believers in Revelation offer us an approach to life that illustrates what God desires. As Jacob sparred with God, he fought with all his might, thus God was able to address him in a profound way which shaped and renamed his identity.[25] And as Christ struggled at Gethsemane – praying that the cup of suffering be taken away, being strengthened by an angel and being anguished even more – he ultimately endured the cross to attain victory over death as the perfect Lamb, bringing those who will endure with him into victory.[26] It is only through this process of two wills in full presence that allows for this complete and earnest exchange of encounter and blessing.[27] Buber writes of being fully present in the I-Thou encounter:

The You confronts me. But I enter into a direct relationship to it. Thus the relationship is at once being chosen and choosing, passive and active. For an action of the whole being does away with all partial actions and thus also with all sensations of action (which depend entirely on the limited nature of actions) – and hence it comes to resemble passivity. This is the activity of the human being who has become whole: it has been called not-doing, for nothing particular, nothing partial is at work in a man and thus nothing of him intrudes into the world. It is the whole human being, closed in its wholeness, at rest in its wholeness, that is active here, as the human being has become an active whole. When one has achieved steadfastness in this state, one is able to venture forth toward the supreme encounter.[28]

Here, the “I” is stretched out in full honestly and therefore there is no effort exerted in hiding from the “You” that confronts. In short, God cannot show up to bless us if we don’t fully show up. Here we see that true obedience and blessing happens as we become those who overcome in living a genuine practice of presence – the “I-Thou” encounter – which God so desired in Israel, Christ, and now us.

“Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome.”

Genesis 32:28

“To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.

Revelation 3:21.

Bibliography

Achtemeier, Paul J., Joel B. Green, and Marianne Meye Thompson. “The Genre of Revelation.” In Introducing the New Testament, 556-565. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2001.

Anderson, Gary A. “Joseph and the Passion of Our Lord.” In The Art of Reading Scripture, edited by Ellen F. Davis, and Richard B. Hays, 198-215. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2003.

Arends, Carolyn. “Here’s to All the Losers.” Christianity Today 52, no. 7 (July 2008): 50-50.

Buber, Martin. I and Thou, translated by Walter Kaufman. New York, NY: Scribners, 1970.

Buechner, Fredrick. The Magnificent Defeat. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 1985.

Curtis, Edward M. “Structure, style and context as a key to interpreting Jacob’s encounter at Peniel.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30, no. 2 (June 1987): 129-137.

Longman III, Tremper, and Raymond B. Dillard. “Genesis.” In An Introduction to the Old Testament, 38-62. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006.

---

[1] Luke 22:42 (NIV). Scripture quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from the New International Version (NIV).

[2] Genesis 25:26 (NIV).

[3] Fredrick Buechner, The Magnificent Defeat (New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 1985), 13.

[4] Genesis 32:9-24.

[5] Genesis 32:31

[6] Genesis 32:26.

[7] Genesis 32:28.

[8] Buechner, The Magnificent Defeat, 18.

[9] Genesis 32:29.

[10] Genesis 32:30.

[11] Curtis, Edward M. 1987. “Structure, style and context as a key to interpreting Jacob’s encounter at Peniel.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30, no. 2: 129-137.

[12] We are told the details of the time and place, how long the struggle lasted, the specific injury of Jacob’s hip, and the conversation between God and Jacob, however the details of the blessing are completely missing from this encounter. This stands in great contrast to Isaac’s blessing of Jacob, in Genesis 27:27-29, where the words and content of Isaac’s blessing are recorded.

[13] Richard B. Hays, “Reading Scripture in Light of the Resurrection,” in The Art of Reading Scripture, ed. Ellen F. Davis, and Richard B. Hays (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2003), 226.

[14] Genesis 25:34.

[15] Buechner, The Magnificent Defeat, 16.

[16] Tremper Longman III, and Raymond B. Dillard, “Genesis,” in An Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 55.

[17] Revelation 3:15-17.

[18] Revelation 3:20-21.

[19] Revelation 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21; 5:5; 6:2; 11:7; 12:11; 13:7; 15:2; 17:14; 21:7.

[20] Revelation 2:7, 17; 3:5; 21:7.

[21] Paul J. Achtemeier et al, “The Genre of Revelation,” in Introducing the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2001), 565.

[22] Exodus 20:4-6.

[23] Deuteronomy 6:5.

[24] Arends, Carolyn. 2008. “Here’s to All the Losers.” Christianity Today 52, no. 7: 50-50.

[25] Genesis 32:22-31.

[26] Matthew 26:36-46; Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:40-46. The accounts of Christ at Gethsemane show the great struggle that Christ himself had in preparing to be handed over to his impending death. It can be argued that in these passages we see Christ wrestling with God, yet afterwards relinquishing himself to be crucified and ultimately victorious.

[27] Luke 22:44 says that Christ “prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drop of blood falling to the ground.” The word “earnestly” (ekteno, Ektenos) also means fervently, intensely, and comes from the verb meaning to “stretch out the hand,” thus meaning to be stretched out. In this, there is no hiding of motives, and like Jacob who was intense in his struggle with God, Christ stretches himself out before God in all honestly before he is capable of moving on to drink from the cup of suffering.

[28] Martin Buber, I and Thou, trans. Walter Kaufman (New York, NY: Scribners, 1970), 124-125.

BTI 503 OT Genre Paper

Solomon Chan

old testament: hosea 3:1-5

And the Lord said to me, “Go again, love a woman who is loved by another man and is an adulteress, even as the Lord loves the children of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love cakes of raisins.”  So I bought her for fifteen shekels of silver and a homer and a lethech of barley.  And I said to her, “You must dwell as mine for many days.  You shall not play the whore, or belong to another man; so will I also be to you.”  For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods.  Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the Lord and to his goodness in the latter days.

Hosea 3:1-5[1]

The book of the prophet Hosea is one in which God demonstrates His intimate and tender love for His bride, Israel, despite their continual unfaithfulness and rebellion.  God signifies His relationship with His wandering lover through the story of Hosea and Gomer in the first three chapters of Hosea.  Calling His prophet to take a whore for a wife, Hosea comes to experience firsthand the pain and betrayal felt by God when His people turn away from Him.  It is in chapter three of Hosea where the culmination of God’s unending love becomes manifest, as God commands Hosea to buy back Gomer and take her again as his wife, though she has left him and given the most precious parts of her to men other than her husband.  Hosea begins an entirely new marriage relationship with Gomer, one based on intimacy and desire rather than legalism and obligation; Hosea’s redemption of his wife in Hosea 3:1-5 portrays the intimate relationship God desires with His bride, the church, and points towards the day when the new covenant will be fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ.

As wonderful as periods of peace and prosperity are, it was often during these times that Israel strayed away from God.  The historical context of Hosea is no different.  The beginning of the prophet Hosea’s ministry occurred during a time of prosperity and expansion in both the North and the South.  Israel’s time of comfort and ease led to corruption and idolatry, and the people forgot their need of Yahweh.  Hosea’s prophetic voice spoke mainly to the northern kingdom, though he addressed both Israel and Judah throughout his ministry.  His ministry was active between 750-715 B.C., and probably began late during the reign of Jeroboam II in the North and Uzziah in the South, and ended early in Hezekiah’s rule of the South.[2] There were many political factors surrounding the backdrop of Hosea, mainly involving the country of Assyria.  During the time of Hosea’s prophecy, Assyria was busying itself with what was going on around its own borders.  As a result, the frequent incursions of Assyria into Israel were temporarily ceased, and Jeroboam was able to expand Israel’s territory and flourish economically.[3] However, after the death of Jeroboam, Israel was plagued by political instability; six kings were toppled in thirty years, three of whom ruled two years or less, four of whom were assassinated, and one who was deposed.[4] During the monarchial tumult, Assyria began a resurgence of power, and a fight broke out between Judah and Israel.  It was during the time of Assyria’s preoccupation with its own borders that the prophecy of Hosea began.  Economic prosperity and peace led to Israel falling away from her God, and began a time of disgusting syncretism with Canaanite religious practices.

The Canaanites practiced a fertility cult that gave credit for all of life to their god Baal.  During Israel’s time of relative peace, they began to accept and intermingle with the religion of the Canaanites.  The Israelites became so engrossed in the Baal Canaanite fertility cult that Yahweh and Baal began to have no distinction in the eyes of the Israelites.  They believed that it was Baal who provided them with an abundance of crops and animals, and so took part in the system of prostitution in the pagan temples.[5] It was Baal who was worshiped as the giver of life for both the land and for procreation.  Israel was not only prostituting their bodies, but they were also prostituting their souls.  They forgot the covenant God had made with them, and became a people who whored themselves out to other gods that were not even real.  “Young women ready to be married sought fertility by offering their virginity to Baal by having intercourse with men in the temple precincts.”[6] It was in these Baal temples and shrines that worshipers sought to increase their favor with Baal by having sexual intercourse with the priests and priestesses of the temples.  Doing so would supposedly secure good crops and fertility.  Men and women alike went to the temples to practice this sort of fornication.[7] When God instructed Hosea to take a whore for a wife and have children of whoredom,[8] it was to literally reflect the whoredom Israel was committing.  Hosea was to reflect Yahweh, and Gomer was to reflect Israel.  Before the book of Hosea, there had been no use of the concept of whoredom to characterize a cult in previous ancient Near Eastern literature.[9] Hosea was to learn firsthand the great pain and costly love that God Himself experienced for His people.

The book of Hosea does not give a lot of background as to Hosea’s calling as a prophet, or to his early life.  God’s first recorded words to Hosea were, “Go, take yourself a wife of whoredom and have children of whoredom, for the land commits great whoredom by forsaking the Lord.”[10] Hosea’s call to marriage is somewhat shocking, because God is instructing His prophet to commit an immoral act in taking a whore for a wife.  His marriage though is the centerpiece of his prophecy.  It was his demonstration of God’s covenant love, as well as how Hosea understood “the divine experience of being rejected, having to judge and discipline, and then effecting reconciliation.”[11] Hosea’s marriage is comparable to what the commissioning visions did for Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.  It is thought that Hosea had already received his call to prophecy prior to the writing of the book of Hosea; hence, attention is drawn more to and centered upon his marriage.[12] “No one before had spoken so repeatedly of God’s love for his people, and no one had cast divine grace in the vocabulary of marital intimacy.”[13]

The book of Hosea is a prophecy that consists of an assembly of prophetic oracles.  The book is predominantly poetic, with only two major sections of prose oracles, one of which is chapter three.[14] Hosea alternates between speeches of judgment and restoration, demonstrating a parallelism throughout the text that follows an AB // AB structure.[15] In chapter three specifically, the judgment occurs during the first four verses, while the restoration takes place in the fifth verse.  Chapter three would also be described as a salvation speech, because it speaks of a day when the Israelites will seek the Lord and David their king, which is a reference to Christ.  If it were a reference to the Davidic monarchy, the text would read, “the house of David.”[16] The book of Hosea also makes great use of imagery, simile, and metaphor to describe God and Israel.  The primary images used are that of a husband and an unfaithful wife, a parent and child, and agriculture.  There is a notable shift from third person to first person in chapter three.  The author has moved from speaking biographically in chapters one and two to directly speaking himself in chapter three.  As Hosea begins to speak, he reveals that God has commanded him to go again and take a whore for a wife.[17]

There is much debate over whether the woman described in chapter three is the same woman, Gomer, described in chapter one.  Hosea is commanded to, “Go again, love a woman who is loved by another man and is an adulteress,”[18] whereas in chapter one, it is explicitly stated that Gomer is the woman that Hosea takes for a wife.[19] However, given the parallelism of the book, it would not follow the AB // AB structure of the text if the woman in chapter three were not Gomer.  It would also go against the theme of covenant within Hosea, given that Hosea is a reflection of God and Gomer one of Israel.  God would be going against His characteristics of faithfulness and steadfast love if He were to simply forsake Israel and move on to another people.  Israel is God’s chosen people; therefore, despite Israel’s waywardness, God will always act to bring her back, even though it will involve judgment.  The judgment gives way to restoration.  Questions arise over whether the story of Hosea’s marriage is literally historical, or whether it is simply parabolic/allegorical.  It seems odd that Hosea would be able to credibly tell such a story of Israel’s spiritual adultery if he was really happily married.  It would also not make a lot of sense for Hosea to portray his wife as a whore if she was actually a woman of virtue.[20] Continuity is drawn between chapters one and three by the fact that the woman Hosea takes as a wife in chapter three is already an adulteress, and as well as the use of the word “again” in 3:1.[21]

An exploration of the original meaning behind some of the Hebrew words begins to help shed light on the original meaning of the text.  There are several words that are significant in the portrayal of God’s covenant love for Israel.  In 3:1, the word “love” is translated to the Hebrew word בהא (ahab), which carries the meaning of “to love, desire, delight, be beloved, be a passionate lover, delight, a tenderness of affection.”[22] It is used to describe the close relationship in marriage, and also “denotes a strong emotional attachment for…the object of love.”[23] ahab is rarely used to describe physical intimacy, but can reflect sexual love within God’s laws of marriage.[24] The use of בהא is one of the most significant words used in chapter three.  Given the strong meaning, it shows how deeply Hosea was called to love Gomer even though she was unfaithful, reflecting the deep love God had for the Israelites despite their waywardness.  In 3:1, the word “adulteress” is translated to הנז (zanah), within which there is the meaning “engage in prostitution, have forbidden involvement with false gods, illicit sexual activity particularly initiated by women, figuratively describes spiritual adultery between Israel and pagan gods.”[25] The dual meaning within zanah carries much significance; it describes at the same time Gomer’s sexual immorality and Israel’s spiritual harlotry represented by Gomer.  The final Hebrew word that gives great weight to the meaning within chapter three is in 3:5 for the word “return.”  The Hebrew word בךש (sub) is used, and it carries the meaning of “return, turning back, cease from the worship of idols, essentially denotes movement back to the point of departure, often used in reference to the return from the Exile.”[26] Israel would return to where they departed from, to the Lord their God.  It is interesting to note that the word is also used to refer to the return from the Exile, and foreshadows the period during which Israel would be decimated because of their spiritual adultery.  Gomer and Hosea were to go through a period where they abstained from sexual relations,[27] which is compared to a time when Israel would dwell without “king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods.”[28] It would be after this period of purification that Gomer and Hosea would be re-united as one flesh, and Israel would return to God and His goodness.

Hosea’s marriage is central to his prophecy, which also helps the reader understand the original meaning of the text.  Reading the text in a straightforward manner, God told Hosea to take a whore for a wife to symbolize His own relationship with Israel.  Though the point has been previously argued in this paper that Hosea’s marriage is historical, one can see that whether the marriage is historical, symbolic, or allegorical, it represents God’s relationship with Israel in all of His revulsion and love for the people He had made a covenant with.[29] Five times within Hosea does the restoration of God’s covenant relationship with Israel occur, giving light to the overall intent of the book:  “The persistent presence of Yahweh’s love despite his people’s endemic waywardness.  A new marriage awaits Israel in God’s time and on God’s terms.  Because Hosea knew this, he had the courage to rebuild the relationship that Gomer had shattered, and to demonstrate both the reality and the cost of such reconciliation.”[30] It is spouses and parents who know a unique pain that comes from their spouse and/or children, and it is through such a relationship that God demonstrates His covenant love for His people.

Marriage between two people involves the making of covenant.  When a man and a woman take vows, they are promising each other that they will care for and love each other until death do them part.  Central to Hosea’s prophecy is a marriage bond that holds despite betrayal.[31] When Hosea marries Gomer a second time in chapter three, God uses their restored marriage to represent a new covenant that He is making with His people.  While it is a renewal of the old covenant in keeping Israel as God’s chosen people, it also a foreshadowing of the new covenant that will come to fulfillment in Christ.  “Hosea’s marriage, where many tragedies were overcome by loving discipline and forgiveness, became the drama of the inexhaustible love of Israel’s God.”[32] The love that Hosea shows Gomer in taking her as his wife for a second time, going so far as to buy her back from the slavery she entered, characterizes the love of God for the Israelites.  “Love a woman who is loved by another man and is an adulteress, even as the Lord loves the children of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love cakes of raisins.”[33] The use of marriage implies the start of a new covenant, as previously Israel had mainly understood their relationship to God in terms of law and keeping the Law.  It is the intimacy found within marriage that makes the covenant between God and Israel something new.  While it does not completely negate the Law, marriage adds a dimension of tenderness, intimacy, and commitment that cannot be found solely in a legalistic contract.  God desired to truly become Israel’s beloved husband and not simply her legal husband, and engage in a relationship of mutual intimacy, love, and loyalty.[34] It was vital for Hosea to take Gomer as a wife a second time for the Israelites to understand the kind of relationship that God truly desired with them, and point to a day when the new covenant would encompass all of God’s church, and be solidified in the person of Jesus Christ.

“Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord, their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the Lord and to his goodness in the latter days.”[35] As stated previously, the reference to David points to Jesus Christ, who will come from the Davidic line in later days.  If the text were a reference to the Davidic monarchy, it would likely have been phrased “to the house of David.”  It is no mistake that “the Lord their God” is placed right beside “David their king.”  Their close proximity supports the last verse in chapter three to be a messianic prophecy.  Indeed, the culmination of the new covenant that God is weaving comes to fruition in 3:5.  Though Israel is rejected, they will be called to return, to בךש, and know the God of the universe, and the seed who has come through David’s line, Jesus Christ.[36]

Hosea 3 presents the modern reader with the question of whether or not God will continue to love a person if they were to commit sin or turn their back on God, particularly Christians.  While Hosea’s restoration of his wife provides a clear picture of redeeming love in the face of sin, once God’s steadfast love is realized, the question then becomes, how will one respond to the love that has been given to them by God?  In loving Gomer, Hosea also deeply loved a woman that society now would typically look down upon.  Christians are called to love the unlovable, to love those who need it most.[37] Hosea is a call for the church to embrace her identity as God’s beloved given in the new covenant, and extend the love that has been given her to others.

The contemporary reader will probably be quick to look to issues of sexuality within the story of Hosea and Gomer.  It would be foolish and naïve to not recognize that Hosea 3 brings up issues of whether or not divorce and the possibility of re-marriage is okay given an instance of infidelity, how to deal with issues of infidelity within a marriage, and how to deal with past sexual histories in marriage.  There are no easy answers to such instances, and one would be a fool to pretend they could precisely interpret Scripture for exact answers.  Perhaps attention should be given more to the concept of forgiveness and restoration more so than condemnation and anger, for it is love that is always sure within the gospel.  It would be easy to overlook the concept of covenant love, and instead give an overly amount of attention to how Hosea and Gomer’s relationship is handled.  If too much attention is given to minute detail, it would be easy for the reader to miss the main message of Hosea 3, that while there are consequences for sin, God’s love is relentless and steadfast; The person of Jesus Christ has solidified the new covenant with God’s church that takes shape in Hosea 3, securing forgiveness for a rebellious people.

When Hosea takes Gomer back as his wife for a second time after she has run off to other men, he paints a painfully beautiful picture of the deep and costly love that God has for His bride, the church.  Though God’s character of judgment cannot be ignored, His relentless and pursuing love will not allow Him to forsake His people.  Hosea’s marriage gives a unique picture of the kind of intimate relationship that God desires with the church.  While the church has been graciously given a taste of that relationship through Christ on earth, she will not fully realize the inexhaustible love and grace poured out upon her until the Second Coming, when Christ returns and all things are made new.  Until that day, Hosea 3:1-5 plays a part in helping the church understand how God loves her intimately, and what God desires with her.  The new covenant takes shape, and the hope of Christ burns through the heart for the day of the wedding feast of the Lamb.

---

[1] All Scripture references are from the English Standard Version (ESV) unless otherwise noted.

[2] Tremper Longman, III and Raymond B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, 2^nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2006), 400.

[3] David A. Hubbard, Hosea (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 24.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Gary V. Smith, The NIV Application Commentary: Hosea/Amos/Micah (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2001), 26-27.

[6] Duane Priebe, “A Holy God, an Idolatrous People, and Religious Pluralism: Hosea 1-3,” Currents in Theology and Mission 23, no. 2 (Apr 1996): 127.

[7] Irene K. Rallis, “Nuptial Imagery in the Book of Hosea: Israel as the Bride of Yahweh,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 34, nos. 2-3 (1990): 198.

[8] Hosea 1:2.

[9] Irene K. Rallis, “Nuptial Imagery in the Book of Hosea: Israel as the Bride of Yahweh,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 34, nos. 2-3 (1990): 203.

[10] Irene K. Rallis, “Nuptial Imagery in the Book of Hosea: Israel as the Bride of Yahweh,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 34, nos. 2-3 (1990): 203.

[11] David A. Hubbard, Hosea (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 26.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid., 29.

[14] Tremper Longman, III & Raymond Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, 2^nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing: 2006), 403.

[15] Charles H. Silva, “The Literary Structure of Hosea 1-3,” Biblotheca Sacra, 164 (Apr-Jun 2007): 182.

[16] Eugen J. Pentiuc, “Messianism in the Book of Hosea in the Light of Patristic Interpretations,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 46, nos. 1-2 (Spr-Sum 2001): 37.

[17] Hosea 3:1.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Hosea 1:3.

[20] Duane A. Garrett, “An Introduction to Hosea,” Criswell Theological Review, 7 (Fall 1993): 9.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Spiros Zodhiates, Warren Baker, Tim Rake, and David Kemp, eds., Hebrew-Greek Keyword Study Bible New International Version (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 1996).

[23] Ibid.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Spiros Zodhiates, Warren Baker, Tim Rake, and David Kemp, eds., Hebrew-Greek Keyword Study Bible New International Version (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 1996).

[26] Ibid.

[27] Hosea 3:3.

[28] Hosea 3:4.

[29] Tremper Longman III & Raymond Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, 2^nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2006): 403.

[30] David A. Hubbard, Hosea (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 21.

[31] Gary W. Light, “The New Covenant in the Book of Hosea,” Review and Expositor 90, no. 2 (Spring 1993): 219.

[32] Irene K. Rallis, “Nuptial Imagery in the Book of Hosea: Israel as the Bride of Yahweh,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 34, nos. 2-3 (1990): 201.

[33] Hosea 3:1.

[34] Gary W. Light, “The New Covenant in the Book of Hosea,” Review and Expositor 90, no. 2 (Spring 1993): 225.

[35] Hosea 3:5.

[36] Eugen J. Pentiuc, “Messianism in the Book of Hosea in Light of Patristic Interpretations,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 46, nos. 1-2 (Spr-Sum 2001): 37.

[37] Gary V. Smith, The NIV Application Commentary: Hosea/Amos/Micah (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2001), 77-78.

What is this thing?

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard us ask each other that we would love to read our papers.  So, this is an experiment to try to do something about it.  You can post anonymously…no one will know who you are, so no need to feel self-conscious about your writing (which if you’re at MHGS, it means you’re an amazing writer anyways).  If you feel okay with adding your name, you can post it on here and attach it at the end.