1 Chronicles 27 – A
list of the people, heads of families, commanders of thousands, hundreds and
officers—divisions numbered 24,000. Each one is assigned a month. Names
that pop out are Banaiah, son of priest Jehoiada, commander of the third
month’s division. He was commander of the Thirty. Asahel, Joab’s brother was in
charge of the 4th.
Leaders of the tribes are named: Eliezer—Reubenites;
Shephatiah—Simeonites; Hashabiah—Levites; Zadok for Aaron; Elihu (a brother of
David)—Judah; Omri—Issachar; Ishmaiah—Zebulun; Jerimoth—Naphtali;
Hoshea—Ephraimites; Joel—Half-tribe of Manasseh; Iddo—Half-tribe in Gilead;
Jaasiel—Benjamin; Azarel—Dan. They are not fully counted because Joab refused (27:23).
Those in charge of the king’s treasuries in the country, in
the cities, in the villages and in the towers; those in charge of the farming,
the vineyard, the care of the grapes and wine cellars, olive and sycamore
trees, over the stores of oil and the herds, over the camels and flocks—all
these stewards are named.
Other big names in his administration: Jonathan (his
uncle)—counselor; Jehiel—attended king’s sons; Ahithophel, then Jehoiada and
Abiathar—counselors; Haushai—king’s friend; Joab—commander of the army.
1 Chronicles 28 – David assembles everyone and talks about
the planned Temple: The reason David
cannot build it is because God told him, “You shall not build a house for my
name, for you are a warrior and have shed blood” (28:3). Solomon shall
build it. His charge to Solomon is as follows: “know the God of you father, and
serve him with single mind and willing heart for the Lord searches every mind,
and understands every plan and thought. If you seek him, he will be found by you,
but if you forsake him, he will abandon you forever” (28:9). He gives
Solomon the detailed plan and all the supplies.
1 Chronicles 29 – All
the provision, which David had made for the coming reign of his son is reviewed.
The leaders and people make their own offerings. Then David says the following:
“But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able to make this
freewill offering? For all things come from you, and of your own have we given
you. For we are aliens and transients before you,
as were all our ancestors; our days
on the earth are like a shadow, and there is no hope. O Lord our God, all
this abundance that we have provided for building you a house for your holy
name comes from you hand and is all your own.
I know, my God, that you search the heart, and take pleasure in
uprightness; in the uprightness of my heart I have freely offered all these
things, and now I have seen your people , . . keep forever such purposes and thoughts in the hearts of your people,
and direct their hearts toward you” (29:14-18).
The next day they offer sacrifices – huge sacrifices: 1,000
bulls, 1,000 rams, and 1,000 lambs “and they ate and drank before the Lord on
that day with great joy” (29:22). David’s son Solomon is re-consecrated. Zadok
is made priest. These acts of David come
from the written records of Samuel, the seer; Nathan, the prophet and Gad, the
seer.
Ecclesiastes 10 –
A lot of unrelated sayings – not very meaningful
Ecclesiastes 11 –
“[D]ivied your investments among many places, for you do not know what risks
might lie ahead” (11:2). This sounds like pretty
modern thinking!
“Just as you cannot understand the path of the wind or the
mystery of a tiny baby growing in its mother’s womb, so you cannot understand
the activity of God, who does all things” (11:5).
“Light is sweet; how pleasant to see a new day dawning. When
people live to be very old, let them rejoice in every day of life. But let them
also remember there will be many dark days. Everything still to come is
meaningless” (11:7-8).
“Rejoice in your youth, you who are young; let your heart
give you joy in your young days” (11:9).
Ecclesiastes 12 – Remember
your creator in the days of your youth. “To sum up the whole matter: fear God,
and keep his commandments, since this is the whole duty of man. For God will
call all hidden deeds, good or bad, to judgment” (12:13-14).
Augustine (354-439)
On the Profit or Benefit of Believing
10 - But, passing
over in the meanwhile the depth of knowledge, to deal with you as I think I
ought to deal with my intimate friend; that is, as I have myself power, not as
I have wondered at the power of very learned men; there are three kinds of error, whereby men err, when they read
anything. I will speak of them one by one.
The first kind is,
wherein that which is false is thought true, whereas the writer thought otherwise.
A second kind,
although not so extensive, yet not less hurtful, when that, which is false
is
thought true,
yet the thought is the same as that of the writer.
A third kind, when
from the writing of another some truth is understood, whereas the writer
understood it not. In which kind there is no little profit, rather, if you
consider carefully, the whole entire fruit of reading.
An instance of the first kind is, as if any one, for
example, should say and believe that Rhadamanthus hears and judges the causes
of the dead in the realms below, because he has so read in the strain of Maro.
For this one errs in two ways: both in that he believes a thing not to be
believed, and also in that he, whom he reads, is not to be thought to have
believed it. I think he’s referring to stories created
by authors but not “believed in” by them like the story of Rhadamanthus, judge
of the underworld.
The second kind may be thus noticed: if one, because
Lucretius writes that the soul is formed of atoms, and that after death it is
dissolved into the same atoms and perishes, were to think this to be true and what
he ought to believe. For this one also is not less wretched, if, in a matter of
so great moment, he has persuaded himself of that which is false, as certain;
although Lucretius, by whose books he has been deceived, held this opinion. For
what does it profit this one to be assured of the meaning of the author,
whereas he has chosen him to himself not so as through him to escape error, but
so as with him to err. Here he is saying that while
Lucretius believed that everything – man included – was made of material atoms
and would eventually return to that in a simpler state. Augustine believes that
this is false though the author definitely believed it to be true. Many moderns
would say that Augustine has done just this, persuaded himself erroneously to
believe that the soul of man is eternal and will never die.
An instance suited to the third kind is, if one, after having read in the books of Epicurus some place wherein
he praises continence, were to assert that he had made the chief good to
consist in virtue, and that
therefore he is not to be blamed. For how is this man injured by the error
of Epicurus, what though Epicurus
believe that bodily pleasure is the chief good of man: whereas he has not
surrendered up himself to so base and hurtful an opinion, and is pleased with
Epicurus for no other reason, than that he thinks him not to have held
sentiments which ought not to be held. This
error is not only natural to man, but often also most worthy of a man. The person “interpreting” Epicurus here, and telling others
of him, is clearly mistaken in Augustine’s eyes; Epicurus did not teach that
virtue was the chief good but rather that man should live according to his
pleasures. But Augustine is trying to find an example of people using
literature or philosophy that they really didn’t understand as the author meant
it to be understood, but who did this in a sincere way that actually brought
some good to them.
For what, if word were brought to me, concerning some one
whom I loved, that, when now he was of bearded age, he had said, in the hearing
of many, that he was so pleased with boyhood and childhood, as even to swear
that he wished to live after the same fashion, and that that was so proved to
me, as that I should be shameless to deny it: I should not, should I, seem
worthy of blame, if I thought that, in saying this, he wished to show, that he
was pleased with the innocence, and with the temper of mind alien from those
desires in which the race of man is wrapped up, and from this circumstance
should love him yet more and more, than I used to love him before; although
perhaps he had been foolish enough to love in the age of children a certain
freedom in play and food, and an idle ease?
For suppose that he had died after this report had reached
me, and that I had been unable to make
any inquiry of him, so as for him to open his meaning; would there be any one
so shameless as to be angry with me, for praising the man's purpose and wish,
through those very words which I had heard? What, that even a just judge of
matters would not hesitate perhaps to praise my sentiment and wish, in that
both I was pleased with innocence, and, as man of man, in a matter of doubt, preferred to think well, when it was in my
power also to think ill?
So, if you read the Old Testament,
and get good from it even though you do not know exactly how to interpret it,
it is harmless, provided it does not lead you into sin.
No comments:
Post a Comment