Sunday, September 24, 2023

Sermon: In Plenty and In Want

Israelites Gathering Manna

Lectionary Proper 20(A)

Texts: Exodus (15:27-16:1), 16:2-15; and Psalm 105:1-6, 37-45

(See also Robert Alter's translation of Exodus text used in sermon, with P and non-P sections differentiated.)



Complaining: Bad or Otherwise?

Complaining. To our ears complaining has a distinctly negative connotation. Parents implore and try to teach their children not to complain. We don’t like listening to people complain. We might even tend to see those who complain as somehow “less than” and not having sufficient virtue or character. We read a text like that found in Philippians 2:14-15, “Do all things without murmuring and arguing, so that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, in which you shine like stars in the world,”[1] and conclude that the Bible uniformly frowns at complaining and valorizes patient endurance amidst difficulties.

But is this an accurate reading of what is found in scripture?

As you might guess, the answer is no. There are instances where complaining is not looked down upon and elicits favorable response. Our Exodus reading is one of those instances. Another instance is found in Acts 6, where the Hellenist Christians complained that they were not being treated equally as the Jewish Christians, and this led to the appointment of deacons to assist with equitable distribution of food. Another example is the Psalms in which many of them contain words of complaints toward God.

On the other hand, some instances of complaining are met with disapproval and even divine judgment. In the book of Numbers, there are several complaint stories that seem to mirror the complaint stories found in Exodus. Both books contain complaint stories about lack of water and food. But whereas in Exodus God does not appear to express any or much disapproval, in Numbers, even as God responds to their complaints by providing what they demand, God disapproves of the complaining and repercussions are experienced.

It is not possible in one sermon to cover all the “complaining” texts in the Bible. So, I am limiting the discussion today to just the present Exodus passage. But even this small piece of text has complicated literary and theological histories.

A Brief Literary History of the Pentateuch

The first point to be noted is that the stories in the Pentateuch, including the Exodus stories, were originally oral traditions. There were many variations of each story, no different than stories found throughout human civilizations up to the present day. They may have been recorded into writing at different periods of time, but most scholars today agree that the form in which we have them did not get written down and arranged until the period of the Babylonian exile or after that.

The second point to note is that in the Pentateuch, the content is arranged so that the giving of the Torah, what we call the Law or the Ten Commandments, is at the center and the climax of these books. This is the revelation of God and the establishment of the covenant with Israel. This is the event that defines the people and through which everything else in the books is read and interpreted.

When the time of the final arrangement and editing of the books and when the central theme are taken together, the third point to note follows. The editors, most likely from the priestly class that were sent into exile and now having returned, looked back into their history and they interpreted their history through the lens of exile. They interpreted the failure of Israel to follow God’s instructions, the Torah, as the key to why they were conquered and exiled. As the literary class and the theologians of the Jewish people, they arranged and recorded what they believed to be important in explaining the exile and offer what they believed would help them re-establish their nation and prevent them from being conquered again.

From a literary perspective, most current scholars see multiple sources being weaved together to form these stories. In the text that we read today scholars recognize a weaving together of two main sources. Although there is some disagreement on the exact identification of each of the sources, a priestly source (P) and a non-priestly source (non-P) are identified.[2] The non-P source is arguably an older tradition of the two.

Multiple Interpretations

Non-Priestly Source

The non-P portion of today’s text is rather short. Many of the details that we might assume are part of the original story are absent from it. Here is the redacted version.[3]

And they came to Elim where there were twelve springs of water and seventy date palms, and they encamped there by the water.

And the Lord said to Moses, “Look, I am about to rain down bread for you from the heavens, and the people shall go out and gather each day’s share on that day, so that I may test them whether they will go by My teaching or not. And it will happen, on the sixth day, that they will prepare what they bring in, and it will be double what they gather each day.” And in the morning there was a layer of dew around the camp. And the layer of dew lifted, and look, on the surface of the wilderness—stuff fine, flaky, fine as frost on the ground.

And the Israelites saw, and they said to each other, “Man hu, What is it?” For they did not know what it was. And Moses said to them, “It is the bread that the Lord has given you as food.”

There is nothing about murmuring or complaining. And there is nothing about quail. It is only an etiological tale about the manna (and also the Sabbath day rest, as the rest of the story continues following today’s lection). The actual “tests” that God asks of the people are also told in the text that is past today’s reading. I will describe each one briefly as each test is noted.

This setting is one of plenty: the Israelites are situated at an oasis with plenty of both food and water. In this version, God initiates the giving of bread, the manna. God gives it to “test” the Israelites. The test is whether the people will listen to and follow God’s instructions. The word Torah, which is usually translated as “law” in English, means broadly, instructions. Torah is related to the Hebrew word yara which means to instruct. The point of the Torah is to instruct and to teach. One of the themes of this non-P version of the manna story is that even in plenty, people need to work. Another theme is that even in plenty, one should carefully manage resources and recognize God as the source of all provisions, i.e., they were to gather twice as much on the sixth day for there would be none on the seventh. Some of the people, it turns out, failed to gather twice as much and went out to gather on the seventh day, and found none, failing the test.

Priestly Source

The priestly editors expanded the story using material from other traditions. This editing process changed the setting to a wilderness; hence the narrative has text that moves them away from the oasis at Elim. And it is now the people murmuring against Moses and Aaron that causes God to respond. And because the people mentioned the fleshpots (or the pots of meat), quail is introduced into the narrative.

It is still an etiological story about manna and there is still a test that God initiates to see if the people will follow instructions or not. But now the test revolves around scarcity and hoarding. Some of the people failed this test by gathering more than they needed for one day and hoping it would carry over to the next. But they found the manna rotted with worms on the following morning.

A Combined Narrative: Development of Archetypes

One of the purposes of editing the narratives in this way is to fit the entire Exodus story into an archetypal tale of birth, growth, and maturity. The ancient nation of Israel is birthed through their deliverance from Egypt and their passage through the waters of the Red Sea. Today’s text follows immediately after that. They are still in infancy, unsure of who they are and even more uncertain about the God that delivered them. Is this God like the gods of the Egyptian pantheon? Or is this God different? Why should they trust this God over other gods? Perhaps the deliverance that Yahweh brought about was merely a power contest with the Egyptian pantheon. Now that Yahweh had won, did he have any use for the people? Or were they just pawns to be sacrificed? Is that why they were directed into the wilderness?

The Israelites are still newborns and they have not yet learned much about Yahweh or his instructions, which in turn will reveal his character to them. So, at this point murmuring is an entirely reasonable response to what they see as Yahweh’s doings.

Once the covenant is given at Sinai and God’s character and intentions for Israel are revealed, things change. The content and purpose of ancient covenants between sovereigns and their subjects are well attested. The sovereign guarantees certain things to his or her subjects and the subjects have responsibilities toward the sovereign. God guarantees care for the Israelites, and their responsibility is to trust and follow the instructions given.

What happens post-Sinai and the covenant are stories of new murmurings, complaints, and grumblings. There are several examples found in the book of Numbers. But now, because God has guaranteed their care through the mechanism of a covenant, their murmurings are seen to be groundless and a lack of trust in the covenant. Hence God’s response to the murmurings are more harsh, even in those instances where God gives the people what they ask for.

We don’t have time today to go further into inquiring if this is an accurate portrayal of God, or if this is a record of how the priestly editors interpreted their history and taught lessons from it. (The stories and texts of the Hebrew scriptures are not as straightforward in interpretation as many may have once thought.)

There are so many more angles and paths that could be explored with this text, but time and focus prevent us from going into them.

Multivalent Scripture

As I bring together some of the wide-ranging paths that I took today, here are a few things to think about.

First, the Bible is multivalent, which is a fancy term for saying that the texts of the Bible can be interpreted and applied in many ways. We only scratched the surface of how biblical texts have come to us in its present form. Texts can contradict one another and even interpretations from a single block of text could be contradictory. The issue of murmuring and complaining is one example.

Second, I think the main “test” that God brings to each person is whether to trust God and acknowledge God as sole provider. Whatever the circumstance may be: plenty or in need, safety or facing harm, or in midst of uncertainty and confusion, do we trust in God as the source of all power and being, in God’s generosity, and in God’s love and care? This is the essence of the story of the Fall of Adam and Eve, and this is the temptation of Jesus, where he overcame.

The final point relates to both the first and the second. Our interpretations of scripture and what it means to us should always affirm God’s character as (for Christians) revealed through Jesus Christ in his life, death, and resurrection. Anything else, no matter how “Christian” or “biblical” it may sound, or where it comes from, or how long it has been held as truth, should be questioned at least. And rejected if it contradicts the way of selfless and self-sacrificing love. But this is to be done in community, so that a single person’s opinion doesn’t send them off in a wildly wrong direction.

Bibliography

Alter, R. (2019). The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Dozeman, T. B. (2009). Exodus (Eerdmans Critical Commentary). Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Enns, P. (2021). Exodus for Normal People. Perkiomenville, PA: The Bible for Normal People.

Fox, E. (2000). The Five Books of Moses (The Shocken Bible, Volume 1). New York, NY: Schoken Books.



[1] New Revised Standard Version, Updated Edition (NRSVue).

[2] Dozeman, Thomas B. Exodus (Eerdmans Critical Commentary)

[3] Text by Alter, Robert. The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary. Non-P identification by Dozeman.

No comments: