 |
| Israelites Gathering Manna |
Lectionary Proper 20(A)
Texts: Exodus (15:27-16:1), 16:2-15; and Psalm 105:1-6, 37-45
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.
