When Scripture speaks of fulfillment, it does not mean”an almost photographic correspondence with the past.” Rather it means an abiding force of God’s providence in which Jesus is fulfillment because the whole of God’s work in Israel is realized through him. When Joseph, Mary, and Jesus flee Herod’s wrath and go to Israel, Hosea says this happened “that what the Lord said through the prophet might be fulfilled: ‘Out of Egypt I called my son’” (Mt 2:15). He refers to the past and God’s lament over Israel’s faithfulness when He called them out of Egypt and referred to the whole people as His son. Although the past does not usually await fulfillment, but we can look at the Exodus from Egypt as a moment in the past that awaits fulfillment in the future life of Israel. We can look at the past to find moments of God’s providence to find a pattern of divine love to come. Although the journey from Exodus was one form of fulfillment, they look forward to a final exodus that frees them from sin and death through the deliverance of John the Baptist and Jesus. Therefore, the citation of Hosea “out of Egypt I have called my son,” find fulfillment in the return of the Holy family from Egypt. We do not look at these words alone, but rather as part of a larger whole unit from which they are drawn and in the context of the infancy narratives. They speak of a new exodus and articulate that Israel is “saved by Emmanuel – God with us.” Therefore, we must “know and read the whole of Israel’s past as an announcement and a type of all that came to pass in Jesus, our Emmauel,” to understand fulfillment.

The opening chapters of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke address the elements of the Old Testament narrative we discussed in class. One theme that sticks out is the promise to Mary and Elizabeth that they will conceive a child, despite the odds being against this occurrence. This reminds me of when Jacob and Rachel, as well as Abraham and Sarah, struggled to conceive yet were eventually blessed with child from God. Another part of the Gospels is the circumcision of Elizabeth’s child because this draws on the tradition established in Genesis. Lastly, the Gospel of Matthew explains the lineage of Abraham that flows in the time of David and then Jesus. This lineage further fulfills the promise to David that he will have great descendants that will occupy the throne.

After reading the chapters in Numbers, I think the dissatisfaction and greediness of the Israelites leads to their downfall. No matter what God provides for them or where He leads them, they always crave more. The people continually treat God with contempt and refuse to believe in Him, no matter what signs He performs to show them His love and power. Moses has to repeatedly ask God to forgive their wrong doings, and many times God does forgive them even when they test Him. For many of the Israelites, God says “your bodies will fall in the wilderness,” and none of them will enter the land he promised because of their lack of trust and loyalty to God. When they offer tests to God to see what He is capable of, they doubt His power and love for them. Additionally, Moses seems to offer his own doubts on God’s abilities, but also concerning why God made him the leader of the Israelites in the wilderness. He does not fully trust God’s plan and casts his own doubts on if he should continue to listen to God and spread His commands.

I think they closed the Pentateuch with the death of Moses because it indicates man’s redemption for mankind and the rekindling of a relationship between God and man. Starting with Adam and Eve, creation tends to break communion with God and it must be restored. This pattern is repeated throughout the first five books of the Bible, but now the people are entering a new promised land in which they must fulfill the covenant God gave them. It is a new opportunity for humans to seek out God in their hearts and soul according to the commandments given to them. God promises to be in the new land promised to them, and He will not forsake them. It is a new starting point in which the Israelites must follow the commandments in order to find success and be prosperous in communion with God.

The closing passage in Deuteronomy 34 guides our reading from the book of Joshua because he is filled with wisdom and the Israelites listen to him as they did Moses, yet Joshua does not know God “face to face.” Thus he does not rise like Moses did because God does not send him wonders to perform like Moses. It is evident that Joshua does not live up to the standards set by Moses, and therefore everything that happens when he is a prophet seems to be in the shadow of what Moses was able to accomplish. I think the text really means to say that the events of his generation may not have the same direct connection between God and a prophet and they are not for the sight of all of Israel.

The purity laws are established by God as norms for the people of Israel to live by. The function of the laws is to make a distinction between the correct and incorrect ways to perform rituals, make sacrifices, and prepare meals. They set a standard for how humans need to act in order to maintain their communion with God to be pure in His eyes. When we disobey Him or His laws, we enter a state of impurity and must be cleansed to restore communion with God. We must understand the laws of purity and impurity because they are not just rules on what to eat and what to avoid. They are largely symbolic of God’s creation and are a point of debate. When I initially read about God’s restriction from humans eating the blood of animals, it immediately reminded my of the creation story of Noah in which God gave a similar order. Furthermore, Douglas claims that “purity rules represent regulations of the social body,” and we must help God to order society by removing impurities, or as Douglas refers to it, removing the disorder of dirt. This out of place matter must be removed in order to clean societal order which is represented by order of the body. The logic of the laws is to show that clean food symbolize our unity in relationship with God. Thus when we eat or offer food in disobedience to God’s rules, we enter into a state of disunity. Therefore there must be boundaries between pure and impure to reflect the order of society and avoid contamination, symbolized by impure foods.

God provides humans with rules regarding food so that we are able to remove any pollutants from our bodies in order to remain pure. In this way, purity has to do with hygiene, but more generally means ordering things into their correct places because God requires purity in order to maintain a system free of dirt. He requires a maintenance of purity because it corresponds to a maintenance of order in which there is a separation of unlike things to maintain harmony. When God’s rules are broken, humans become unclean and impure because our harmony with God is ruptured, thus purity must be reinstated to restore our communion with God.

Through my own existence I am able to see who God is. I see him in “moments of need and failure,” but also the “fullness of earthly life.” I owe my existence, in its ups and downs, to God. He has bestowed me my life, and I give meaning to my life in order to receive the goodness of God. He is an all-powerful being who created the world and all that dwells in it. God is an all knowing being whose power can be traced through Scriptures. He is a “numen personale,” a personal God, and a “numen locale,” a local God. This means He is not bound to one spot or person, but present and powerful wherever man is present. His “power is boundless,” but he is still relational for humans. We can build relationships with Him and grow in unity and love with Him. God is the “greatest power of all, as he who stands above all else.” God is also the “God of the promise,” which means He directs humans towards a goal and to a hope of the future. God is “entirely different from ‘the gods’,” because He is omnipotent and omniscient, thus there is no being greater than Him. He is the sole creator of all that is good, and we owe everything to His creation. For me, God is a divine being who I can confide in during touch times, and exult in during good times. He offers everlasting love and support to those who suffer, and He is willing to take our burdens and make them His own. God signifies “inclusion in the structure of social relations,” meaning He has a relation to fellow humanity. In this way God is relational, but He is also an instructor. He created commandments and offered us ways to enter into covenants so that we may live according to His word. God is an all-powerful, knowing, and loving divine power who is “God of all people and of the whole universe.”

Joseph plants the silver cup as a test, not to be cruel or wicked, but to see if his brothers had changed. The cup was used at the dinner they feasted on together, and it is strategically placed in Benjamin’s sack. The aim was to plant the cup in the youngest brother’s sack, now the favorite of his father, and see how the other brother’s react when his life was threatened. He picked Benjamin because he is the son that most closely holds the position Jacob had in his family as the beloved son. He tests the brothers by giving them the opportunity to again leave the father’s favorite son in the hands of the Egyptian’s to suffer and the brother’s once again return home to break the news to their father. Jacob is joyful when he realizes his brothers truly have changed and are willing to offer themselves as sacrifices in their brother’s place. They are no longer wicked, but now give thought to their brother and father’s feelings. The story as a whole shows the brother’s jealousy and wickedness in which they were willing to sacrifice their own brother to gain attention from their father. In the time from when Jacob is sent to Egypt and when the brothers come begging for food from him, they have undergone a serious change in attitude and actions. God has assisted in allowing the brother’s to transform and enter into good graces with God and with Jacob, now that Judah and the others are willing to make the “supreme sacrifice” of “pledging his own life.” There is no longer envy in the brother’s hearts, and Joseph is “moved to tears by Judah’s love” for Benjamin and reveals his identity. Therefore the brothers, including Benjamin, are able to return home to their father with food and with the news that Joseph is alive and thriving.

The scene of Jacob wrestling is a tricky one to analyze and seek clear answers, beginning with the questions of who and why is Jacob fighting. Initially the title of the chapter signals he fights with God, but Kass says the opponents were evenly matched. Therefore, it does not seem remotely possible that Jacob would be able to perfectly match God in strength or strategy. Although Jacob says that he has seen God after the fight, I assume he means through the interaction with this other powerful being. This leads me to believe the fight was with an angel, who was able to call on God for extra strength to eventually injure Jacob. Jacob finds himself alone and and scared, but he is anything but weak in the battle. He relies on his own strength to fight a being greater than himself , and he earns a new name for himself. But did he win the fight? It is not obvious that there is a clear winner, as they fought evenly until the angel had to call on a higher power. I agree with Kass’s theory that the angel may be “a stand-in for Esau,” and this battle represents his fear of seeing his brother again and the previous struggles they shared in their mother’s womb. The equal strength they fight with may represent their equality as twins, but the angel then calls on divine strength to overcome Jacobin the end. It is interesting that the angel waits until daylight to draw from divine power, but as Kass suggests, this may be because the angel does not desire Jacob to discovery his identity. This seems to be another hint that the angel is a representation of Esau, and like birth, he wants Jacob to release him. Although I think the angel wins the fight because visibly harms Jacob, Jacob does not leave empty handed. He once again demands a blessing and gets a name tied to God that represents a title of victory. This scene is very complex, but it gives another insight into the relationship between Jacob and Esau.

According to Martin Marty’s book, there are seventeen definitions of religion and a single definition can not be agreed upon by scientists. Instead, he points out five features of religion to place boundaries around the term. These features include a “ultimate concern,” building community, appealing to “myth and symbol,” enforcement “through rites and ceremonies,” a demand for “certain behaviors.” His features help identify what religion is in broad terms, while also revealing a “tendency towards violence in religion.” From his features, there is a little room to distinguish politics from religion, and his broad understanding creates fuzzy edges rather than a firm boundary around the term. Its broad usage makes it unhelpful in making distinctions, but when defined too narrowly it can also exclude some phenomena. Many other American historians, sociologists, and academics have also tried and failed to apply a clear definition to religion, but “people still know how to use it in a meaningful way.” Religion is defined in the dictionary as the “belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” We use the word religion often, yet we never really stop and think, what does it really mean? I think religion is a set of beliefs that make me live my life a certain way. It dictates my words and actions because it makes me act in an intentional way that requires a response from others. Religion adds structure to one’s life and creates patterns that are formulated through beliefs in a god. Religion allows humans to grow intellectually and spiritually because we can derive principles of morality and ethics from its general rules, and we are able to find a larger purpose in life. Lastly, religion gives humans beliefs and practices that can unite people in a community with those who share the same faith.

According to Wilkin, faith is unavoidable. It is the “portal that leads to the knowledge of God” and is the mark of a genuinely religious person. As we look back at history, the events are unique and we cannot verify what we know to be true. Rather, we must rely on the testimonies of those who lived through history and believe it to be true. Therefore, we understand faith to be “a constituent part of historical knowledge,” which depends on the accuracy of the testimony and our trust in it. If the witness who documents the historical event is reliable and has integrity, it is difficult to not believe them altogether. Furthermore, faith is unavoidable because it is the “sacred bond of the human race” that would be shattered if we only believed “what can be held with absolute certainty.” Faith is beneficial because it allows us to gain a type of knowledge that requires “practices, attitudes, and dispositions and has to do with ordering one’s loves.” The knowledge we gain from having faith is gained slowly “into the mind and heart” and humans can live by it once it is practiced. Faith benefits us when we are able to follow the example of people who “invite us to love what they love,” in order to rightly worship God. We do not need to see to believe and to have faith, which is another important factor. Rather, we gain a different view of God when we believe without having to see physical proof of His existence. We benefit from faith because we gain religious knowledge, but we also benefit with a life in which we can “see the Word,” and enter “into the life of God.” Faith is unavoidable, but it also benefits humans in a way that is unique and desirable because it allows us to know the living God and live in a relationship with Him.

Abraham initially agrees to God’s quest to get up and go to the land God shows him where he will make a great nation because Abraham longs for settled land and a great name, all of which God promises him if he follows the command. He knows he is being commanded by a God because He speaks to Abraham knowingly and with divinity. God is able to see into Abraham’s heart and offer him what he desires most if he follows His command. Abraham also answers God’s request to (almost) sacrifice his only son because he trusts God and knows that He will only do what is best for Abraham and for humanity. He puts the life of His son in God’s hands because He believes in His omniscient power and plan for him. I do think Abraham is lying in the two passages, but I think he has a good reason to do so and it is not done with poor intention. He does not do so to harm or in spite of anyone. Rather, I think he lies to comfort his son and his servants and because he does not want his mission to be disrupted by their objections. Again, he knows that what God tells him is what he needs to do and thus he does not want anyone to stop him from carrying out this mission. I think God’s intention of making him go through the ideal was to test his trust and his willingness to obey God in any circumstances. I think this was a test of Abraham’s obedience to God’s mission and to ensure Abraham does not think of himself as more powerful or knowing than God. I think Abraham is praiseworthy for following God’s command almost blindly because he is not given an explanation for the mission. I admire his trust in God and his commitment to carrying out God’s word because he knows God has a plan for his own family and for humanity. I would not exactly call God praiseworthy in this instance, but I would say He acts strategically and with intelligence by putting forth such a daunting and difficult challenge to Abraham in order to test his obedience and trust in God.

The narrative about Noah furthers the concerns present in the account of the first sin because it again draws on the master theme of scripture which is, how does communion break and how is communion restored. Noah enters the world when death is already present and grows up knowing that eventually he must die because mortality is a part of the human condition. Unlike other humans who are angry at their discovery of an “unavoidable morality” and go “boldy and heroically wild,” Noah has a righteousness rooted in simplicity and pureness. In the face of death, the disunion between humans with each other, God, and creation deepens because human population grows and “the love for the beautiful takes on still greater importance,” but leaves humans unfulfilled. Similar to the account of the first sin in Genesis 3, again humans cannot differentiate between what seems good in their eyes, versus what is “truly good, or good for them.” Now in this narrative, men choose their wives based off of looks rather than moral goodness or character because they think this is good. Over time, men continues to exemplify wickedness that furthers their disconnect with God and the breakage of communion. God sees this and regrets His entire creation of man and animal life. This is the climax of original communion being replaced with disunion between humans and God that is present in Genesis 3 as well. God decides to erase his entire creation to start again, but he modifies this decision and save Noah, his immediate family, and many animals. Noah listens to God and follows His instructions with no objections in order to help God “erase the evil that has polluted His creation” and restore communion with humans and creation. The third creation narrative about Noah furthers the concerns present in Genesis 3 that revolve around the theme of breaking and restoring communion.