Most of us are familiar with the phrase "read between the lines." It is something that we do intuitively in conversations; we "read" emotion, tone, and inflection, actively interpreting what someone might be saying to us. However, when we are reading a text, the text does not have the natural ability to emote, provide tone, or inflect. We often have to do it for the text, which means we have to do our best to hear the text in different ways to allow the appropriate balance of these three aspects to emerge.
This is often a frustrating activity. We would much rather the author just announce what he or she intends to be understood. Or do we? In a classic episode of Futurama, the original series finale entitled, The Devils Hands Are Idle Play Things, this point is excellently illustrated. Fry, the main character, is composing an opera about the woman he loves, Leela. In the midst of this a character named The Robot Devil (whose character is exactly what his name implies) becomes frustrated with Fry's composition and announces, "You can't just have your characters announce how they feel, that makes me feel angry!" This ironic line, in context, is hilarious to say the least. However, its point is precise: subtlety allows for much deeper and varied meaning than a direct statement can ever convey.
This fact stood out to me recently as I was reading through the Abram/Abraham narrative. The first movement of the story is Abram going into Egypt and swindling Pharaoh by misleading him regarding his relationship to Sarai. Pharaoh is warned of the nature of the situation and responds in repentance. So Abram leaves with wife and new goods in tow. Arriving in the land, Lot confronts Abram about the ability of the land to sustain both of their families. Abram responds by allowing Lot to choose his land and take it. Lot chooses the "better" land and they part ways and God confirms his covenant with Abram. This is the simple progression of the narrative that forms a very general pattern: two characters interact to produce a result with God communicating with the one of the parties.
But what is going on between the lines? This is the place where assumptions are made that can radically alter how you might read these stories. There are good ways to do this and there are bad ways; but, there are multiple ways.
I have some thoughts, but what do you see happening as you read Genesis 12:10-13:18? What are the connections between the two stories presented? I would like you to think through your assumptions and try to name them and articulate them. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and what subtleties come out as you read, so thank you ahead of time.
So, I started to write a comment here but realized that what I had to say was just too friggin long.
ReplyDeleteSo, the conclusion: I don't see much link between the two stories other than one starts off with Abram's fear & contrivances and the other starts with "Abram worshiped the Lord again." One seems very void of relationship between Abram and God, the other depicts more interaction between the two. In the former story, Abram is trying to manipulate things to go in his favor and people are hurt (though he really ends up pretty rich in the end), in the latter he seems willing to take a position of goodwill and faith rather than fear, and there is communion as well as a re-articulation of God's promise and blessing.
*shrug*
Okay, now these were my initial thoughts:
ReplyDelete1. I have heard it said that Abram was "faithless" or disobedient by going to Egypt during the famine. I personally don't know where this notion comes from.
2. I hesitate upon initial inspection to surmise anything about Abram but a (selfish?) concern for his own welfare and provision in the Egypt story - and a certain (again selfish?) cunning that is demonstrated by other characters, such as (arguably) David and Jacob - for good or for ill (a cunning that isn't necessarily judged but that often results in blessings upon the poser). The text remains suspiciously silent in its evaluation of Abram, yet it is obvious that it is his deception that creates the plague scenario and that God is not pleased with what is happening.
3. What does it mean that Sarai was taken into the Pharaoh's house??? Was she being prepared as Esther was or was she ushered directly into his bed as a concubine, or even a wife? What was Abram up to at this point? Was he even considering an intervention? Is this about a dumb idea and a white lie gone terribly wrong or did Abram intend to continue on with the deception even at the cost of his wife?
4. Are the plagues about the violation of marriage and some sort of sacred law? Are they about the violation of Sarai? Is God responding to the cries of her heart in all of this? Or is this even possibly about God wanting there to be no mistake pertaining to Abram and Sarai's offspring?
5. And what does it mean that Abram, after leaving Egypt, worshiped the Lord "again"? Had he stopped? Was this, in fact, some sort of evidence of Abram's faithlessness or disobedience?
And there are a million similar questions about Abram and Lot. I just don't find a lot of emphasis in these stories to afford assumptions about why they were included or what they were intended to intimate. Are they just an account of what happened? And the big question for me is, what do they say - not about Abram - but about God???