Wednesday

Hi there. Tonight Obama is doing his 30 minute infomercial. I am a supporter, although I have mixed feelings about this infomercial idea. I am getting somewhat uncomfortable with the extravagance of the whole thing, although I still prefer his views and leadership over McCain's. I am still going to vote Obama this election, but I fear that this extravagant 30 minute thing is going to annoy some people. Perhaps I am also anxious for him to not have to try to talk about it and prove himself to the world and for him to go ahead and start being our president.

But I already look at him as my president now, partly because of how much I have disapproved of the current administration. I am so hungry to have a president I respect, that I naturally see Obama as president already - does that make sense? I guess it would be similar to being cheated on by your husband, and, after finding out, but before the divorce went through, you start dating someone else. I don't plan on any of that, but I plan to vote for Obama. And frankly, leaders like this arise in our consciousness as our leaders and role models, even before the get officially appointed into the role as our leader. Obama is already a leader who calls not just FOR change, but for US to change as well. Any leader who can lead us all into a transformation of ourselves is really a leader of hearts. Again, Edwin Friedman comes to mind when he speaks of this motivating power in A Failure of Nerve, when he said that true leaders aren't really running in front of us but are also beside us with the furthest-seeing vision. While a true leader can see in the distance for us, they are connected to us and our emotional states in this present moment. I think Obama fits this description, almost eerily. That's probably why I am so fascinated with him.

I have so much going on lately - and ironically, I am still unemployed. I don't feel like enumerating everything right now, but I am excited about the opportunity to do a Bible Study on Dinah (Genesis 34). I am excited because the women in my group elected to talk about Dinah next week and the website we're using (http://www.womeninthebible.net/) doesn't feature a chapter on her. So I get to do the exegesis myself. I am fascinated with how much time is actually given to Dinah herself compared to the time spent on the negotiation of her marriage and the later violence her brothers bring upon her betrothed's city, killing all of the male sons in the city of Shechem. It's a story of deception and violent "judgment" upon Shechem and his people, done by Jacob's sons, the sons of Leah, brothers of Dinah. It starts with something that appears to be a rape and ends with the rape of a city, in way, because as the sons of Jacob destroy the young males of the city, they take away the city's strongest form of defense against invaders.

When Dinah is "raped" (my RSV says something like "seized...lay with...humbled her...") Shechem actually goes to her family and asks to marry her. This would have been the honorable thing to do in those times, according to Jewish custom, and the Bible also describes him as having a very strong desire to love her and marry her. But in going to his family, her brothers deceive him into thinking they can marry and that they may also set up other trading relationships. So with their deception they take advantage of Shechem (like turnabout) by entering their city walls and destroying their integrity as a settlement and as a clan-based people.

I am fascinated with the parallels there and that it started between two people - and how quickly it became between two clans of people. Of marked importance here is, again how much time is spent on the brothers and their anger - both while deceiving and then after destroying - compared to the little amount of time spent telling us anything about how Dinah really felt about this. Even her father Jacob has more to say than she. She is really present for only about 2 sentences out of the 31 verses dedicated to this story.

I am curious about her brothers because they do take up a lot of space in this story. They are clearly angry and have a blood-lust for vengeance. Jacob doesn't want that kind of relationship to the Canaanite people. Jacob seems to want to be on good terms with them, perhaps because he had just purchased some land nearby from them, earlier in chapter 33. He has also just made peace with his older brother Esau, of the Edomites. Perhaps these are signs that he is "mellowing out" in his fatherhood, looking for a piece of land to own. Since he is in the land of Shechem, naturally he would have wanted to have been at peace with the peoples there. As the word "Hebrews" actually means, he and his family were foreigners there. At least I think that's what the name meant. I can't remember now. I guess I'd better look that up.

I am curious about the arrangement that the brothers make with Shechem for them to be circumcised. It says that they required them to be circumcised in order for them to be able to do business together. I suppose that would make sense, according to Jewish law, although I wonder if they really thought of it as law at their time? I am curious as to why this story spends so much time talking about circumcision.

I have been taking many of these early Genesis stories about the family of Israel as ways to talk about their interrelationships as well as their relationships outside of their family to the other clans they meet. But this story appears to start with a little promise when we hear about Shechem's apparent love for Dinah and he wishes to marry her. It ends with a terrible and destructive event that only explains why the Canaanites would hate Israel. I wonder how the Jews reading the Torah during Jesus' time would have reacted to this story? What did it mean to them?

Well, I think I am going to go. I have some knitting to do. Peace be with you,
Amy