Daily Old Testament and Early Christian Writings: Numbers 31-32 and Origen's De Principiis: Book One - 6-7

Numbers 31 - Twelve thousand men, 1000 from each of the tribes, are sent out by Moses to attack the Midianites and execute vengeance upon them in the name of the Lord.  Phinehas is the priest of the campaign. 

 

Every male is killed, plus five kings, and Balaam--women and children are taken captive along with other booty.  They are taken to Moses at his camp on the plains of Moab.  Moses becomes angry with the officers for their having spared the lives of the women, “the very ones who on Balaam’s advice prompted the unfaithfulness of the Israelites toward the Lord in the Peor affair, which began the slaughter of the Lord’s community” (31:16). As a result, all the male children and all women not virgins are also slain. It doesn’t get much grimmer than this in the Old Testament narrative.

 

Then the Israelites are instructed on purifying themselves, their clothes and all their tools, weapons etc.  Whatever can stand the fire is to be purified in the fire.  Whatever cannot be purified by burning is purified in lustral water.  These are the constant modes of purification throughout the scriptures. The booty is divided and a tax levied on the warriors’ share.  One out of every 500 people, beasts, oxen, etc. are offered to Eleazar as a contribution to God.

 

Numbers 32 - In this chapter, the Gadites and Reubenites request Moses to permit them to stay on the east side of the Jordan where the grazing land is good. [They were shepherds] At first Moses rebukes them for discouraging the people from going over into the land God has given them.  But then it is proposed that they just leave their families here but the men will continue on to help the people as a whole claim the land and they promise not to return until all the Israelites are in possession of the promised land.  So Moses agrees.

 

 

Origen (185-254 AD)

De Principiis (First Principles)

Book One

6 – Origen makes another comparison. “Our eyes frequently cannot look upon the nature of the light itself—that is, upon the substance of the sun; but when we behold his splendor or his rays pouring in, perhaps, through windows or some small openings to admit the light, we can reflect how great is the supply and source of the light of the body. So, in like manner, the works of Divine Providence and the plan of this whole world are a sort of ray, as it were, of the nature of God, in comparison with His real substance and being. As, therefore, our understanding is unable of itself to behold God Himself as He is, it knows the Father of the world from the beauty of His works and the comeliness of His creatures. God, therefore, in not to be thought of as being either a body or as existing in a body, but as an uncompounded intellectual nature . . . mind, for its movements or operations, needs no physical space, nor sensible magnitude, nor bodily shape, nor color, nor any other of those adjuncts which are the properties of body or matter.”

 

He refers to the “simplicity of the divine nature” – uncomplicated by any mix of matter or components of any kind.

 

7 – Origen delves thoroughly into his analysis of the nature of “the mind.”  We are still at a loss to explain the powers and special qualities of the human mind. It will be very interesting to see what comes of the recent initiative to study the human brain in a manner as thorough as our study of human DNA. Origen would have a problem embedding “mind” in the brain; but my sense of its rootedness in the brain is not something that will undermine the tenets of Christianity as I see them. Christ’s incarnation itself is a testimony to the union of physical and divine.

 

“I wish [those who see mind and soul as somehow “bodily”] would tell me . . . how it receives reasons and assertions on subjects of such importance—of such difficulty and such subtlety? Whence does it derive the power of memory? And whence comes the contemplation of invisible things? How does the body possess the faculty of understanding incorporeal existences? . . . How is it able to perceive and understand divine truths, which are manifestly incorporeal?”

 

Views: 97

Comment by Paul Smith on 5th mo. 22, 2013 at 10:38am
I have gradually become aware that I conceive of God in human likeness because I have no language or mental constructs to do otherwise. My recent contemplation have focused on time as one of my limitations. God exists outside of time. My life is ordered within the confines of time. God is aware of every person and event that has happened in the past; is happening now; and will ever happen. For God, all Eternity exists in this single moment. While I study the past; live in the present moment; and wonder about the future.
Comment by Irene Lape on 5th mo. 22, 2013 at 10:51am

It is true, we are in many ways, bound by the time we know we are in; but what is so amazing about human beings is that we can "imagine" or "conceive" of timelessness, and in some small way we can "know" that God. I think we are unique in that in the universe - or let's be modest and say this earthly part of the universe. And in a way, just this makes us a little "like God." Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

Comment

You need to be a member of QuakerQuaker to add comments!

Join QuakerQuaker

Support Us

Did you know that QuakerQuaker is 100% reader supported? If you think this kind of outreach and conversation is important, please support it with a monthly subscription or one-time gift.


You can also make a one-time donation.

Latest Activity

Forrest Curo replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"I'd rather encourage people to examine the Bible sympathetically than discourage them from…"
3rd day (Tue)
William F Rushby replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"Instead of floundering and thrashing around to find a way to conceptualize God, Turn to the Bible…"
3rd day (Tue)
Forrest Curo replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"Masculine _nouns_? A word like "Godd-ess" would imply that 'God's were normally…"
2nd day (Mon)
Patty Quinn replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"To hear God referred to in masculine nouns and pronouns feels to me like a slap in the face to the…"
2nd day (Mon)
Forrest Curo replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"It's probably best to talk about many Biblical concepts of God. What they have in common is…"
7th day (Sat)
William F Rushby replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"Some Christians try to stick closely to the Biblical concept of God.  Of course, we know that…"
7th day (Sat)
Thomas Maxwell replied to Thomas Maxwell's discussion 'Concept of Diety'
"Yes I agree. I believe we can be fluid in our conception of our Higher Power. I love Kuan Yin but I…"
2nd month 19
Ronald Gordon updated their profile
2nd month 19

© 2021   Created by QuakerQuaker.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service