John Goldingay talks about blessing as one of the aspects of “God speaking” in creation. God’s speech is life-giving. He mentions something Genesis Rabbah says concerning the fact that Torah does not start with the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, ‘aleph. And what does that have to do with blessing? Here is what he says,

“Thus blessing “is not simply a friendly wish” but “a bestowal of life-force… an act whereby the power-for-life monopolized by Yahweh generously is transmitted to Abraham and his descendants” (Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997], p. 165) — and here to humanity as a whole and to other living creatures. God shares power-for-life with the animal world. The prominence of the blessing theme makes for a pointed contrast with the gloomy vision of other Middle Eastern stories of the origins or the world and humanity, as well as with the troubled experience of Israel in; for instance, the exile. Genesis Rabbah 1:10 (on Gen 1:1) sees here another significance in the fact that Scripture begins with a bet, not an ‘alep, the second letter of the alphabet rather than the first, since b is the first letter of the word for blessing (whereas ‘aleph is the first letter of the word for curse). “Bless” has the first word in Scripture” (Israel’s Gospel, 54).

Side Note:

I was curious to find out when blessing and cursing first occur in the Bible. Blessing first makes its appearance in Genesis 1:22:

God blessed them, saying, “Be fertile and increase, fill the waters in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.”

The noun blessing is used for the first time in Gen 12:2.

I could not find the noun for curse using the root ארר (which is what I think the midrash has in mind), since it is usually קללה which HALOT defines as a curse-formula by which someone or something is designated as cursed (ארור). So the first time the verbal form of ארר is used in the Bible is in 3:14:

Then the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you did this, More cursed shall you be Than all cattle And all the wild beasts: On your belly shall you crawl And dirt shall you eat All the days of your life.

The first time God blesses something is on the fifth day and what He blesses is specifically living beings. The interesting comment in Genesis Rabbah is that the first letter already foreshadows that. I think it is a little ironic that the first curse is also attributed to a living creature.

I am slowly working my way through John Goldingay’s Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Gospel. He is a very thought-provoking writer, and I look forward to reading all three volumes. Incidentally, I am still reading Bruce Waltke’s OT Theology, but, for some reason, it has not resonated with me as I thought it would (although I have benefited from Waltke’s insights).

Anyway, Goldingay used an analogy of God as a lion to reflect on the nature of theology (and more specifically Old Testament Theology), and I would like to quote it here. I specially liked this analogy because it also says something about testimony and preaching in a way I had not thought of before.

Let us imagine that God is like a lion, as the Old Testament says (e.g.. Lam 3:10; Hos 5:14; Amos 3:8). Testimony is then like telling people you have met a lion. Preaching is like inviting people to come to meet a lion. Theology is like reflecting on your meeting with a lion. It will involve some distancing, though during the process of reflection the lion may suddenly pop its head round the door. This reflection will be open to conversation with scientists who have read books about lions and people who have watched nature programs on television, whether or not they have met a lion or are sure they exist. Indeed, there are many scientific ways to seek to understand a lion, and many angles from which to do so: there are the angles and the categories of the zoologist, the geographer and the economist. In a parallel way, there are many angles from which to seek to understand the metaphysical lion. There are the angles of the systematic theologian and the philosophical theologian, the New Testament scholar—and the Old Testament scholar. The nature of the beast is such that no one angle and no one set of categories will reveal everything. The conviction of this theologian is that there is insight to be gained by looking at the metaphysical lion from the angle of the Old Testament and focusing resolutely on that. Whether this is so must emerge a posteriori. (2003, p. 20, emphasis mine)

Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over. (Psalm 23:5)

Even people who may not be too familiar with the biblical text will recognize the phrase “my cup runneth over” as coming from the Bible (and some might even guess it is from a psalm or Psalm 23). But, what does that really mean… my cup runneth over/overflows? Yalkut Shemoni (A haggadic compilation on the books of the Old Testament) has, in my view, an unexpected interpretation:

Said R. Abbaye, “from here we learn that the cup of David in the times to come [Messianic Age] will hold 221 logs [133 liters].”

Now that’s a big cup.

Although here we get no explanation of why David will have such a big eschatological cup in the Messianic Age, we know where the number 221 comes from. Gematria is the calculation of numerical equivalence of letters, words or phrases. For example David in Hebrew is דוד (sometimes also spelled דויד), since each letter has a numerical value we get ד = 4) + (ו = 6) + (ד = 4) = 14). New Testament commentators point out that Matthews’ genealogy revolves around the number 14 which, as we just saw, is David’s number.

The Hebrew word translated as “runneth over” (more literally translated as “satiation” as in JPS’s translation “my cup is full”) is רויה, (ר=200; ו=6; י=10; ה=5) = 221. Therefore, according to this interpretation, the phrase כוסי רויה stands for “my cup is 221″ which is then attributed to David in the future.

This type of interpretation does not seem very promising if we are interested in understanding what it is meant by “my cup is full” without the dubious aid of gematria. But it does put the focus on the very interesting word רויה (satiation).
Read more »

One of the things that intrigued me about this psalm is the way it seems to play with the word ‘ak. This has been duly noticed by commentators who take the word to be either restrictive (“only”) or asseverative (“truly”). The question then becomes which of these two senses the psalmist has in mind or if both are meant. James Boice lamented, for example, that Marvin Tate took the word to be asseverative in his translation. Boice believed that what the psalmist really meant was that his confidence was in God alone, the most important theological statement of the psalm. Read more »

In the last part of psalm 62, the psalmist exhorts the people (probably referring to the congregation as the LXX implies) to pour out their hearts before God:

But what does it mean to say that we should pour out our hearts before God? Read more »