My seminars this year have been delightful. I’m sure I seemed a bit odd as I grinned, wide-eyed with childish anticipation and angst for discovery. After my first three seminars on Genesis, I gained a certain awe that beforehand was missing. Whereas Exodus always seemed like one continuous story, with a clear beginning and ending surrounding a central character, Moses, and Israel’s children, Genesis, though I always appreciated it, had seemed to me like a more archaic layout, a mixture of stories loosely connected by the theme of ancestral covenants. And during my seminars repeatedly I would hear the Spirit whispering to me, connecting some dots between the stories, and revealing a real development from one story to the next. The theme of the covenants and promises is indeed a strong connection between them, but I’m struck now by how much the same messages surrounding the expulsion from Eden are woven into the other stories, especially Jacob’s and Joseph’s. There is also pictured the development of human culture, cities, language, etc., and also the development of a person’s relationship to God, to other humans, and to the created world. Fascinating!
The Exodus seminar, also, was fun. There were so many cutting and honest questions asked concerning God’s authority, His love, His power. A question from my second Genesis seminar echoed in my thoughts during my time spent on Exodus; my tutor had asked me previously, “Why does God want a nation for Himself?” A nation. Here in the context of the birth of the nation the question became even more deeply impressed on my mind. It’s an enormous and wonderful question that encompasses the entirety of the Bible. It’s on my new list for Sophomore Essay topics. I really suspect that my pursuit of this question is indeed a highway for the pursuit of understanding God’s own heart.
My reading and subsequent seminar on Deuteronomy was plainly one of the most insightful moments of my life. Ms. Kirby opened with a question stemming from 6:4-5. She asked what it means that we are commanded to love God—not asked, not begged, not exhorted or urged, but commanded. For several others in the room I witnessed a change from being offended by the commandment to being genuinely pursuaded that love is implicit in the entirety of the law, observing that the command to love and the command to keep the commandments are never separated. We were all therefore led to a place of wonder. (The mystery remains for most, though, what it is to love with all our “heart and soul.” I heard a hint from one person that love toward other humans seems to be very important to God, also.) Though participating, I was able to witness the Lord speaking for Himself through His law; suddenly people recognized that there is a connection between the events in the days of Eden and the outworking of the Mosaic Law. One peer asked whether, if possible, God intends to prepare a way for humans to eat from the tree of life again. And another also posited that perhaps there is something more, something beyond law, something into which God’s people are being ushered, even prompted by the commandments. Is it possible that God had in mind something that transcends ethics and morality and politics? What an exciting question! To say that love is that something is good, but it forces me to return to the opening question from Ms. Kirby and to contemplate God’s law anew.
This past seminar was more difficult. There was far too much text, in my opinion, for one seminar. We read the end of Judges, I Samuel 8-end, II Samuel, and I Kings 1-4. The story of Samuel and Saul is enough for one seminar without the added stories of David, Absolom’s rebellion, and Solomon’s inception. We were a bit aimless in class, but not to the degree of discouraging anyone. We will return to much of this reading as we study several Psalms for this next seminar.
My tutorials have been decent, also. I don’t have much sense of direction in any of them, though, and in my music tutorial least of all. It’s very difficult for me to enjoy school work without a view to a purpose, but perhaps that makes me a very poor philosopher. I’m also frustrated by the fact that Zuckerkandl’s Sense of Music (which is a very loquacious version of an overly-pompous textbook, in my opinion) seems to allow for less inquisition than it ought to. Because most of us are so unfamiliar with the technical aspects of music theory, we are forced to swallow Zuckerkandl’s philosophies because we have no knowledge or experience to do our own investigating, at this point. It seems that we ought to study music as we study language: first we learn the technical, and then we use the technical as our vehicle to the philosophical. But I can complain all day and sin against you for wasting your time. My classes are fun, on the whole.
I will post more concerning my personal reflections on the happenings at the College, but for now I must sleep. I have crew tomorrow morning, as usual. Goodnight. God bless y’all.
Surely goodness and mercy will pursue me all the days (and sleepy nights) of my life.
The Exodus seminar, also, was fun. There were so many cutting and honest questions asked concerning God’s authority, His love, His power. A question from my second Genesis seminar echoed in my thoughts during my time spent on Exodus; my tutor had asked me previously, “Why does God want a nation for Himself?” A nation. Here in the context of the birth of the nation the question became even more deeply impressed on my mind. It’s an enormous and wonderful question that encompasses the entirety of the Bible. It’s on my new list for Sophomore Essay topics. I really suspect that my pursuit of this question is indeed a highway for the pursuit of understanding God’s own heart.
My reading and subsequent seminar on Deuteronomy was plainly one of the most insightful moments of my life. Ms. Kirby opened with a question stemming from 6:4-5. She asked what it means that we are commanded to love God—not asked, not begged, not exhorted or urged, but commanded. For several others in the room I witnessed a change from being offended by the commandment to being genuinely pursuaded that love is implicit in the entirety of the law, observing that the command to love and the command to keep the commandments are never separated. We were all therefore led to a place of wonder. (The mystery remains for most, though, what it is to love with all our “heart and soul.” I heard a hint from one person that love toward other humans seems to be very important to God, also.) Though participating, I was able to witness the Lord speaking for Himself through His law; suddenly people recognized that there is a connection between the events in the days of Eden and the outworking of the Mosaic Law. One peer asked whether, if possible, God intends to prepare a way for humans to eat from the tree of life again. And another also posited that perhaps there is something more, something beyond law, something into which God’s people are being ushered, even prompted by the commandments. Is it possible that God had in mind something that transcends ethics and morality and politics? What an exciting question! To say that love is that something is good, but it forces me to return to the opening question from Ms. Kirby and to contemplate God’s law anew.
This past seminar was more difficult. There was far too much text, in my opinion, for one seminar. We read the end of Judges, I Samuel 8-end, II Samuel, and I Kings 1-4. The story of Samuel and Saul is enough for one seminar without the added stories of David, Absolom’s rebellion, and Solomon’s inception. We were a bit aimless in class, but not to the degree of discouraging anyone. We will return to much of this reading as we study several Psalms for this next seminar.
My tutorials have been decent, also. I don’t have much sense of direction in any of them, though, and in my music tutorial least of all. It’s very difficult for me to enjoy school work without a view to a purpose, but perhaps that makes me a very poor philosopher. I’m also frustrated by the fact that Zuckerkandl’s Sense of Music (which is a very loquacious version of an overly-pompous textbook, in my opinion) seems to allow for less inquisition than it ought to. Because most of us are so unfamiliar with the technical aspects of music theory, we are forced to swallow Zuckerkandl’s philosophies because we have no knowledge or experience to do our own investigating, at this point. It seems that we ought to study music as we study language: first we learn the technical, and then we use the technical as our vehicle to the philosophical. But I can complain all day and sin against you for wasting your time. My classes are fun, on the whole.
I will post more concerning my personal reflections on the happenings at the College, but for now I must sleep. I have crew tomorrow morning, as usual. Goodnight. God bless y’all.
Surely goodness and mercy will pursue me all the days (and sleepy nights) of my life.
2 comments:
Oooooh! Reading this makes me want to be back at school SO BAD. I miss my core groupies so much! Lazing around doing not much and reading non-Program stuff is only fun for so long (though, I have to say, getting some sleep is nice). And it sounds like I'm going to enjoy sophomore year a lot more than I did freshmen year. If I wasn't absolutely convinced that I'm doing the right thing, I'd be sad, but I know that is the right thing so...to everything there is a time and a season, no? I'll get my chance in two years, and I'll have had a life-altering experience in the meantime. :)
I'm sad to hear that you're not enjoying music tutorial, though. I love music so much - by far my favorite classes at my first university were my choir and my theory classes. It truly is a magical form of communication, transcending words. I hope things get more interesting for you soon.
You, Sir Philip Thomas Mohr, are an appreciacian to life.
Darren.
Post a Comment