Genesis 29:15-28

Jacob continues on his journey and finds his uncle Laban, and works for him. For wages they negotiate his marriage to Jacob's cousin Rachel. This is done without comment other than it's a good idea. And he gets a servant, actually a servant for his wife, which is something you can find in ancient Babylonian marriage contracts. This is long before the Babylonians have become an empire that will exile Jacob's descendants. At this point in history, Judaism is forming out of Babylonian and other surrounding cultures.

Jacob, the trickster, gets tricked this time. He has treated the tradition of the first born with disdain and figured out how to steal it from his brother, so it's not too surprising that he doesn't see this coming. But no worries, another seven years of work and he gets a second wife. Again, with no comment. This is normal.

After this passage, they will go on to deal with being barren, being jealous of each other, giving their servants over to bear children, and Jacob will figure out how to selectively breed his flock so it is healthier than his Uncle's. God seems to be a mere passive observer to all of this, popping in to do something like “open Rachel's womb”, so she can finally serve her purpose and have a baby. When his male cousins complain about Jacob's wrangling, Jacob invokes God's blessing and complains about Laban's dealings. He says God told him to leave, so he does.

Rachel grabs the “household gods” on her way out. These are pagan idols in terms of Mosaic law, but that law has not yet been developed. Rachel obviously sees value in them, and I assume whoever wrote this did too. When Laban chases them down he's pissed about taking the grandkids without getting to kiss them, but he's really troubled about why his gods were stolen. Rachel sits on them to hide them. The men argue and Laban makes the peace offering, with God as their witness. Laban invokes the name of his grandfather, Nahor, but they are all in the same family. This is a pact in a world where it is not yet clear who's legacy will prevail. They both understand that their actions could lead to fighting, so they call upon the higher powers of justice and reasonableness that their ancestors passed on to them. They agree to divide their wealth and set a boundary.

Psalm 105

Note how by this time, Nahor and Laban are not mentioned. The land of Canaan has become the coveted prize, and whatever Laban and those people to the East got, is no longer in the poetry.

1 Kings 3:5-12

That's different. A king in the central bloodline who is not impetuous. God speaks to him and he just asks for wisdom. Even God is unusual in this interaction, he doesn't tell Solomon what to do or what the plan is, he asks. My first inclination in cases like this is always, okay, God actually does know. I think early listeners to this story would have heard that first line and giggled to each other, “uh-oh, God's doesn't ASK people what to do, what's He up to now?” We're so serious about this today, we miss it.

This is sort of a test, or God wants to let Solomon think for himself, or something. Either way, Solomon passes with flying colors. It's also a chance for us to ask ourselves, if we could ask the genie for 3 wishes what would they be? Asking for riches always ends up bad. Solomon first considers how great things are. How many of us would start there? But what a wise place to start. When we accept who we are and appreciate what we have, that's when something new and greater often shows up. When we want something fixed, or focus on something we think is missing, we close our minds and miss the little things passing by that could actually be what we need.

Kings is a pivotal pair of books. The family rivalries have played out, Moses has rediscovered God and got clearer instructions. A kingdom has begun. A Temple is being built (according to legend anyway). It's starting to look like the promises to Abraham will be fulfilled. But by the end of 2 Kings, it's all fallen apart.

Kings is also pivotal in how the story is told. We see the leaders making good choices, like here, and sometimes not so good. We have to wait to see the consequences of their actions to understand what the judgment is. We also hear a lot more from the judgments of humans, the prophets and prophetesses. They are there to keep the kings and queens in line. The books of Kings don't have a specific theme or tale to tell, rather many.

With a larger society forming, and a priestly class that could discuss the stories, rather than vague references to ancient wanderings in the desert, this to me was a necessary upgrade. A set of laws and patriarchs to represent them can only take you so far. You need interpreters and those who can apply the law to unexpected situations. You need to demonstrate wisdom. Without these enhancements, I seriously doubt they would have survived the political upheaval to come.

Romans 8:26-39

The lection sticks to every verse of Romans 8. . It took centuries after this was written to work out just what the Spirit is. Eventually declarations like this were made about it in the Council of Rome in 382 AD, i.e. “If anyone denies that the Holy Spirit has all power and knows all things, and is everywhere, just as the Father and the Son: he is a heretic.” Most Christians today don't feel beholden to such declarations. They are quite happy with their own personal definitions.

Paul invokes the old symbols of the first born being the one at a place of highest honor, as we have been seeing from the earliest days of Isaac. There is really no reason for this, it's just tradition. A tradition so ancient we don't know its roots. As we saw with Jacob, with a little deception, you can steal the graces and blessings that come with those symbolic places of honor.

Paul then talks of what God knows. The NIV study Bible chooses to take a middle of the road interpretation of verse 29, about predestination. In its footnote, it uses the accommodating language, “some”; “Some insist knowledge here is not abstract but is couched in love and mixed with purpose… that [God] knew us in the sense of choosing us by grace,” while, “Others believe that Paul [says] in eternity past God knew… who would become his people.” I think this attempt to please a range of readers shows how controversial this idea of predestination is.

Honestly, and I expect some will think this is a cop out, I don't think we can know what Paul would say if we sat him down and asked his opinion about what Pope Damasus I or Martin Luther or anyone else said about these things. My guess is, it would begin something like, “That's not what I meant at all, not even close.”