I've been a naughty girl today, and have procrastinated from writing all day. *tsks* As soon as I'm done with this, I shall get to it. I promise.
So. I started reading about Joseph today. (Joseph as in Jacob's son, coat of many colors, Pharoah's righthand guy, etc.) It made me want to read Angela Hunt's one series about him...but that's beside the point. Not that I necessarily have a point. I'm just rambling.
But I did notice something that struck me as a little...odd, I guess. When Jacob sends Joseph out to look for his brothers, he runs into "a certain man" who tells Joseph where to look. I wonder who that man was, and why he was so important to mention? I mean, stories in the Bible usually don't mention things inconsequentially, I don't think. In fact, from a novelist's point of view, they tend to have an abominable lack of detail (or, reversely, an abominable excess of detail, like how many cubits long this piece of wood was, and how many shekels of gold was used for that...). As a Christian, I believe that everything that's in the Bible is in it for a reason--I just don't understand the majority of the reasons, hehe--but I have to confess to some disappointment at times, reading some Biblical anecdote or another, and wishing it had more information, was more detailed, went into the people more (e.g. their emotions, thoughts, etc). Alas, the Holy Spirit is wiser than I am about that sort of thing.
But anyway, back to Joseph and the random unnamed man. Or, rather, just Joseph. I don't have anything else to say about the "certain man."
So, Joseph finds his brothers, and they see him coming, and plot to kill him.
This seems to me, way more than a little overreacting. (I know, I know, there was a purpose to it all, and if it hadn't happened, everyone would've starved from the famine.) I mean, I come from a large family, so I know a little about sibling rivalry (though, honestly, I see more sib-rivalry in smaller families, generally speaking; my family is in no way perfect or even close to it, but we--especially the female half--get along pretty well), but no matter how annoying one of my little brothers can be, I would never in a trillion years want him to die--let alone be the instigator of his death. I can't imagine the level of hatred involved, especially toward your own brother.
Of course, I don't know what it was like, living in that time period, in that culture, in a mixed family of twelve boys (eek! I feel so sorry for Dinah
). People killed a lot more easily back then, I guess, even family. I mean, Cain killed Abel centuries before then, just because of petty jealousy (or at least it seems like petty jealousy to me). Esau vowed, more or less, to kill Jacob after he tricked him out of a blessing (though of course, he never fulfilled the vow).
But anyway, it seems an extreme reaction to your father's favoritism (however wrong--you'd think Jacob would have learned the follies of parental favoritism what with his own parents' antics) of a brother to want to coldbloodedly kill him. Like that would garner your dad's love? Ehh... But I liked Reuben's part in it. He was at least sensible (even if his rescue attempt was belated).
So. I started reading about Joseph today. (Joseph as in Jacob's son, coat of many colors, Pharoah's righthand guy, etc.) It made me want to read Angela Hunt's one series about him...but that's beside the point. Not that I necessarily have a point. I'm just rambling.
But I did notice something that struck me as a little...odd, I guess. When Jacob sends Joseph out to look for his brothers, he runs into "a certain man" who tells Joseph where to look. I wonder who that man was, and why he was so important to mention? I mean, stories in the Bible usually don't mention things inconsequentially, I don't think. In fact, from a novelist's point of view, they tend to have an abominable lack of detail (or, reversely, an abominable excess of detail, like how many cubits long this piece of wood was, and how many shekels of gold was used for that...). As a Christian, I believe that everything that's in the Bible is in it for a reason--I just don't understand the majority of the reasons, hehe--but I have to confess to some disappointment at times, reading some Biblical anecdote or another, and wishing it had more information, was more detailed, went into the people more (e.g. their emotions, thoughts, etc). Alas, the Holy Spirit is wiser than I am about that sort of thing.
But anyway, back to Joseph and the random unnamed man. Or, rather, just Joseph. I don't have anything else to say about the "certain man."
So, Joseph finds his brothers, and they see him coming, and plot to kill him.
This seems to me, way more than a little overreacting. (I know, I know, there was a purpose to it all, and if it hadn't happened, everyone would've starved from the famine.) I mean, I come from a large family, so I know a little about sibling rivalry (though, honestly, I see more sib-rivalry in smaller families, generally speaking; my family is in no way perfect or even close to it, but we--especially the female half--get along pretty well), but no matter how annoying one of my little brothers can be, I would never in a trillion years want him to die--let alone be the instigator of his death. I can't imagine the level of hatred involved, especially toward your own brother.
Of course, I don't know what it was like, living in that time period, in that culture, in a mixed family of twelve boys (eek! I feel so sorry for Dinah
). People killed a lot more easily back then, I guess, even family. I mean, Cain killed Abel centuries before then, just because of petty jealousy (or at least it seems like petty jealousy to me). Esau vowed, more or less, to kill Jacob after he tricked him out of a blessing (though of course, he never fulfilled the vow). But anyway, it seems an extreme reaction to your father's favoritism (however wrong--you'd think Jacob would have learned the follies of parental favoritism what with his own parents' antics) of a brother to want to coldbloodedly kill him. Like that would garner your dad's love? Ehh... But I liked Reuben's part in it. He was at least sensible (even if his rescue attempt was belated).
