Respond Again (Week 11)
1030 words by xumed2010
Respond to comments on your project. What is the difference between source and textual criticism? Summarize Tobit, and what is the main lesson of this story? Why do some people consider the Maccabees to be heroic.
After posting my ninth blog, I have to say it took a good minute to get some comments. (Notice my intermediary scream for comments!) But I finally got some folks to take a look and was pleasantly surprised at their reactions. Most agreed that it was going well and I’m happy to see others coming along well also. Here is one of the comments: “I am happy to hear that your project is going well!! At least your’s is! This semester it seems like you have had the most rewarding project. What your doing seems fun as well as you helping people find inadequate healthcare. You working in a hospital really helps you be in the center of where all the action is! Your ideas form the beginning seem great as well as creative and I hope that you continue to see rewards with your project!!” I’ve noticed a lot of different perspectives on “problems” in the world. They range from such things as not enough blood donations to obesity. I think its wonderful that the class is becoming more socially conscious and I think we are in fact changing the world each in our own way.
The main difference between source and textual criticism is the way in which the text is analyzed. In source criticism the goal of the scholar is to find and differentiate where it came from and when. Sources are not always explicitly stated and may just be stated out of tradition. Such as Exodus being written by Moses and the gospels being attributed to their respective authors. Textual criticism focuses on the how the text was in its original form when it was first written down. The idea of the shorter and more complicated text being more accurate is a nifty one. I really liked this form the best! Textual criticism involves types of errors that can accumalated due to transcription. These slight mistakes may greatly affect how we interpret the text. Of the two, I think it would be easier to discern the source rather than word errors. But never the less, both seem to be very useful.
The story of Tobit is a very interesting one. Basically he is a devout Jew who likes to bury the unclaimed dead. He has a son whose name is Tobias. One random day, birds drop feces in his eye and he goes blind. And then he basically is so ashamed that he doesn’t even want to live anymore. His son is sent to Medias to pay an owed sum of money, but he encounters the other suicidal character. Her name is Sarah and a demon keeps slaying her husbands on their honeymoon night. But she see Tobias who is blessed by an angel who is accompanied him on the journey and realizes he’s her true love. So they get married and I think Tobias is a type of doctor or healer because he uses organs to ward off the demon.
I wasn’t at all sure how to interpret this story, so here I go. Since the fact that Tobit and his son are faithful is explicitly stated, I think it is very important. So I would say its a faith story about believing against all odds even through the hard times. But another thing that stood out was the number of marriages Sarah had. SEVEN! But in a way, mabye the demon was killing them all because they weren’t the right type of man. So I suppose the lesson is the ideal man is someone who is truly committed to God. If this was to reflect a good marriage, it would seem to suppory christianity quite nicely. But since we are discussing criticisms, I kind of wonder who wrote this and what was THEIR intention. It could be a political metaphor or even just a story. But I’m sure that everything somebody took the time to write down must be important. So in a nutshell, I believe the lesson is about the right way and man to marry as well as how important faith is in life decisions.
Now about the Maccabees, and whether or not they were heroic. I think its pretty funny that I’m not shocked this story is most stories of the Bible that were really bloody and war filled, are portrayed in cartoons as happy go lucky. The story of the Maccabees involves a lot of death and destruction. It all starts with King Antioch and his laws. For some reason, he decides to limit the Jews activities and even force assimilation upon them. But the way he goes about it is so horrible. The worst blow besides the desecration of the Temple by putting up idols, would have to have been the requiring of the important leaders of the community to sacrifice to these idols. It was very disrespectful and I’m not surprised someone stood up and took a stand.
Judas Maccabee was that person along with his two other brothers. I think he was the son of a leader who just flat out refused to sacrifice to a statue. So Judah led a revolt against the ruling party. The Hellenism going on back then was a very extreme form of forced assimilation. The leader Antioch was even against circumcision, so he built gyms where men went naked to force the practice to go away. It was mentioned in class that even those who had been cut had a surgical operation to replace the removed sking. How cool! But I shall digress. The point is that lives were lost trying to suppress the Jews as well as when they were tryin to win their freedom back. So were they heroes in a sense? I guess I would have to say yes. They eventually defeat the rulers and kill the King. The Jewish laws are reinstated and they’ve accomplished their mission.