Resurrection in Hannah's song?

[Michael Scarlett]

I am intrigued by a small line in Hannah's song, 1 Sam 2.1-10. It's one little verse: "The LORD kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up."

It is believed that Samuel was written around 1000BC. Yet, if I remember correctly, a theology of resurrection (life after death) wasn't more fully developed until closer the single digits BC. I do notice in Ezekiel the imagery of new life in the valley of dry bones and it's believed to have been written in the 500sBC. Could it be that these passages are the early flickers of that theology that develops later?

Grace and peace,

Michael

[Dennis Bratcher]

I am intrigued by a small line in Hannah's song, 1 Sam 2.1-10. It's one little verse: "The LORD kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up."

It is believed that Samuel was written around 1000BC. Yet, if I remember correctly, a theology of resurrection (life after death) wasn't more fully developed until closer the single digits BC. I do notice in Ezekiel the imagery of new life in the valley of dry bones and it's believed to have been written in the 500sBC. Could it be that these passages are the early flickers of that theology that develops later?

Grace and peace,

Michael

I don’t think so, at least not directly as this implies. The Ezekiel passages are about the nation of Israel and new life out of the “death” of exile, not about individual persons and physical death.

And in all of the OT, “death” is not strictly a biological reality as it is with us. “Death” was often a poetic description of any diminishment of the vitality of life, such as sickness. Any form of diminishment of life could be described as “death,” or in poetic metaphor Sheol (for example, Psa 9:13, 13, 18, 22, 55:4, 56:13, etc.). In that sense the Psalmist can pray to be raised up from death, that is to be healed of sickness or whatever might diminish life.

For example, in the psalm of thanksgiving of Jonah 2 there is reference to both Sheol and the Pit, both metaphors for death and the grave. Yet, Jonah did not actually die, even though physical death was immanent. Yet the language is that of being “raised up from the pit.”

Or, this example in Psalm 30:

30:2 O LORD my God, I cried to you for help, and you have healed me. 30:3 O LORD, you brought up my soul from Sheol, restored me to life from among those gone down to the Pit.

In the case of Hannah, the "death" that she experienced is being childless. In a culture where the only form of hope in the future was progeny, childlessness was, indeed, death of the future (note the same theme in Abraham's story in Genesis 12 ff.) that could be symbolized or imaged by Sheol.

Grace and peace,

Dennis B.

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

Well, if all scripture was writen from inspiration of the Holy Spirit, it may be that He inspired the words that came from Hannah's mouth.

[Ken Pell]

I don’t think so, at least not directly as this implies. The Ezekiel passages are about the nation of Israel and new life out of the “death” of exile, not about individual persons and physical death.

And in all of the OT, “death” is not strictly a biological reality as it is with us. “Death” was often a poetic description of any diminishment of the vitality of life, such as sickness. Any form of diminishment of life could be described as “death,” or in poetic metaphor Sheol (for example, Psa 9:13, 13, 18, 22, 55:4, 56:13, etc.). In that sense the Psalmist can pray to be raised up from death, that is to be healed of sickness or whatever might diminish life.

For example, in the psalm of thanksgiving of Jonah 2 there is reference to both Sheol and the Pit, both metaphors for death and the grave. Yet, Jonah did not actually die, even though physical death was immanent. Yet the language is that of being “raised up from the pit.”

Or, this example in Psalm 30:

30:2 O LORD my God, I cried to you for help, and you have healed me. 30:3 O LORD, you brought up my soul from Sheol, restored me to life from among those gone down to the Pit.

In the case of Hannah, the "death" that she experienced is being childless. In a culture where the only form of hope in the future was progeny, childlessness was, indeed, death of the future (note the same theme in Abraham's story in Genesis 12 ff.) that could be symbolized or imaged by Sheol.

Grace and peace,

Dennis B.

If I am looking at the Scriptures from an historical-critical perspective I would agree with Dennis Bratcher.

In recent years I have become intrigued by how the way the N.T. writers interpreted, used, and applied O.T. texts. I could not, for example, apply much of the Scripture the way the author of Hebrews did or even the way some of the Gospel writers "twisted" some Scripture to support Christological prophecy. It seems they fall closer to interpreting & using Scripture as Anne has mentioned than the manner in which I am comfortable.

My assumption is that the weakness or lack of full understanding must lie with me not with Matthew or the author of Hebrews.

So, if one was to apply texts the way the author of Hebrews did then I have no problem with someone extracting resurrection from Hannah's song. I am not comfortable with my skill or, therefore, doing it myself; but I think it could be done with integrity.

[Ryan Scott]

We also have to think about aspects of resurrection that don't involve afterlife. I've been reminded lately how much we associate salvation with afterlife, when that is simply one aspect. God has a lot of good intentions for this world which also fall under the general term resurrection.

I think that's more what Dr. Bratcher was getting at. We see it at work also quite frequently in Luke.

[Doug Kitchen]

I am intrigued by a small line in Hannah's song, 1 Sam 2.1-10. It's one little verse: "The LORD kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up."

It is believed that Samuel was written around 1000BC. Yet, if I remember correctly, a theology of resurrection (life after death) wasn't more fully developed until closer the single digits BC. I do notice in Ezekiel the imagery of new life in the valley of dry bones and it's believed to have been written in the 500sBC. Could it be that these passages are the early flickers of that theology that develops later?

Grace and peace,

Michael

Michael,

As I read those two sentences, I see parallel construction - two sentences that say nearly the same thing with slight differences for emphasis - kills ~ sheol, brings to life ~ raises up. I don't think the phrases as translated imply a resurrection - note that the writer (or translator) does not say "The LORD kills and brings back to life"

in other words, God takes life and He gives life. I don't see this particular verse suggesting that there is life after death. (it does not exclude the possibility either).

Doug

[Dennis Bratcher]

If I am looking at the Scriptures from an historical-critical perspective I would agree with Dennis Bratcher.

But the question was a historical question, so that is the perspective from which the answer should come. The question was not how the New Testament writers used and applied the Old Testament texts in light of the already-experienced reality of the resurrection. The question was whether any of the later ideas about resurrection are nascent in 1 Samuel. In other words, the question was not how Hebrew reads Samuel or the OT, but about the message and meaning of 1 Samuel. From that perspective, the answer was that 1 Samuel is not about resurrection.

In recent years I have become intrigued by how the way the N.T. writers interpreted, used, and applied O.T. texts. I could not, for example, apply much of the Scripture the way the author of Hebrews did or even the way some of the Gospel writers "twisted" some Scripture to support Christological prophecy. It seems they fall closer to interpreting & using Scripture as Anne has mentioned than the manner in which I am comfortable.

My assumption is that the weakness or lack of full understanding must lie with me not with Matthew or the author of Hebrews.

It is crucially important that we distinguish the two kinds of questions. When we ask how Matthew has used the Old Testament to bear witness to the Incarnation and resurrection, the answers we get will be about Matthew not about the Old Testament. In other words, we cannot use the NT writers as a hermeneutical key to interpret the Old Testament. It works the other way. Understanding the OT passages will help us understand what the NT writers are doing when they use OT passages as a vehicle to talk about Jesus.

Another way to put this is that the NT Testament writers were not trying to interpret the Old Testament passages in the way that we try to understand the OT today. In fact, they were not trying to interpret the OT at all. They were interpreting the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus who is the Christ, and doing that by using familiar passages of Scripture from the OT. And they often did so in ways that defy our own analytical logic, but yet which drew from a deeper understanding of the theology of the OT than is usually present among Christians today (for a couple of examples, see Immanuel in Isaiah and Matthew (http://www.crivoice.org/immanuel.html), or Nazareth and the Branch (http://www.crivoice.org/branch.html)).


So, if one was to apply texts the way the author of Hebrews did then I have no problem with someone extracting resurrection from Hannah's song. I am not comfortable with my skill or, therefore, doing it myself; but I think it could be done with integrity.

The problem is that it is not present in Hannah’s song so cannot be extracted. It is certainly present in Hebrews or Matthew, but just because it is there does not mean that it is in 1 Samuel. That is an important historical reality about Scripture that I think we need to preserve. Resurrection is no less a fact because it is not in 1 Samuel. But if we force it to be in 1 Samuel by reading it backwards from Hebrews or the NT, then we have destroyed the very historical dimension of both Scripture and God’s revelation of himself that we claim is important. In effect we have ignored the historical aspect that is a centerpiece of biblical Faith confession.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Ken Pell]

I think your conclusions are a bit of an overstatement but, in general I agree.

[Dennis Bratcher]

We also have to think about aspects of resurrection that don't involve afterlife. I've been reminded lately how much we associate salvation with afterlife, when that is simply one aspect. God has a lot of good intentions for this world which also fall under the general term resurrection.

I think that's more what Dr. Bratcher was getting at. We see it at work also quite frequently in Luke.

Yes, I think this is valid. The problem is the term "resurrection," which has specific content in Christianity. Certainly there is a strand throughout the OT in which God is understood to bring new beginnings out of endings that from human perspectives were irreversible. It is probably too much to call any of that “resurrection,” even in early forms. Yet, that is the understanding of God out of which the belief in resurrection of the body after death had begun to develop even before the resurrection of Jesus.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Charles W Christian]

Well, if all scripture was writen from inspiration of the Holy Spirit, it may be that He inspired the words that came from Hannah's mouth.

Of course they are inspired, but if doesn't mean that the words meant what we think they mean, right?

God inspired them for a purpose that has some immediate effect and impact. Only in the hindsight of the cross and empty tomb can we try to "read more," which isn't always the best way to do things as far as interpretation is concerned.

Death seems to be the biggest "enemy" in the OT. I mean, there were remedies for sin (although that was bad, too), but even the "good folks" in the OT seemed to struggle with death at times (see David in the Psalms, for instance: "How can I praise you from Sheol?" etc., etc.)....

The first message of the Christian preachers, according to Acts, focused upon the Resurrection, which was a radical paradigm shift, theologically speaking: "This Jesus, whom you killed, God raised Him from the dead," etc. (see Acts 2 and 3).....

Thanks,
CWC

[Crystal Lutton]

I have been studying passages that reflect Messiah's resurrection as "seen" by OT persons including Abraham when he was taking Isaac to sacrifice him. It's a very interesting study. I have no problem believing those who were pre-Cross lacked fullness of understanding, but don't most of us??? Lacking fullness of understanding is not the same as lacking awareness.