Retribution and 1 Sam 12

The dynamics of retribution and divine characterisation in 2 Sam 11–20 are compared and contrasted with the formulation of divine violence in 1 Sam 12. In 1 Sam 12, retribution is threatened but not yet enacted. Thunder and rain on the people’s crops in 1 Sam 12:18 is educative violence, warning the people for future obedience. The king is sidelined throughout Samuel’s speech, and included in the consequences but not transgression in the formulations for obedience and disobedience, democratising divine retribution from the king to the people in the post-exilic period. God is again characterised as transcendent king and judge, using the language of ‘evil that you have done in the eyes of the LORD.’ God’s words are all mediated through the prophet, and whereas David intercedes on his own behalf in 2 Sam 12, the Israelites must rely on Samuel’s intercession.

God has Become your Enemy

The interpretation of Saul’s sins, the prophetic condemnation against him, and his rejection by God in 1 Sam 13 and 15 is contested in scholarship. Many interpretations have been influenced by or respond to the interpretation of David Gunn that Saul is unfairly rejected. Main themes in Part 2 on upheavals in divine retribution in the stories of Saul and Eli are introduced. These include questions around the proportionality of Saul’s punishment to his transgressions; God’s hostility towards the Amalekites and king Agag as a model of divine hostility towards Saul; and the central role of the portrayal of God’s emotions for evaluating Saul’s rejection ethically.

Divine Violence in the Book of Samuel

Much of the drama, theological paradox, and interpretive interest in the book of Samuel derives from instances of God’s violence in the story. The beginnings of Israel’s monarchy are interwoven with God’s violent rejection of the houses of Eli and of Saul, deaths connected to the Ark of the Covenant, and the outworking of divine retribution after David’s violent appropriation of Bathsheba as his wife. Divine Violence in the Book of Samuel explores these narratives of divine violence from ethical, literary, and political perspectives, in dialogue with the thought of Immanuel Kant, Martha Nussbaum, and Walter Benjamin. The book addresses such questions as: Is the God of Samuel a capricious God with a troubling dark side? Is punishment for sin the only justifiable violence in these narratives? Why does God continue to punish those already declared forgiven? What is the role of God’s emotions in acts of divine violence? In what political contexts might narratives of divine violence against God’s own kings and God’s own people have arisen? The result is a fresh commentary on the dynamics of transgression, punishment, and their upheavals in the book of Samuel. The book offers a sensitive portrayal of God’s literary characterisation, with a focus on divine emotion and its effects. By identifying possible political contexts in which the narratives arose, God’s violence is further illumined through its relation to human violence, northern and southern monarchic ideology, and Judah’s experience of the Babylonian exile.

Reading Retribution in the David Story Politically

Many formulations for the composition of 2 Sam 10–20 suggest that 2 Sam 10–12, or part thereof, are a later addition to an earlier text. It is argued that such an addition is likely to be from the monarchic period and, perhaps counter-intuitively in light of the subject material, supports an ideology of the Davidic dynasty. In 2 Sam 13–20, David is unaccountably weak and slow to quash the coup of his son Absalom. With the inclusion of 2 Sam 12:1–15, David is subject to God’s sovereignty, but divine favour is assured; and threats from the people in his kingdom, from Benjaminites and from within his own family have no possibility of success except as the instrument of divine retribution. A reading of the text is also considered in a post-monarchic period, where forgiveness and restoration after retribution had potential to bring comfort during and after exile.

Ethnohistorical Archaeology and the Mythscape of the Naga in the Chiang Saen Basin, Thailand

There is a northern Thai story that tells how the naga—a mythical serpent—came and destroyed the town known as Yonok (c. thirteenth century) after its ruler became immoral. Despite this divine retribution, the people of the town chose to rebuild it. Many archaeological sites indicate resettlement during this early historical period. Although many temple sites were constructed in accordance with the Buddhist cosmology, the building patterns vary from location to location and illustrate what this paper calls ‘nonconventional patterns,’ distinct from Theravada Buddhist concepts. These nonconventional patterns of temples seem to have been widely practiced in many early historical settlements, e.g., Yonok (what is now Wiang Nong Lom). Many local written documents and practices today reflect the influence of the naga myth on building construction. This paper will demonstrate that local communities in the Chiang Saen basin not only believe in the naga myth but have also applied the myth as a tool to interact with the surrounding landscapes. The myth is seen as a crucial, communicated element used by the local people to modify and construct physical landscapes, meaning Theravada Buddhist cosmology alone cannot explain the nonconventional patterns. As such, comprehending the role of the naga myth enables us to understand how local people, past and present, have perceived the myth as a source of knowledge to convey their communal spaces within larger cosmological concepts in order to maintain local customs and legitimise their social space.

On St. Isaac The Syrian’s Argument Against Divine Retribution

Many theists maintain that God punishes humans retributively, whereby God intentionally harms those punished as their sins deserve, without also aiming qua punishment to contribute to the immediate or ultimate flourishing of those punished, or to the flourishing of some third (human) party. By contrast, St. Isaac the Syrian in effect contends that such an understanding of divine retribution is incompatible with a plausible understanding of God’s initial creative purposes of love and is thus untrue. In this paper, I present and substantially build upon Isaac’s contention, and I defend the resulting developed argument as a good argument worthy of further consideration.

Insecurity and the invisible: The challenge of spiritual (in)security

The search for security has become an almost permanent feature of the contemporary lived experience and what Brian Massumi has called an ‘operative logic’ for states across the globe. The modern study – and practice – of security has, nonetheless, been largely concerned with the protection, preservation and sustaining of the material, the tangible and the visible. For many people around the world, however, feelings of security also derive from understandings of an individual or community’s relationships with invisible and spiritual forces. Religious devotion and divine protection represent a central plank of security for many, just as fears of divine retribution, demonic possession or witchcraft feature as a central dimension of insecurity for many others. This remains, however, a significant blindspot in much of security studies – and, indeed, often eludes and challenges state authority as much as it intersects with and enhances it. Drawing on fieldwork undertaken in northwestern Uganda, this study reflects critically on the provenance and implications of this blindspot and argues for an expanded understanding of what ‘counts’ as (in)security. In doing so, the article emphasizes the global character of spiritual (in)security and the challenges an understanding of (in)security that encompasses this pose to longstanding scholarly and practitioner associations of (in)security with state authority.