Numbers
The book of Numbers is an interesting book to read despite the numerical listings recorded in its pages. Incidentally, the book’s name is derived from the Greek name of the book Arithmoi which was translated in Vulgate as Numeri probably based on the censuses conducted from the moment Moses gathered the Hebrew people at the foot of Mt Sinai up to the time they were about to settle in the promised land.
Beyond the numerical listings, Numbers tells the story of the experiences of the Hebrew people as they journeyed for nearly forty years in the desert on their way to the land promised to them by God, thirteen months after they left slavery in Egypt. This is the reason why the Hebrew name for the book is bemidbar which means, “In the Desert.”
Numbers, Israel was a young nation going through the painful process of growth as God led the people to trust Him as their leader and provider. What makes Numbers remarkable is that the book establishes God’s faithfulness despite the people’s unfaithfulness, impatience, murmurings and outright rebellion.
The book also provides us with a dramatic portrait of God, Moses and the people as they struggle to turn the disasters in their wilderness journey into a success and blessing. The book tells of how the Hebrew people learned the bitter consequence of unbelief and unfaithfulness.
Numbers also contains materials for the worship patterns of Israel. It contains the Aaronic Benediction, instructions on Passover and instructions for worship. At the end, the pulse of the book is worship, as it challenges us to worship God, trust his plans and promises for us.
Other interesting stories in Numbers:
a. The story of the 12 spies
b. The water from the rock
c. The story of the Bronze Snake
d. Balaam and the Talking Donkey
e. The claim of women for inheritance
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
LEND or DEDICATE, What Did Hannah Do?
What did Hannah do with Samuel?
1 Sam 1:28
Rcpv : gitugyan ko siya sa Ginoo
Gnt: I am dedicating him to the Lord
Rsv: I have lent him to the Lord
LXX: kavgw. kicrw/ auvto.n tw/| kuri,w - -to lend – And I dedicate him to the Lord
WTT BHS: hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w> -I have asked/inquired/borrowed/beg him to (recent translation, occasionally, from) Yahweh
LXX used the verb kicrw (to lend where rsv translated using the verb; the LXX tense is in indicative present active first person singular.
rsv: although using the verb lend – but is rendered in present perfect first person singular
gnt: uses the verb dedicate in present progressive first person.
dedicate vs lend
dedicate means - to devote to the worship of a divine being; specifically : to set apart (a church) to sacred uses with solemn rites
lend - to give for temporary use on condition that the same or its equivalent be returned
Theological Implication on the choice of word:
The term “dedicate” has a churchy, sacred sound in it. I can very well understand the translator’s choice of a more “churchy” sacred term “dedicate” over “lend” which has a more utilitarian, commercial sound in it. But if LXX is to be consulted, Hannah lent to the Lord Samuel on condition that God will return Samuel or its equivalent.
Theologically, when we use the term “dedicate” we offer to the divine being (to God) something (our lives, the product of our labor, etc) unconditionally. It’s an act of worship. It is a lifetime commitment.
On the other hand, to lend something, whether we put a religious connotation on it or not, is for temporary use, and always, we expect that that which we lent will be returned at an appointed time.
LXX claims that Hannah only lent Samuel to the Lord. Although Klein thinks this is
“more idiomatically, she “lent him to Yahweh,” repeating one more time the pun on the letters שאל. For all his days he will be a “Saul” for Yahweh.”
If we go by Klein’s idea that the term “lent him to Yahweh” is more idiomatic than literal, then what could lent mean? Mirriam-Webster provides an explanation on the use of the verb lend:
lend is the verb used for figurative expressions, such as “lending a hand” or “lending enchantment.”
But to lend a life, a person to the Lord, what does this mean? For a mother to lend her child to God?
Let me venture into some theological concepts:
1. Our life is borrowed from God. Technically, God lends us our life and all that we have. That’s why in our act of dedication, we say, “all that we have comes from you, our God, the source of our lives and all that we have.”
a. In the act of dedication, usually through offering, we return back to God what he lent to us: our life, our talent, our treasure, etc.
b. In the act of child dedication, we thank God for the life that God so graciously allowed us to have and nurture. But in this liturgical act, we offer back to God disowning ownership of the life borne and acknowledging that God is the sole owner of the life of our child and we are temporary care-givers.
2. Created in the image of God means that we take part in the creative and salvific work of God. The lives given to us, the child(ren) we bore are the product of the creative act of a man and a woman. Nurturing the child(ren) into full-maturity is the continuing creative and saving act of God. We become partners of God in creating and saving lives. So when we offer this life back to God, we acknowledge we are never on our own in rearing up our child(ren). God is our partner and we partake in God’s continuous work in the lives of our child(ren).
3. That we are stewards of the lives born to us. Our child(ren) are not born to us so that someday they will be of used to us. On the contrary, as stewards of the lives given to us, it is our duty and obligation to develop them into the person that God designed them to be.
Given these theological concepts, how then are we going to understand the LXX use of the word kicrw (English: to lend):
There are other uses of the term lend:
a. to give the assistance or support of : AFFORD, FURNISH 〈a dispassionate and scholarly manner which lends great force to his criticisms —Times Lit. Supp.〉
b. to adapt or apply (oneself) readily : ACCOMMODATE 〈a topic that lends itself admirably to class discussion〉
a. if we apply the first definition of the word lend which is to give assistance or support of, then Hannah [gives assistance of support] to the Lord. In the sentence, the Lord is the recipient of the assistance of support. This is participating the creative and saving work of the Lord in the life Hannah’s child, Samuel.
b. if lend means to accommodate oneself readily to God, then Hannah commits herself readily for the purpose of God into the life of Samuel. Hannah accommodated upon herself into God’s plan for Samuel.
It becomes more interesting when we look at the Hebrew rendition of 1 Sam 1:28:
hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w>
WhTil.aiv.hi (verb hiphil perfect 1st person common singular, of the verb שאל which means ask, inquire, borrow, beg, suffix 3rd person masculine singular - (I) have asked/inquired/borrowed, begged him)
(And so, I have asked/inquired, borrowed begged him to/for Yahweh).
Where is the act of dedication here? This is only a declaration that what she had prayed for has come true. And that Eli’s blessing “Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him” (1Sa 1:17) has been fulfilled and is now a reality.
Where then is the idea that dedication (kicrw ) means bringing the child to stay in the temple and be a minister? In verse 22, Hannah declared, “As soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him, that he may appear in the presence of the \nd Lord\nd*, and abide there for ever.”
Implications:
A. Translation
kicrw has been rendered in English as lend (RSV, NRS, KJV) and dedicate (NAS, GNT); Cebuano has two renditions : gihatag (give) (Bugna, Pinadayag) and gitugyan (dedicate) (MBB, RCPV). Lend has not been rendered in any CEB translation.
a. Is dedication a faithful rendition of the LXX kicrw? Where did the contemporary versions base their use of dedication? It is not in LXX and definitely not in Hebrew Bible.
b. Dedicate vs Lend. Dedicate may be a good choice of word for what Hannah did to her child Samuel. But the depth of the meaning of lend is lost with the use of dedication. Unfortunately, if we use dedicate, we create an idea of passive surrendering of the child to the Lord whereas as discussed above, lend gives active and more participative act on Hannah’s part with regards to her child.
On the issue of tense: at the start, we noted the differences of tense between RSV and GNT (RSV is formal translation, GNT uses dynamic equivalence). RSV uses present progressive tense while GNT uses present perfect tense.
Grammar books tell us the progressive tense is a weak tense and should be used with care. Progressive tense suggest incomplete act or tentative act. On the other hand, GNT’s rendition in perfect tense suggests a completed act. However, LXX renders the verb in indicative present active. RSV was able to render the indicative present active only that RSV renders the verb in present progressive tense, which again is a weak tense. The intense resolve of Hannah in her act of kicrw has been muffled at the very least or lost at its worst. Why hasn’t there been a translation that renders Hannah’s act in simple present tense: And so I lend/dedicate him to the Lord. Renders this way, we see that lending/dedicating her child to the Lord becomes a habitual, daily act, not a one-time completed act, leaving the rearing of her child into the hands of God (or the church) but an active daily participation, which is the very essence of the term lend. All these meanings are lost at the choice of word and the setting of tense.
B. Parenting Guidelines
Hannah’s prayer and action has been a model act of godly parenting (or godly mothering). A bible study notes says:
“Hannah is a great example of a godly mother. From the time she first desired for a child, in prayers and intentions she has dedicated to God the future of her child”
Unfortunately, “dedicated” in this passage had always been misunderstood as offering ones child to the ministry (literally, giving up custody of the child into the church; or figuratively, dedicating the child to the Lord to become a minister). How many stories have we heard of a person forced into the ministry because he/she had been dedicated to God as first born and following the example of Hannah to her Samuel.
Ok, I will not go any farther. This has been my experience. My parents dedicated me to God and so they expected that I will serve the church. (My gosh! My parents have good connections in heaven!). But I resented this. I resented losing my freedom to choose the path I wish to trod or the freedom to accommodate for my own God’s plan for my life. This is what I call the passive dedication.
Given my analysis on the verb and its tense in verse 28, we can glean some parenting principles:
1. kicrw whether translated as lend or dedicate, tugyan or hatag, means: Our children are not our own, they are God’s. Parents are only temporary care-takers, stewards. And if we kicrw them to the Lord we
a. commit ourselves to participate in the continuing creative and saving work of God in our children’s lives. The operating word here is “participate.” We do not control. We do not design. We do not impose. The way I read this text, it is US, the parents who commit ourselves to God so that God can implement or fulfill his purposes in the lives of our children.
b. We should therefore accommodate God’s plan into the upbringing of our children. Does this mean passive rearing of children? Far from it! This is an active nurturing. When we accommodate God’s plan – we lend our children to God’s plan, as what Hannah did- we give support or assistance. We cannot be the one to thwart God’s plan, instead, we support it in every possible way. We cannot jut fold our arms and be fatalistic, que sera, sera, whatever will be will be – with the future of our children.
c. the act of kicrw begins long before conception. If this is so, parents cannot be careless. They should prepare, pray intently and work hard, and as Eli told Hannah, “and may the God of Israel give you what you have asked him for.”
2. kicrw is indicative present active, first person. Translated in first person simple present active form, kicrw is a daily habitual thing to do. Not a one-time, completed act. Perhaps we can glean from Susanna Wesley (the mother of John and Charles Wesley) who was said to daily, by hour or by minute pray and commit her children to the Lord. Parenting principles and guidelines and books and tv shows on parenting have overflowed. But nothing beats habitually lending our children to the Lord.
Conclusion:
So what did Hannah do with Samuel? She lent him to the Lord. Lend here had been given a deeper meaning and should be reflected in its translation.
Issues to be considered in translation:
1. which is easier understood, dedicate or lend? If lend is to be used, how should this be rendered in Filipino, pinahiram (TAG), gipahulam (CEB) for formal translation.
2. How about functional equivalence, how should this be rendered: Given the suggestions above, this writer is certain that v28 will have a totally new meaning when read.
Up next, still on verse 28 of ch 1, what did Samuel do in the temple? English translations say, he worshipped there, CEB, misimba, mag-alagad. Ows, talaga?
1 Sam 1:28
Rcpv : gitugyan ko siya sa Ginoo
Gnt: I am dedicating him to the Lord
Rsv: I have lent him to the Lord
LXX: kavgw. kicrw/ auvto.n tw/| kuri,w - -to lend – And I dedicate him to the Lord
WTT BHS: hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w> -I have asked/inquired/borrowed/beg him to (recent translation, occasionally, from) Yahweh
LXX used the verb kicrw (to lend where rsv translated using the verb; the LXX tense is in indicative present active first person singular.
rsv: although using the verb lend – but is rendered in present perfect first person singular
gnt: uses the verb dedicate in present progressive first person.
dedicate vs lend
dedicate means - to devote to the worship of a divine being; specifically : to set apart (a church) to sacred uses with solemn rites
lend - to give for temporary use on condition that the same or its equivalent be returned
Theological Implication on the choice of word:
The term “dedicate” has a churchy, sacred sound in it. I can very well understand the translator’s choice of a more “churchy” sacred term “dedicate” over “lend” which has a more utilitarian, commercial sound in it. But if LXX is to be consulted, Hannah lent to the Lord Samuel on condition that God will return Samuel or its equivalent.
Theologically, when we use the term “dedicate” we offer to the divine being (to God) something (our lives, the product of our labor, etc) unconditionally. It’s an act of worship. It is a lifetime commitment.
On the other hand, to lend something, whether we put a religious connotation on it or not, is for temporary use, and always, we expect that that which we lent will be returned at an appointed time.
LXX claims that Hannah only lent Samuel to the Lord. Although Klein thinks this is
“more idiomatically, she “lent him to Yahweh,” repeating one more time the pun on the letters שאל. For all his days he will be a “Saul” for Yahweh.”
If we go by Klein’s idea that the term “lent him to Yahweh” is more idiomatic than literal, then what could lent mean? Mirriam-Webster provides an explanation on the use of the verb lend:
lend is the verb used for figurative expressions, such as “lending a hand” or “lending enchantment.”
But to lend a life, a person to the Lord, what does this mean? For a mother to lend her child to God?
Let me venture into some theological concepts:
1. Our life is borrowed from God. Technically, God lends us our life and all that we have. That’s why in our act of dedication, we say, “all that we have comes from you, our God, the source of our lives and all that we have.”
a. In the act of dedication, usually through offering, we return back to God what he lent to us: our life, our talent, our treasure, etc.
b. In the act of child dedication, we thank God for the life that God so graciously allowed us to have and nurture. But in this liturgical act, we offer back to God disowning ownership of the life borne and acknowledging that God is the sole owner of the life of our child and we are temporary care-givers.
2. Created in the image of God means that we take part in the creative and salvific work of God. The lives given to us, the child(ren) we bore are the product of the creative act of a man and a woman. Nurturing the child(ren) into full-maturity is the continuing creative and saving act of God. We become partners of God in creating and saving lives. So when we offer this life back to God, we acknowledge we are never on our own in rearing up our child(ren). God is our partner and we partake in God’s continuous work in the lives of our child(ren).
3. That we are stewards of the lives born to us. Our child(ren) are not born to us so that someday they will be of used to us. On the contrary, as stewards of the lives given to us, it is our duty and obligation to develop them into the person that God designed them to be.
Given these theological concepts, how then are we going to understand the LXX use of the word kicrw (English: to lend):
There are other uses of the term lend:
a. to give the assistance or support of : AFFORD, FURNISH 〈a dispassionate and scholarly manner which lends great force to his criticisms —Times Lit. Supp.〉
b. to adapt or apply (oneself) readily : ACCOMMODATE 〈a topic that lends itself admirably to class discussion〉
a. if we apply the first definition of the word lend which is to give assistance or support of, then Hannah [gives assistance of support] to the Lord. In the sentence, the Lord is the recipient of the assistance of support. This is participating the creative and saving work of the Lord in the life Hannah’s child, Samuel.
b. if lend means to accommodate oneself readily to God, then Hannah commits herself readily for the purpose of God into the life of Samuel. Hannah accommodated upon herself into God’s plan for Samuel.
It becomes more interesting when we look at the Hebrew rendition of 1 Sam 1:28:
hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w>
WhTil.aiv.hi (verb hiphil perfect 1st person common singular, of the verb שאל which means ask, inquire, borrow, beg, suffix 3rd person masculine singular - (I) have asked/inquired/borrowed, begged him)
(And so, I have asked/inquired, borrowed begged him to/for Yahweh).
Where is the act of dedication here? This is only a declaration that what she had prayed for has come true. And that Eli’s blessing “Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him” (1Sa 1:17) has been fulfilled and is now a reality.
Where then is the idea that dedication (kicrw ) means bringing the child to stay in the temple and be a minister? In verse 22, Hannah declared, “As soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him, that he may appear in the presence of the \nd Lord\nd*, and abide there for ever.”
Implications:
A. Translation
kicrw has been rendered in English as lend (RSV, NRS, KJV) and dedicate (NAS, GNT); Cebuano has two renditions : gihatag (give) (Bugna, Pinadayag) and gitugyan (dedicate) (MBB, RCPV). Lend has not been rendered in any CEB translation.
a. Is dedication a faithful rendition of the LXX kicrw? Where did the contemporary versions base their use of dedication? It is not in LXX and definitely not in Hebrew Bible.
b. Dedicate vs Lend. Dedicate may be a good choice of word for what Hannah did to her child Samuel. But the depth of the meaning of lend is lost with the use of dedication. Unfortunately, if we use dedicate, we create an idea of passive surrendering of the child to the Lord whereas as discussed above, lend gives active and more participative act on Hannah’s part with regards to her child.
On the issue of tense: at the start, we noted the differences of tense between RSV and GNT (RSV is formal translation, GNT uses dynamic equivalence). RSV uses present progressive tense while GNT uses present perfect tense.
Grammar books tell us the progressive tense is a weak tense and should be used with care. Progressive tense suggest incomplete act or tentative act. On the other hand, GNT’s rendition in perfect tense suggests a completed act. However, LXX renders the verb in indicative present active. RSV was able to render the indicative present active only that RSV renders the verb in present progressive tense, which again is a weak tense. The intense resolve of Hannah in her act of kicrw has been muffled at the very least or lost at its worst. Why hasn’t there been a translation that renders Hannah’s act in simple present tense: And so I lend/dedicate him to the Lord. Renders this way, we see that lending/dedicating her child to the Lord becomes a habitual, daily act, not a one-time completed act, leaving the rearing of her child into the hands of God (or the church) but an active daily participation, which is the very essence of the term lend. All these meanings are lost at the choice of word and the setting of tense.
B. Parenting Guidelines
Hannah’s prayer and action has been a model act of godly parenting (or godly mothering). A bible study notes says:
“Hannah is a great example of a godly mother. From the time she first desired for a child, in prayers and intentions she has dedicated to God the future of her child”
Unfortunately, “dedicated” in this passage had always been misunderstood as offering ones child to the ministry (literally, giving up custody of the child into the church; or figuratively, dedicating the child to the Lord to become a minister). How many stories have we heard of a person forced into the ministry because he/she had been dedicated to God as first born and following the example of Hannah to her Samuel.
Ok, I will not go any farther. This has been my experience. My parents dedicated me to God and so they expected that I will serve the church. (My gosh! My parents have good connections in heaven!). But I resented this. I resented losing my freedom to choose the path I wish to trod or the freedom to accommodate for my own God’s plan for my life. This is what I call the passive dedication.
Given my analysis on the verb and its tense in verse 28, we can glean some parenting principles:
1. kicrw whether translated as lend or dedicate, tugyan or hatag, means: Our children are not our own, they are God’s. Parents are only temporary care-takers, stewards. And if we kicrw them to the Lord we
a. commit ourselves to participate in the continuing creative and saving work of God in our children’s lives. The operating word here is “participate.” We do not control. We do not design. We do not impose. The way I read this text, it is US, the parents who commit ourselves to God so that God can implement or fulfill his purposes in the lives of our children.
b. We should therefore accommodate God’s plan into the upbringing of our children. Does this mean passive rearing of children? Far from it! This is an active nurturing. When we accommodate God’s plan – we lend our children to God’s plan, as what Hannah did- we give support or assistance. We cannot be the one to thwart God’s plan, instead, we support it in every possible way. We cannot jut fold our arms and be fatalistic, que sera, sera, whatever will be will be – with the future of our children.
c. the act of kicrw begins long before conception. If this is so, parents cannot be careless. They should prepare, pray intently and work hard, and as Eli told Hannah, “and may the God of Israel give you what you have asked him for.”
2. kicrw is indicative present active, first person. Translated in first person simple present active form, kicrw is a daily habitual thing to do. Not a one-time, completed act. Perhaps we can glean from Susanna Wesley (the mother of John and Charles Wesley) who was said to daily, by hour or by minute pray and commit her children to the Lord. Parenting principles and guidelines and books and tv shows on parenting have overflowed. But nothing beats habitually lending our children to the Lord.
Conclusion:
So what did Hannah do with Samuel? She lent him to the Lord. Lend here had been given a deeper meaning and should be reflected in its translation.
Issues to be considered in translation:
1. which is easier understood, dedicate or lend? If lend is to be used, how should this be rendered in Filipino, pinahiram (TAG), gipahulam (CEB) for formal translation.
2. How about functional equivalence, how should this be rendered: Given the suggestions above, this writer is certain that v28 will have a totally new meaning when read.
Up next, still on verse 28 of ch 1, what did Samuel do in the temple? English translations say, he worshipped there, CEB, misimba, mag-alagad. Ows, talaga?
A DIALOGICAL SERMON with my DAUGHTER
SADYANG KABUTIHAN
a Dialogical Sermon by Carmel and Mithi
Intro…
I would like to present to you a dialogical sermon… it’s a conversation with my daughter (call Mithi). I invite you to join with us in this conversation.
Nanay: Siguro naman (address students) alam nyo ang story ng Good Samaritan. Ikaw Mithi alam mo ang story ng Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Siempre naman, ako pa! Ano nga bay un? Yun ba yong…. (ad lib narrate the story)
Nanay : (address the students) Tama ba ang kwento ni Mithi? Agree ba kayo? Medyo nga lang modern ang rendition, but faithful to the story. That’s good, Mithi. I’m sure your Bible teacher is proud of you. But do you know the answer to Jesus’ question: Who among the three was a real neighbor to the man who was held-up?
Mithi: Siempre, yung Good Samaritan. Kaya nga tinawag na Good Samaritan, kasi he stopped to help a dying man?
Nanay: Oo nga. But do you know, tama din naman ang ginawa ng mga priest at levites?
Mithi: Tama ba yun? Tama bang iwan ang isang taong nakahandusay sa kalsada at hindi tulungan! Hello! Kahit ganito ako, alam ko namang mali siguro yung hindi tumulong sa nangangailangan, lalu na yung mga biktima ng hold-up!
Nanay: Tama ka jan. Mali talaga ang iwan lang ang isang taong nakahandusay at hindi tulungan. Pero para sa mga priest at levites, tama din yung ginawa nila.
Mithi: Ha? Panong nangyari yun?
Nanay: Do you know who the priests were?
Mithi: Siempre naman. Pari – o kaya pastor sa ngayon, katulad mo Nanay. Pero, naku, Nay, kapag ginawa mo yung ginawa ng Priest sa story natin, kahit ako sasabihin ko, magaling ka lang magsermon, pero wala sa gawa!
Nanay: Kasi nga you are looking at the story from our present time. But during Biblical times, priest ….
Mithi: Dib a, priests are mediators between people and God?
Nanay: Tama ka uli. But during Biblical Times, priests do not only represent God before people, they also bring people to God. They were the ones who ask forgiveness for the sins of the people. They were the ones who burn sacrifices offered by the people for the forgiveness of their sins. They have to be ceremonially clean to do this.
Mithi: Ano daw yun? cere,,,
Nanay: ceremonially clean! Dapat malinis sila… pure! They cannot approach God defiled. They go through complicated ceremonies of bathing, cleansing and many purification rituals before they can do their task of approaching God in behalf of the people. And one of the things that will defile them is if they touch corpse. They are forbidden to touch a corpse… mapatawo man yan o animal.
Mithi: Bawal silang humipo sa patay? Pero hindi pa naman patay yung tao sa story, di ba ?
Nanay: Because you know the story. But if we follow the story, the robbers left the man half-dead. Ibig sabihin, puede mong mapagkamalang patay na yung tao. And the priest could not take the risk of touching a possibly dead body or else, he could not function as a priest. Kawawa naman ang maraming mga tao na nangangailangan ng kapatawaran ng Dios sa kanilang kasalanan!
Mithi: E yung levite…
Nanay: Levites are temple helpers. They have the same purification requirement before they can serve in the temple!
Mithi: Mukhang mali pa rin yung iwanan mo lang ang isang tao na nakahandusay na hindi tulungan…
Nanay: I’d like us all to listen to this song. Entitled,
PLAY CD cut 9
Nanay: the song says, lahat ng mga paniniwala ay may layuning kabutihan. Lahat ng paninindigan ay para sa kabutihan ng kapwa. Yun ang kailangan nating isipin. Lahat tayo, magkakaiba man ang ating paniniwala at paninindigan, may sadyang kabutihang taglay. The priest and the levite had good reasons not to touch the victim, otherwise, they won’t be able to do what they needed to do.
Mithi: Ok. Pero para sa akin, hero ko pa rin ang Samaritan. Dib a magkaaway ang mga Jews at Samaritan? Pero kahit na, tinulungan pa rin niya ang kaaway ng kanyang lahi! Yan ang hero!
Nanay: At yan din talaga ang gusto nating iparating sa ating lesson ngayon. Alam mo ba ang daming makakahadlang sa atin upang gumawa ng kabutihan. Ang daming boundaries…
Mithi: Katulad ng yan, (point to the school boundary), boundary ng PCU High School – hindi kami puedeng lumabas ng wala sa oras?
Nanay: Pero higit na nakakatakot yung boundaries na hindi nakikita. Andyan, yung pagkakaiba ng paninindigan at paniniwala… pagkakaiba ng gusto at hilig…
Mithi: Ya right… like gusto ko ng anime… ayaw mo naman…
Nanay: Uh-huh! Like gusto ko ng tahimik, ang lakas ng patugtog mo ng mp3…
Mithi: Nanay, ha! Wag mo akong ibisto…
Nanay: But do you see my point? We have created boundaries. In fact, kahit siguro sa inyong classroom may kanya kanya kayong boundaries – boundary ng pagkakaibigan--- kami-kami – sila-sila.
Mithi: Tama po. Kung minsan, dahil kami ang magkafriendster at magka-gm…
Nanay: posibleng na exclude nyo na ang iba, dib a? Instead na magkatulungan, nagiging ka-kompetensya na.
Mithi: at sa halip na magkasundo, nagkaka-asaran pa.
Nanay: You know what is the greatest lesson of the story of the Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Yung tinulungan nya yung victim.
Nanay: But more than that, the Samaritan was able to cross over the boundaries of racial enmity, o pag-aaway ng lahi, pagkakaiba ng paniniwala (magkaiba kasi sila ng relihiyon), pagkakaiba ng estado at posisyon sa buhay. Yan ang greatest goodness. Please listen to this song:
PLAY CD cut 10
Nanay: (to the people) Let this be a prayer dance.
Group as a class. Form two circles: One from the inside. And another outer circle.
Each time you touch a person’s hand and say ‘kaibigan’ let it be a real prayer, that you are a friend, maasahan, karamay, masasandalan sa lahat ng panahon.
(Choreo of the Prayer Dance):
KAIBIGAN
Lyrics movement
Ang Kaibigan mo’y point to the person in front of you
kaibigan ko, point to self
Kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place
Maaasahan mong may karamay ka hold the hands of the person next to you
at sandigan lean on the person next to you (nty)
Ang kaibigan hold the hand of the person nty
ng kaibigan ng kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place until the end of the song….
Ng kaibigan from inner circle to outer circle
ko’y kaibigan mo. try to touch as many hands as possible
towards the end of the song… form one big circle… arms locked into you neighbors arm and sway or do the “chorus line” movement.
Benediction:
Nanay: You know what Mithi, brothers and sisters, Jesus no longer calls us servant or slaves… but friends. So go out and be a friend, cross boundaries and Do good at all times, at all places, with all that you can.
Mithi and Schoolmates: Amen. Amen. Amen.
a Dialogical Sermon by Carmel and Mithi
Intro…
I would like to present to you a dialogical sermon… it’s a conversation with my daughter (call Mithi). I invite you to join with us in this conversation.
Nanay: Siguro naman (address students) alam nyo ang story ng Good Samaritan. Ikaw Mithi alam mo ang story ng Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Siempre naman, ako pa! Ano nga bay un? Yun ba yong…. (ad lib narrate the story)
Nanay : (address the students) Tama ba ang kwento ni Mithi? Agree ba kayo? Medyo nga lang modern ang rendition, but faithful to the story. That’s good, Mithi. I’m sure your Bible teacher is proud of you. But do you know the answer to Jesus’ question: Who among the three was a real neighbor to the man who was held-up?
Mithi: Siempre, yung Good Samaritan. Kaya nga tinawag na Good Samaritan, kasi he stopped to help a dying man?
Nanay: Oo nga. But do you know, tama din naman ang ginawa ng mga priest at levites?
Mithi: Tama ba yun? Tama bang iwan ang isang taong nakahandusay sa kalsada at hindi tulungan! Hello! Kahit ganito ako, alam ko namang mali siguro yung hindi tumulong sa nangangailangan, lalu na yung mga biktima ng hold-up!
Nanay: Tama ka jan. Mali talaga ang iwan lang ang isang taong nakahandusay at hindi tulungan. Pero para sa mga priest at levites, tama din yung ginawa nila.
Mithi: Ha? Panong nangyari yun?
Nanay: Do you know who the priests were?
Mithi: Siempre naman. Pari – o kaya pastor sa ngayon, katulad mo Nanay. Pero, naku, Nay, kapag ginawa mo yung ginawa ng Priest sa story natin, kahit ako sasabihin ko, magaling ka lang magsermon, pero wala sa gawa!
Nanay: Kasi nga you are looking at the story from our present time. But during Biblical times, priest ….
Mithi: Dib a, priests are mediators between people and God?
Nanay: Tama ka uli. But during Biblical Times, priests do not only represent God before people, they also bring people to God. They were the ones who ask forgiveness for the sins of the people. They were the ones who burn sacrifices offered by the people for the forgiveness of their sins. They have to be ceremonially clean to do this.
Mithi: Ano daw yun? cere,,,
Nanay: ceremonially clean! Dapat malinis sila… pure! They cannot approach God defiled. They go through complicated ceremonies of bathing, cleansing and many purification rituals before they can do their task of approaching God in behalf of the people. And one of the things that will defile them is if they touch corpse. They are forbidden to touch a corpse… mapatawo man yan o animal.
Mithi: Bawal silang humipo sa patay? Pero hindi pa naman patay yung tao sa story, di ba ?
Nanay: Because you know the story. But if we follow the story, the robbers left the man half-dead. Ibig sabihin, puede mong mapagkamalang patay na yung tao. And the priest could not take the risk of touching a possibly dead body or else, he could not function as a priest. Kawawa naman ang maraming mga tao na nangangailangan ng kapatawaran ng Dios sa kanilang kasalanan!
Mithi: E yung levite…
Nanay: Levites are temple helpers. They have the same purification requirement before they can serve in the temple!
Mithi: Mukhang mali pa rin yung iwanan mo lang ang isang tao na nakahandusay na hindi tulungan…
Nanay: I’d like us all to listen to this song. Entitled,
PLAY CD cut 9
Nanay: the song says, lahat ng mga paniniwala ay may layuning kabutihan. Lahat ng paninindigan ay para sa kabutihan ng kapwa. Yun ang kailangan nating isipin. Lahat tayo, magkakaiba man ang ating paniniwala at paninindigan, may sadyang kabutihang taglay. The priest and the levite had good reasons not to touch the victim, otherwise, they won’t be able to do what they needed to do.
Mithi: Ok. Pero para sa akin, hero ko pa rin ang Samaritan. Dib a magkaaway ang mga Jews at Samaritan? Pero kahit na, tinulungan pa rin niya ang kaaway ng kanyang lahi! Yan ang hero!
Nanay: At yan din talaga ang gusto nating iparating sa ating lesson ngayon. Alam mo ba ang daming makakahadlang sa atin upang gumawa ng kabutihan. Ang daming boundaries…
Mithi: Katulad ng yan, (point to the school boundary), boundary ng PCU High School – hindi kami puedeng lumabas ng wala sa oras?
Nanay: Pero higit na nakakatakot yung boundaries na hindi nakikita. Andyan, yung pagkakaiba ng paninindigan at paniniwala… pagkakaiba ng gusto at hilig…
Mithi: Ya right… like gusto ko ng anime… ayaw mo naman…
Nanay: Uh-huh! Like gusto ko ng tahimik, ang lakas ng patugtog mo ng mp3…
Mithi: Nanay, ha! Wag mo akong ibisto…
Nanay: But do you see my point? We have created boundaries. In fact, kahit siguro sa inyong classroom may kanya kanya kayong boundaries – boundary ng pagkakaibigan--- kami-kami – sila-sila.
Mithi: Tama po. Kung minsan, dahil kami ang magkafriendster at magka-gm…
Nanay: posibleng na exclude nyo na ang iba, dib a? Instead na magkatulungan, nagiging ka-kompetensya na.
Mithi: at sa halip na magkasundo, nagkaka-asaran pa.
Nanay: You know what is the greatest lesson of the story of the Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Yung tinulungan nya yung victim.
Nanay: But more than that, the Samaritan was able to cross over the boundaries of racial enmity, o pag-aaway ng lahi, pagkakaiba ng paniniwala (magkaiba kasi sila ng relihiyon), pagkakaiba ng estado at posisyon sa buhay. Yan ang greatest goodness. Please listen to this song:
PLAY CD cut 10
Nanay: (to the people) Let this be a prayer dance.
Group as a class. Form two circles: One from the inside. And another outer circle.
Each time you touch a person’s hand and say ‘kaibigan’ let it be a real prayer, that you are a friend, maasahan, karamay, masasandalan sa lahat ng panahon.
(Choreo of the Prayer Dance):
KAIBIGAN
Lyrics movement
Ang Kaibigan mo’y point to the person in front of you
kaibigan ko, point to self
Kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place
Maaasahan mong may karamay ka hold the hands of the person next to you
at sandigan lean on the person next to you (nty)
Ang kaibigan hold the hand of the person nty
ng kaibigan ng kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place until the end of the song….
Ng kaibigan from inner circle to outer circle
ko’y kaibigan mo. try to touch as many hands as possible
towards the end of the song… form one big circle… arms locked into you neighbors arm and sway or do the “chorus line” movement.
Benediction:
Nanay: You know what Mithi, brothers and sisters, Jesus no longer calls us servant or slaves… but friends. So go out and be a friend, cross boundaries and Do good at all times, at all places, with all that you can.
Mithi and Schoolmates: Amen. Amen. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)