This week's portion tells the story of the birth and boyhood of Isaace, from the promise of the angels to the binding of Isaac for sacrifice on Mount Moriah. In between we the end of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the wells of Be'er Sheva.
In a portion with many famous passages, perhaps the most famous is Abraham's argument with God, in which he challenges the Lord to act in accordance with his own principles, and spare the city of Sodom for the sake of the innocent.
Ultimately, there are not enough innocent people -- even Lot behaves rather strangely -- and the city is destroyed. There is a later parallel to this story, and to the behavior of the Sodomites, at the end of the book of Judges (19-21).
There is also a parallel, told in the additional Haftarah reading (Kings II 4:1-37), of the Prophet Elisha and the good Shunemmitess, whom he promises a son -- and whom he later assists by bringing his son back from apparent death to life.
I once heard Aviva Zornberg say in a lecture that the child who is resurrected is the Prophet Jonah, and that his prayer in the belly of the whale is a recounting of his experience of being dead until he was revived through Elisha's assistance.
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
An interesting weekend -- one of the last of Daylight Savings Time -- in which there is much to celebrate, much to contemplate, and a bit to worry about.
The Gaza peace deal is shaky, but holding, after the living hostages returned; the shutdown is still going on, with no end in sight; the China trade war is heating up; and the confrontation with Venezuela continues to escalate.
The "No Kings" protest was a dud, despite the media's attempt to inflate it. What I find fascinating is that the Democrats have basically stolen the rhetoric and the imagery of the Tea Party protests, circa 2009. They claim they are defending the Constitution -- just like the Tea Party did.
On the one hand, this is good. How wonderful to have a political system in which both sides, bitterly opposed though they are, articulate differences through the Constitution -- and not, as in so many other countries, outside it.
On the other, this is sheer hypocrisy for the Democrats. Not only did they malign the Tea Party as ...
