Fredrik Lindström

“I am God and Not Human” (Hos 11,9) : Can Divine Compassion Overcome our Anthropomorphisms?

Abstract Hos 11,8-9 is characterized by its strong anthropomorphic language and by its (illusory?) disassociation from it. A reference to Israel’s God as “not human” motivates the unexpected change of mind and compassion for God’s Israel. This article is based on a tradition-historical oriented typological reading of the expression “I am God and not human.” It suggests a new interpretation of this expression which throws a new light on the notoriously difficult conclusion of the passage: “I will not enter the city.” The exegetical discussion normally focuses on what is going on in YHWH’s mind and heart, but also on the alleged struggle between anger and love. The author’s interpretation points to the risk of transforming the pain of God into an internal transaction, with which it is hard to sympathize and to feel involved.

God and the Origin of Evil. A Contextual Analysis of Alleged Monistic Evidence in the Old Testament

This book is dedicated to the study of a problem which Biblical research has regarded a a central aspect of the OT understanding of God, namely, the thesis that the Deity was held to be the immediate author of all evils affecting both the individual and the nation of Israel a a whole. Examination of the exegetical literature dealing with this problem reveals that scholars have thought to find support for this view in passages of two types, in part in texts which explicitly place responsibility for evil with God, and in part in texts which seem to indicate that a demonic element was incorporated into the Deity via a process of identification. In the first part of Lindstrom’s study the latter supposition is examined by means of a critical review of those passages which are usually held to support the “demon” thesis. The author concludes that none of the texts in question provides valid grounds for the notion that YHWH became identified with a demonic being, or that he took such a being into his service, thus becoming secondarily or indirectly indicted for capricious activity. Consequently, against the usual view it is maintained that none of these passages implicitly expresses the concept of universal divine responsibility in the Old Testament. The second part of Lindstrom’s study investigates the classical passages generally held to support the thesis of divine responsibility. The writer examines these passages with a view to determining whether they do in fact intend to assign responsibility for all the misfortunes of life to God. Contextual analysis leads to a negative answer of this question. In conclusion the writer emphasizes that this well-known axiom of the exegetical study of the problem of God and the origin of evil is untenable and is to be abandoned.