A motif in Hebrew prophetic literature in God making a legal case against a group of people. That motif recurs at the beginning of Chapter 6.
Another motif in the Hebrew Bible is that God is like what God has done. In other words, divine deeds reveal God’s character. Likewise, human deeds reveal human character. We read reminders of divine deliverance in Micah 6:4-5. These verses call back to Exodus 1:1-15:21; Numbers 22:1-24:25; and Joshua 3:1-5:12. God, who is just, expects and demands human justice:
He has told you, O man, what is good,
And what the LORD requires of you:
Only to do justice
And to love goodness,
And to walk modestly with your God.
Then will your name achieve wisdom.
–Micah 6:8-9, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985)
Not surprisingly, no English-language translation captures the full meaning of the Hebrew text. For example, to walk humbly or modestly with God is to walk wisely or completely with God. Doing this–along with loving goodness and doing justice–is more important than ritual sacrifices, even those mandated in the Law of Moses. This theme occurs also in Hosea 6:4-6. One may also recall the moral and ethical violations of the Law of Moses condemned throughout the Book of Amos. Micah 6 and 7 contain condemnations of such sins, too. The people will reap what they have sown.
To whom can they turn when surrounded by corruption and depravity? One can turn to and trust God. In the fullest Biblical and creedal sense, this is what belief in God means. In the Apostles’ Creed we say:
I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth….
In the Nicene Creed, we say:
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
Sometimes belief–trust–is individual. Sometimes it is collective. So are sin, confession, remorse for sins, repentance, judgment, and mercy. In Micah 7:7-13, belief–trust–is collective. Divine judgment and mercy exist in balance in the case of Jerusalem, personified. The figure is Jerusalem, at least in the later reading of Micah. The reference to Assyria (7:12) comes from the time of the prophet.
“Micah” (1:1) is the abbreviated form of “Micaiah,” or “Who is like YHWH?” That is germane to the final hymn of praise (7:18-20). It begins:
Who is a God like You….
–Micah 7:18a, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985)
Imagine, O reader, that you were a Jew born and raised in exile, within the borders of the Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian Empire. Imagine that you had heard that the Babylonian Exile will end soon, and that you will have the opportunity to go to the homeland of which you have only heard. Imagine that you have started to pray:
Who is a God like you, who removes guilt
and pardons sin for the remnant of his inheritance;
Who does not persist in anger forever,
but instead delights in mercy,
And will again have compassion on us,
treading underfoot our iniquities?
You will cast into the depths of the sea all our sins;
You will show faithfulness to Jacob, and loyalty to Abraham,
As you have sworn to our ancestors from days of old.
—The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
Imagine, O reader, how exuberant you would have been.
As R. B. Y. Scott wrote regarding the Book of Hosea:
[The prophet] speaks of judgment that cannot be averted by superficial professions of repentance; but he speaks more of love undefeated by evil. The final word remains with mercy.
—The Relevance of the Prophets, 2nd. ed. (1968), 80
Thank you, O reader, for joining me on this journey through the Book of Micah. I invite you to join me as I read and write about First Isaiah (Chapters 1-23, 28-33).
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 27, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF PAUL GERHARDT, GERMAN LUTHERAN MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF ALFRED ROOKER, ENGLISH CONGREGATIONALIST PHILANTHROPIST AND HYMN WRITER; AND HIS SISTER, ELIZABETH ROOKER PARSON, ENGLISH CONGREGATINALIST HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF AMELIA BLOOMER, U.S. SUFFRAGETTE
THE FEAST OF JOHN CHARLES ROPER, ANGLICAN ARCHBISHOP OF OTTAWA
THE FEAST OF SAINT LOJZE GROZDE, SLOVENIAN ROMAN CATHOLIC MARTYR, 1943
The superscription (1:1) provides information useful in dating the original version of the Book of Amos. Jeroboam II (r. 788-747 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 14:23-29) was the King of Israel. Azariah/Uzziah (r. 785-733 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 15:1-17; 2 Chronicles 26:1-23). In a seismically-active region, the “big one” of circa 770 or 760 or 750 B.C.E. was apparently a memorable natural disaster. (Ironing out wrinkles in the chronology of the era from Uzziah to Hezekiah has long been difficult, as many Biblical commentaries have noted. For example, reputable sources I have consulted have provided different years, ranging from 742 to 733 B.C.E., for the death of King Uzziah.) Centuries later, after the Babylonian Exile, Second Zechariah recalled that cataclysm in the context of earth-shaking events predicted to precede the Day of the Lord–in Christian terms, the establishment of the fully-realized Kingdom of God:
And the valley in the Hills shall be stopped up, for the Valley of the Hills shall reach only to Azal; it shall be stopped up as a result of the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah.–And the LORD my God, with all the holy beings, will come to you.
–Zechariah 14:5, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985)
The original version of the Book of Amos, then, dates to circa 772 or 762 or 752 B.C.E.
The final version of the Book of Amos, however, dates to the period after the Babylonian Exile. The prophecies of Hosea, Amos, Micah, and First Isaiah, in their final forms, all do. So do the final versions of much of the rest of the Hebrew Bible, from Genesis to the two Books of Kings. The final version of the Book of Amos indicates a pro-Judean bias, evident first in the listing of Kings of Judah before King Jeroboam II of Israel.
“Amos,” the shorter version of “Amasiah,” derives from the Hebrew verb for “to carry” and means “borne by God.”
Amos was a Judean who prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel. He was, by profession, a breeder of sheep and cattle, as well as a tender of sycamore figs (1:1, 7:14). The prophet was wealthy. In 2 Kings 3:4, King Mesha of Moab was also a sheep breeder. Amos hailed from the village of Tekoa, about eight kilometers, or five miles, south of Bethlehem, and within distant sight of Jerusalem (2 Samuel 14:2; Jeremiah 6:1). King Rehoboam of Judah (r. 928-911 B.C.E.; 1 Kings 12:1-33; 1 Kings 15:21-31; 2 Chronicles 10:1-12:16; Ecclesiasticus/Sirach 47:23) had ordered the fortification of Tekoa (2 Chronicles 11:6). Although Amos prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel, “Israel” (Amos 1:1) was a vague reference.
Since the prophetic office as manifested in Amos was a function of Yahweh’s lordship over his people, the political boundary that had been set up between Judah and Israel was utterly irrelevant. Amos was concerned with Israel in their identity as the people of the Lord; the sphere of his activity was the realm of the old tribal league, all Israel under Yahweh, and not the state cult with its orientation to the current king and his kingdom.
–James Luther Mays, Amos: A Commentary (1969), 19
I wonder if the vagueness of “Israel” in Amos 1:1 is original or if it is a product of subsequent amendment and editing. The later editing and amendment do present questions about how to interpret the edited and amended texts. Anyhow, I recognize that the message of God, via Amos of Tekoa, received and transmitted faithfully in a particular geographical and temporal context, remains relevant. That message remains germane because human nature is a constant force, often negatively so.
The reference to the cataclysmic earthquake (Amos 1:) may do more than help to date the composition of the first version of the book. One may, for example, detect references to that earthquake in Amos 2:13, 3;14f, 6:11, and 9:1. One may reasonably speculate that the Book of Amos, in its final form, at least, may understand the earthquake of circa 770 or 760 or 750 B.C.E. as divine punishment for rampant, collective, persistent, disregard for the moral demands of the Law of Moses. This presentation of natural disasters as the wrath of God exists also in Joel 1 and 2 (in reference to a plague of locusts) and in Exodus 7-11 (in reference to the plagues on Egypt). This perspective disturbs me. I recall certain conservative evangelists describing Hurricane Katrina (2005) as the wrath of God on New Orleans, Louisiana, allegedly in retribution for sexual moral laxity. I wish that more people would be more careful regarding what they claim about the divine character. I also know that earthquakes occur because of plate tectonics, swarms of locusts go where they will, and laws of nature dictate where hurricanes make landfall.
Amos seems to have prophesied in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel briefly, perhaps for only one festival and certainly for less than a year, at Bethel, a cultic site. Then officialdom saw to it that he returned to Tekoa, his livestock and sycamore figs, and the (southern) Kingdom of Judah.
[Amos] proclaimed:
The LORD roars from Zion,
Shouts aloud from Jerusalem;
And the pastures of the shepherds shall languish,
And the summit of Carmel shall wither.
–Amos 2:2, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985)
The theological understanding in Amos 2:2 holds that God was resident in Zion. The reference to Mount Carmel, on the Mediterranean coast and in the (northern) Kingdom of Israel makes plain that the message was, immediately, at least, for the Northern Kingdom. Looking at a map, one can see the geographical setting. For the divine voice, shouted in Jerusalem, to make the summit of Mount Carmel writhe, poetically, God really is a force with which to reckon.
God is near, but he is also far–immeasurably exalted, inexpressively different. He is the king who does not die.
–R. B. Y. Scott, The Relevance of the Prophets, 2nd. ed. (1968), 121
How we mere mortals think, speak, and write about God depends largely on our theological and social contexts–how well we understand science, how we define moral parameters, and how wide or narrow our theological imagination may be. How we mere mortals think, speak, and write about God must also include much poetry, even prose poetry. If we are theologically, spiritually, and intellectually honest, we will acknowledge this. How we mere mortals think, speak, and write about God may or may not age well and/or translate well to other cultures.
Despite certain major differences from the pre-scientific worldview of the eighth-century B.C.E. prophet Amos and the world of 2021 B.C.E., the social, economic, and political context of the Book of Amos bears an unfortunate similarity to the world of 2021. Economic inequality is increasing. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the numbers of poor people while a relative few already extremely wealthy people have become richer. God still cares deeply about how people treat each other. God continues to condemn institutionalized inequality. Many conventionally pious people–religious leaders, especially–are complicit in maintaining this inequality.
Amos of Tekoa continues to speak the words of God to the world of 2021.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 19, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF JACQUES ELLUL, FRENCH REFORMED THEOLOGIAN AND SOCIOLOGIST
THE FEAST OF SAINT CELESTINE V, BISHOP OF ROME
THE FEAST OF SAINT DUNSTAN OF CANTERBURY, ABBOT OF GLASTONBURY AND ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
THE FEAST OF SAINT IVO OF KERMARTIN, ROMAN CATHOLIC ATTORNEY, PRIEST, AND ADVOCATE FOR THE POOR
THE FEAST OF GEORG GOTTFRIED MULLER, GERMAN-AMERICAN MORAVIAN MINISTER AND COMPOSER
Military defeat (which God allowed, according to the text) of the Israelite forces did not constitute the defeat of God. Philistine capture of the Ark of the Covenant (in lieu of the statue of a deity, the conventional booty) did not constitute the defeat of God. Military defeat of Israelite forces did, however, constitute a crisis.
The Ark of the Covenant symbolized the presence of God. The Ark’s unprecedented presence on the battlefield indicated the belief that the Ark was a talisman.
The deaths of Hophni and Phinehas (per 1 Samuel 2:24) and of Eli (once he heard of the capture of the Ark of the Covenant, not the deaths of his wayward sons) added to the seriousness of the situation. Had the glory of God departed from Israel? The mother of Ichabod thought so.
I wonder how Ichabod felt going through life with a name meaning “no glory.”
This story, in context, contains no hint of pervasive national wickedness for which God punished Israel via the Philistines. One must, therefore, wonder why the defeat occurred. A prosaic answer would entail an explanation of military strategies, of course. That, however, is not the point of this story. No, the point relates to the sovereignty of God.
The defeat was ironic. The Philistines were polytheists who misquoted the history of the plagues of Egypt (Exodus 7:8-11:10), placing them in the wilderness, oddly. Yet, according to 1 Samuel 4, these Philistines were agents of God. They were about to learn how little they understood about the God of the Israelites.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 14, 2020 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF WILLIAM CROFT, ANGLICAN ORGANIST AND COMPOSER
THE FEAST OF JOHN BAJUS, U.S. LUTHERAN MINISTER AND HYMN TRANSLATOR
THE FEAST OF JOHN HENRY HOPKINS, JR., EPISCOPAL PRIEST AND HYMNODIST; AND HIS NEPHEW, JOHN HENRY HOPKINS, III, EPISCOPAL PRIEST AND MUSICIAN
THE FEAST OF SAINT MAXIMILIAN KOLBE, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND MARTYR, 1941; AND JONATHAN MYRICK DANIELS, EPISCOPAL SEMINARIAN AND MARTYR, 1965
THE FEAST OF SARAH FLOWER ADAMS, ENGLISH UNITARIAN HYMN WRITER; AND HER SISTER, ELIZA FLOWER, ENGLISH UNITARIAN COMPOSER
Judgment and Mercy are both individual and collective. They are individual in Psalm 50:16-23, 2 Corinthians 5:1-10, and Mark 5:21-43. They are, however, collective in Exodus 8:1-15 and 2 Samuel 11:1-17, in which innocent people pay the stiff penalty for the sins of others or another person–a monarch, in particular.
Collective punishment that affects the innocent is not fair, at least from one perspective. I subscribe to that point of view. I also acknowledge that life is not fair. This is a truth with which more than one Psalmist wrestled and that the authors of layers of the Book of Job addressed in sometimes contradictory ways. We mere mortals have the right to complain–to kvetch, even–about it to God. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, with its richness, arguing with God has become an art form.
All that anyone of us does affects others, for good and for ill. Of course, reward and punishment have collective components; we cannot segregate ourselves entirely in any given society. This is objective reality.
May God deliver us from ourselves and each other.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JULY 23, 2019 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT BRIDGET OF SWEDEN, FOUNDRESS OF THE ORDER OF THE MOST HIGH SAVIOR; AND HER DAUGHTER, SAINT CATHERINE OF SWEDEN, SUPERIOR OF THE ORDER OF THE MOST HIGH SAVIOR
THE FEAST OF ADELAIDE TEAGUE CASE, PROFESSOR OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
THE FEAST OF SAINTS PHILIP EVANS AND JOHN LLOYD, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND MARTYRS
THE FEAST OF THEODOR LILEY CLEMENS, ENGLISH MORAVIAN MINISTER, MISSIONARY, AND COMPOSER
Exodus 7:26-8:28 in Jewish and Roman Catholic Bibles equals Exodus 8:1-32 in Protestant ones. So the Exodus citation in the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod daily lectionary refers to the Protestant versification.
With this post I turn to that part of the LCMS daily lectionary (2006 version) which pairs the Book of Exodus and the Letter to the Hebrews. The epistle belongs to the Pauline tradition without St. Paul being its author. Origen, my favorite excommunicated theologian, wrote in the 200s,
As to who wrote the epistle, only God knows.
The epistle opens by explaining the superiority of Jesus:
He is the reflection of God’s glory and bears the impress of God’s own being, sustaining all things by his powerful command; and now that he has purged sins away, he has taken his seat at the right hand of the divine Majesty on high.
–1:3, The New Jerusalem Bible
Meanwhile, in the Book of Exodus, the plagues continue. Frogs, lice or gnats (depending on the translation one consults), and flies overrun Egypt. But the Pharaoh is stubborn. He is the same uncaring character who, in 7:23-24, went home as common Egyptians, desperate for drinking water, dug wells.
How is one supposed to tie these two readings together? Psalm 32:10 (The New Jerusalem Bible) reads
Countless troubles are in store for the wicked,
but one who trusts in Yahweh is enfolded in his faithful love.
Were the ordinary Egyptians wicked? No, course not! They were no more or less sinful than anyone else. So I have difficulty reconciling the God concept in Exodus 8 with the one in Hebrews 1. Is the God who inflicts plagues on innocent civilians the same one whose impress Jesus bears?
I think that a series of natural disasters befell Egypt in rapid succession and that the Hebrews escaped in the process. I think that authors of now-canonical texts interpreted these disasters as acts of God. But I do not think that God victimized innocent civilians. No, that is not the God whose glory I see in Jesus of Nazareth, who sacrificed himself out of love rather than betray it. We have begun Holy Week. May we not proceed through it with a concept of God who attacks innocent populations.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 29, 2012 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF THE FIRST U.S. PRESBYTERIAN BOOK OF CONFESSIONS, 1967
THE FEAST OF JIRI TRANOVSKY, HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF SAINTS LUKE KIRBY, THOMAS COTTAM, WILLIAM FILBY, AND LAURENCE RICHARDSON, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND MARTYRS
To say that Metropolis is a classic and influential film is to understate reality greatly; immediately I recognize echoes of it in the works of James Whale (Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein), George Lucas (Star Wars, sequels, and prequels), and Ridley Scott (Blade Runner). Scholars of cinema can and do create long lists of influences and subsequent homages. And to state that those who butchered the movie (even destroying cut scenes) shortly after the movie’s debut were blooming idiots is to claim the obvious as true. Fortunately, a nearly complete restored version (finished in 2010) is available.
There are versions of the movie available for home viewing. I have the 2001 restored version (with about 3/4 of the movie present) and the 2010 restored version (with 99% of the footage included). Alas, two scenes are, to the best of current knowledge, beyond salvage, so intertitles summarizing them will have to suffice. Each of these versions–the Restored Authorized Version of 2001 and the Complete Metropolis of 2010–has different and helpful special features, so I recommend owning both if one is a cinephile. The commentary track on the 2001 version is quite informative, for example, as is the documentary included with the 2010 edition.
This is a religious blog, so I choose to leave most aspects of the movie to already extant websites (such as http://www.metropolis1927.com/ and http://www.filmsite.org/metr.html ), which cover that ground quite well as I ponder some of the movie’s spiritual connections. A film in which a city leader rules from the New Tower of Babel (a reference to Genesis 11:1-9), people read from the Book of Revelation (with references to the Whore of Babylon from chapters 17 and 19), and the leader’s son must serve as the mediator between the head (the ruler) and the hands (the oppressed workers) calls out for theological analysis.
Thea von Harbou’s story is set in an unnamed European city in 2026. Urban elites live in skyscraper penthouses and play in the Eternal Gardens. Meanwhile, those who built the city and who keep it functioning live hard lives, work ten-hour shifts, and occupy subterranean homes. Joh Fredersen, the ruthless industrialist who governs the city, considers this arrangement just; the workers are, he says,
Where they belong.
His son, Freder, is naively unaware of the plight of the “other half” until Maria, the prophet of the working class, brings some of the workers’ barefoot children, clad in rags, to the Eternal Gardens and shows them their
brothers and sisters.
The butler shoos them away, of course. But Freder begins to search the city in search of the woman with whom he has just fallen in love. He does find her eventually, but not before he witnesses and experiences the harsh industrial conditions. And he begins to realize his destiny to function as the mediator who will avert the violent overthrow of his father’s regime and who will create justice for the workers.
Some characters are inexact analogs for biblical figures.
Freder Fredersen is the Christ figure. Not only is he the mediator, but he is crucified on a clock in one scene in which he takes a worker’s place.
If Freder Fredersen is the Christ figure, his father Joh is the YHWH figure. If one reads the Hebrew Scriptures closely, one realizes that YHWH is not always nice. Joh does approve of the workers’ rebellion so that he can crush it, eliminate troublemakers, and rule with an even more iron fist; he is an unsympathetic character. Meanwhile, back in the Old Testament, depictions of YHWH are sometimes unpleasant; YHWH does send plagues and pestilences upon innocent populations more than once. (See Exodus 7:14-12:32 and 2 Samuel 24:10-17, for example.)
Above: Rotwang shows Joh Frederson the “Machine Man”
Rotwang, the inventor and prototypical cinematic mad scientist, is the Satan figure. He pursues his own agenda and desires to undermine Joh. Rotwang almost succeeds.
The movie portrays inhumane industrial conditions as idolatry. In one scene Freder witnesses an industrial accident which claims human casualties. He imagines the machine as Moloch/Molech, the Ammonite deity mentioned in 1 Kings 11:7 and 2 Kings 23:10, and experiences a hallucination of the machine consuming willing and unwilling human sacrifices.
Alas, the film’s conclusion does seem like a too-convenient deus ex machina, one which leaves the oppressive Joh Fredersen in charge. But perhaps he will change his ways; nobody is beyond repentance and redemption, right?
Metropolis, despite its inconsistencies, is a staggering achievement and a masterpiece, one worthy of thoughtful appreciation and analysis beyond its obvious technical excellence. This is not a story of the violent overthrow of the dictatorial and insensitive regime. Rather, the aborted uprising is the work of Rotwang, the Satan analog, who seeks to overthrow Joh, and of Joh, who wants to use the opportunity for his own purposes, only to find that they backfire on him. So the politics of the film are inconsistent. One might guess, based on the early scenes, that the ending might be different: Freder and Maria overthrow Joh, with the screenwriter’s approval. But no!
Yet the movie is what it is. And the theme of social justice, especially that of the economic variety, is consistent with the ethos of the Hebrew prophets.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JANUARY 3, 2013 COMMON ERA
THE TENTH DAY OF CHRISTMAS
THE FEAST OF EDWARD CASWALL, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF EDWARD PERRONET, BRITISH METHODIST PREACHER
THE FEAST OF SAINT GENEVIEVE, PROPHET
THE FEAST OF GLADYS AYLWARD, ANGLICAN MISSIONARY TO CHINA
BLOGA THEOLOGICA 
You must be logged in to post a comment.