The theme of divine wisdom, active in time, combines with two more themes in the culmination of the Wisdom of Solomon. The other two themes are the working of divine justice and divine control of nature. Recall, O reader, that religious persecution formed part of the context for the Wisdom of Solomon.
The Wisdom of Solomon approaches the plagues and the Exodus from Egypt differently than the Book of Exodus does. The Book of Exodus tells of ten plagues, in the context of a struggle between YHWH and the Pharaoh. However, in the Wisdom of Solomon, we read of seven plagues and focus on the working of divine justice and the divine control of nature. The presentation and interpretation in the Wisdom of Solomon 11:1-19 depends on familiarity with Exodus 7-15.
N. T. Wright proposes that living under occupation is a form of exile in the Gospels. According to this reasoning, liberation from occupation is a variety of exodus–not of of the oppressed population, but of the oppressors. So, the language of the Exodus from Egypt assumes contemporary, political potency in the Gospels. If we accept this hypothesis, we may also apply it to the context in which Pseudo-Solomon wrote. God will expel the Romans as part of the working of divine justice. Superficially, the text is about events from the lifetime of Moses. Actually, it is about the present–our antiquity, relative to 2023. The text can be about 2023, also.
Another theme in these chapters is the balance of divine judgment and mercy. We read in chapter 12, for example, that God exercises forbearance sometimes. This is a season of mercy, during which people and peoples may rid themselves of wickedness. If they do not rid themselves of wickedness, we read, severe judgment will ensue in time. Pseudo-Solomon’s theory of relative severity of punishment (as upon Egyptians) is:
Thus, while you correct us, you flog our enemies ten thousand times harder,
to teach us, when we judge, to reflect on your kindness
and when we are judged, to look for mercy.
–12:22, The Jerusalem Bible (1966)
One may also recognize an indisputable truth: Liberation of the oppressed often accompanies judgment of the oppressors (16:4).
Chapter 13 begins a long section about the folly of idolatry. Some facts are essential for context:
Polytheism was standard in the ancient Near East. Monotheism seemed as absurd to polytheists as polytheism seemed sinful to monotheists.
The ancients did not regard those idols as deities. No, the ancients understood the idols to be objects through which to engage with their gods. The idea was that a deity inhabited an idol temporarily.
Pseudo-Solomon had a host of pantheons in mind when he composed this section of the Wisdom of Solomon. Most religions in the Roman Empire were polytheistic. And emperor worship was part of the civic cultus.
The Wisdom of Solomon contrasts idols with divine wisdom. Wisdom has existed from before creation. The love of divine wisdom is the beginning of righteousness. Yet:
For the idea of making idols was the beginning of fornication,
and the invention of them was the corruption of life,
for neither have they existed from the beginning
nor will they exist forever.
–14:12-13, Revised Standard Version–Second Catholic Edition (2002)
Recall, O reader, that in the Bible, adultery and fornication are frequently metaphors for idolatry.
In the context of the multi-chapter condemnation we read a prayer, which concludes with these words:
For to know you is complete righteousness,
and to know your power is the root of immortality.
–15:3, Revised Standard Version–Second Catholic Edition (2002)
The Wisdom of Solomon 18:14-16 occurs in the context of the deaths of the firstborn:
For while gentle silence enveloped all things
and night in its swift course was now half gone,
your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne,
into the land that was doomed,
a stern warrior carrying the sharp sword of your authentic command,
and stood and filled all things with death,
and touched heaven while standing on earth.
—Revised Standard Version–Second Catholic Edition (2002)
The conflation of these verses with the account in Luke 2 led to the tradition that the angels sang to the shepherds outside Bethlehem at midnight. So, we have Midnight Masses and a Christmas carol, “It Came Upon the Midnight Clear.”
The Wisdom of Solomon 18:20f continues the interpretation after the Exodus. The text speaks of divine kindness and mercy balanced with punishment, understood as just desserts.
The punishments did not come upon the sinners
without prior signs in the violence of thunder,
for they justly suffered because of their wicked acts,…
–19:13a, Revised Standard Version–Second Catholic Edition (2002)
The Wisdom of Solomon concludes with a prayer:
For in everything, O Lord, you have exalted and glorified your people;
and you have not neglected to help them at all times and places.
–19:22, Revised Standard Version–Second Catholic Edition (2002)
Explicit in that prayer is another prayer: Help us again.
Thank you, O reader, for joining me for this journey through the Wisdom of Solomon. I invite you to remain by my side as I step backward in time for one last book in the wisdom genre. Ecclesiasticus/Sirach/the Wisdom of Ben Sira is my next stop.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 3, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINTS JOANNA, MARY, AND SALOME, WITNESSES TO THE RESURRECTION
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
you preside over land and sea, sunshine and storm.
By your strength pilot us,
by your power preserve us,
by your wisdom instruct us,
and by your hand protect us,
through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord. Amen.
–Evangelical Lutheran Worship (2006), page 40
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Assigned Readings:
Exodus 7:14-24 (Monday)
Exodus 9:13-35 (Tuesday)
Psalm 65 (Both Days)
Acts 27:13-38 (Monday)
Acts 27:39-44 (Tuesday)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You still the roaring of the seas,
the roaring of the waves,
and the clamor of the peoples.
Those who dwell at the ends of the earth
will tremble at your marvelous signs;
you make the dawn and dusk to sing for joy.
–Psalm 65:7-8, The Book of Common Prayer (1979)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
God, the biblical authors affirmed, controls nature. This theme occurs in the plagues upon Egypt, Jesus walking on water, droughts in ancient Israel and Judah, et cetera. The pericopes from Exodus, in which the theme of God being in control of nature occur, constitute a narrative which contrasts with the storm at sea then the shipwreck in Acts 27. Innocent Egyptians suffered and/or died in the plagues, but all hands survived in Acts 27. The plagues led to the freedom of the Hebrew slaves, but the voyage of the prison ship took St. Paul the Apostle to his trial, house arrest, and execution at Rome. I can only wonder about the fates of the other prisoners. Drowning at sea might have been a more merciful way of dying.
The Exodus pericopes remind me that sometimes a divine rescue operation comes with a body count. When oppressors insist on oppressing the end of their oppression is good news for their victims yet bad news for them. Sometimes innocent people become casualties in the conflict, unfortunately.
I wish that all were joy, love, and happiness. I wish that nobody would ever oppress anyone. Violence would be absent from my utopia. Yet Utopia is nowhere, potentates are often prideful and not concerned with the best interests of their people, and circumstances escalate to the point that some people will suffer from violence one way or another. This proves (as if anyone needs confirmation) that the Kingdom of God is not fully realized in our midst.
May we pray for the day that it will become fully realized on this plane of existence.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MARCH 25, 2015 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF THE ANNUNCIATION OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST
It is true that Moses was trustworthy in the household of God, as a servant is, acting as witness to the things which were yet to be revealed, but Christ is trustworthy as a son is, over his household. And we are his household, as long as we maintain the hope in which we glory.
[Aaron and Miriam] came forward; and [the LORD] said, “Hear these My words: When a prophet of the LORD arises among you, I make Myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses; he is trusted throughout My household. With him I speak mouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles, and he beholds the likeness of the LORD. How then did you not shrink from speaking against My servant Moses?” Still incensed with them, the LORD departed.
In Exodus 10 we find a new wrinkle in the narrative: Courtiers of the Pharaoh criticize him for his obstinancy. They understood what he ought to do. Confronting such a monarch was no small risk, and this was no sympathetic king.
Moses, meanwhile, was faithful to God’s instructions. This is a point the author (probably the Elohist–E) wanted the audience to understand. It was a point the author of the Letter to the Hebrews grasped. In Hebrews Jesus was greater than the prophets (1:1-4), the angels (1:5-2:18), and Moses (3:1-6), who was very close to God. Moses was great, but he was only a servant in the household of faith, a household with Jesus built (3:2, 3, and 5).
We who have read the Bible know the outline of the rest of the story. Yes, God will liberate the Hebrews from slavery in Egypt. (The name of the book isExodus!) But almost immediately afterward the troubles will start. Grumbling will ensue. People will express nostalgia for Egypt. And the next generation will be the one to enter the Promised Land. The liberated generation will not enter the Promised Land because it will not believe and will not abandon its slave mentality. It will not enter the Promised Land because it will insist on hardening its collective heart.
Likewise, the author of the Letter to the Hebrews wrote, Christians ought not to harden their hearts. Our Promised Land is spiritual, not geographical. And Jesus, whose Hebrews name translated directly into English is Joshua, will lead us there. The parallels between the Old Testament and the New Testament are beautiful, are they not?
This is a devotion for Tuesday in Holy Week. This day has meaning only in relation to subsequent days, namely Maundy/Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday, and Easter Sunday. Most of all it derives meaning from its position relative to Easter Sunday, for that Sunday gives us a Resurrected Jesus, not a dead one. As scholars of the New Testament observe accurately, the point of perspective in the canonical Gospels is a post-Resurrection one. And that is appropriate. We Christians follow a Resurrected Lord and Savior, not a dead Messiah. We follow him, who is superior wo even the greatest figure of the Hebrew Scriptures. We follow the one of whom St. Paul the Apostle wrote
But what were once my assets I now through Christ Jesus count as losses. Yes, I will go further: because of the supreme advantage of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, I count everything as loss. For him I have accepted the loss of all other things, and look on them as filth if only I can gain Christ and be given a place in him….
(Sorry for the ellipses, but the text is a run-on sentence in The New Jerusalem Bible. The citation is Philippians 3:7-9a.)
St. Paul summarized the case well; I cannot do better. So I encourage you, O reader, to ponder the supremacy of Christ during all weeks, but especially during Holy Week, and to do so while remembering St. Paul’s words from Philippians 3.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 30, 2012 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA, HISTORIAN AND ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP
THE FEAST OF APOLO KIVEBULAYA, ANGLICAN EVANGELIST
THE FEAST OF JOACHIM NEANDER, GERMAN REFORMED MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
Before I arrive at my main point I choose to indulge myself in raising two points.
ALPHA
All the livestock of the Egyptians died in Exodus 9:6. That is what the text says. Where, then, did the Egyptians get the livestock mentioned in 9:19? My inquiring mind wants to know. The source of both verses is presumably the Elohist (E), so I cannot explain away this detail by pointing to the editing together of different documents. And I assume that the Hebrews kept all their livestock, of which we will read later in the Book of Exodus.
I did find one attempt to explain this detail. The NIV Study Bible (1985), page 98, offers this weak explanation:
That is, all that were left out in the fields. Protected livestock remained alive (see vv. 19-21).
But that is not what 9:6 says. It does not say that all the unprotected livestock died. No, even in the New International Version, it reads:
All the livestock of the Egyptians died, but one one animal belonging to the Israelites died.
The sooner we abandon misconceptions of Scriptural infallibility and inerrancy, the better off we will be. We ought not to transform texts into allegedly error-free idols. No, an error crept in somewhere during the transmission of the saga of the plagues. That is the simplest explanation.
BETA
Hebrews 2:15 is one source for the Conquest Satan theory of the Atonement. One finds three understandings of the Atonement in the writings of the first five centuries’ worth of the Church Fathers. The other two are Penal Substitution and the Incarnation itself.
+++++++++++++++
Now for my main programming….
Exodus 9:20-21, for the first time in that book, makes a distinction between those Egyptians who obeyed God’s instructions and those who did not. Those who did as Moses said reaped the benefits. And, in Hebrews 2:1-4, we read a stark warning not to neglect salvation
so that we do not drift away.
–2:1b, The New Jerusalem Bible
Yes, I affirm Single Predestination and its partner, free will, and therefore recognize the possibility of committing apostasy. I do not advocate apostasy, however. Free will plays a vital role in gaining and retaining salvation for many people.
The original audience for the Letter to the Hebrews risked suffering for the Gospel. So here in Chapter 2 we find yet another passage which contradicts the idea that suffering necessarily equals punishment for sin. In fact, the text tells us, Christ’s suffering “perfected” him, that is, completed the divine plan of salvation. So Christ, who has suffered, can identify with and help suffering Christians.
This is excellent news. It should encourage us in our struggles. But if we drift away, there remains the possibility of returning. I do not presume to know the extent of divine mercy. It is vast, however. But there is also judgment. All of these matters are for God, not me, to decide and decree. If we are prodigal sons or daughters, may we return to home and stay there. And, if we are elder brothers or sisters, may we not resent divine mercy.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
MAY 30, 2012 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA, HISTORIAN AND ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP
THE FEAST OF APOLO KIVEBULAYA, ANGLICAN EVANGELIST
THE FEAST OF JOACHIM NEANDER, GERMAN REFORMED MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
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.