queen martine blah blah blah: JS423 Assignment 1: Lecture 4,5,6

Robin Martine Eve-Macleod
Grad dip ed
Lecture 4

The Moses Movement

Exodus: The Israelites – the chosen people were the poor, nomadic, slave class – without citizenship – without rights, Moses and the God Yahweh claim them as their own.

The biblical scholar Norman Gottlieb saw Exodus as the symbolic memories of the poor to legitimise their struggle against their oppressors, in Pharaohs Egypt. He saw Moses as a movement, rather than a single entity, whose central message was of equity and equality for the disenfranchised members of society under the Pharaohs – an egalitarian social project in opposition to the feudalism of Egyptian ruling class, that had the prophetic guidance of their god, Yahweh. In this light the “angel of death” killing all the 1st born “…the killing of the firstborn, the ones born to rule” (Brueggemann, p.22), is a symbolic act that disassociates God from the ruling class of Egypt, by eradicating those traditionally born to rule, through an act of guerrilla warfare.

Moses (and those associated with his ideology) is a “…paradigmatic prophet who sought to evoke in Israel an alternative consciousness.” (Brueggemann, p.15) The religious institutions of the Pharaohs preached the divine order of feudal Egypt, while Moses preached in direct opposition to that order, of a “free God” (Brueggemann, , p.17) who actively engages with the Israelites to overthrow their systemic oppression: “Moses dismantles the politics of oppression and exploitation by countering with a politics of justice and compassion.” (Brueggemann, p.16). And leads the chosen, the poor and oppressed out of domination, and into a new way of life.

Jesus can be seen as having inherited Moses’ social project. Jesus enhances and broadens the scope of the project and the ‘promised land’ becomes the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’, not a piece of real estate, but a land of equity and equality for all. Furthermore he rejects violence as a means of attaining equity and equality, in favour of tolerance and love.

This Moses and God I can understand. Looking at the Old Testament like this makes explicable things that were irreconcilable for me, such as the horrific killing of the first born. Even if, like Jesus, I do not agree with the method, I can understand the sentiment.

Reference:
Brueggemann, W. “The alternative community of Moses” The Prophetic Imagination,

Lecture 5

Two “Projects”

The Moses movement achieves its goals. After about 250 years tensions begin to arise as class distinctions take prominence over equality and equity. At Mt Sinai Temple Law was used as a confirmation of hierarchical order and a tension develops between the “Prophetic” project of justice as preached by Moses and Jesus, and the “Purity” project of the Temple of Mt Sinai, in which the law is central: “The Jesus movement left the temple confines and showed the universal appeal and power of Jewish spirituality…A different language, a different culture- none of this was an obstacle. The experience opened them and awakened them to new thoughts. It did not strap them into a rigid orthodoxy.” (The Single Source of Morality and Religion, pp.62-3) The tension this created had a direct effect on Jesus, leading ultimately to his crucifixion, and continued throughout the Gospel in to theology of today.

Balance is essential to create a harmonious blend that gives structure to immutable truths, while seeking justice for all in the myriad ways of human relationships on Earth. Without balance the prophetic can become personal ideology which is little more than heresy, while rigid adherence to the law lacks the ability to work with local community nuances, and can lead to an idolatry of the Church.

Lecture 6

Jesus and the Crucifixion:

The popular view of Jesus’ death gives Jesus up to God as a sacrificial lamb in atonement for the sins of man, a blood sacrifice to a vengeful deity, language and ideology that was part of many religions of the ancient world, including the Old Testament.

In the 4th century Christianity became the state religion of Rome. The influx of pagans embracing Christianity needed to understand their new religion in terms of their past religious experiences, in which blood sacrifice was a central theme.
In the 12th century St Anselum used the ideology of atonement as a ‘sacred mimic of the feudal social order’ at a time when honour was a matter of blood, blood ancestry, blood contests.

However, the theology of atonement is at odds with the most powerful story of the New Testament, that of the prodigal son. This analogy is of God as the forgiving, loving father, who will go out to meet his wayward son, rather than wait in judgement. God embraces the sinners, and rejects the role of accountant requiring recompense to balance the books. It also negates Jesus’ life, as only his sacrifice is needed to expunge our guilt and satisfy God, his life is just filling in time until this ultimate act. If this was the case, why need he go through a human existence at all?

If the crucifixion is not an act of atonement, then it is a consequence of the life of Jesus, not the point of it. Jesus is the inheritor of the prophetic project of Moses that preaches equality and equity for all. Jesus lived and vociferously expounded a life that was in opposition to the current culture and power base of the day. His message was for all, not just those who lived rigidly by Temple Law (The Purity project), and it was in opposition to the structure of society under Roman Imperialism, all of which came to a head with the destruction of the Temple. His crucifixion was a direct consequence of his radical, compassionate, subversive and confronting preaching to the masses, “He has, in fact, dismantled the dominant culture and nullified its claims. The way of his ultimate criticism is his decisive solidarity with the marginal people and the accompanying vulnerability required by that solidarity.” (Brueggemann p.81)

At Gethsemene Jesus recognised that if he continued on this path he would die. He knew that some of his friend will denounce and reject him, but still he feels that to validate his vision of the Kingdom of Heaven must stand firm. His acceptance of death is an act of fidelity to the prophetic mission that he has inherited and lived his life in accordance with. His resurrection is God’s fidelity to Jesus, and thus the prophetic mission he died for: “As with Moses, so Jesus’ ministry and death opposed the politics of oppression with the politics of justice and compassion. As with Moses, so Jesus’ ministry and death resisted the economics of affluence and called for the economics of shared humanity. As with Moses, so Jesus’ ministry and death contradicted the religion of God’s captivity with the freedom of God to bring life where he will, even in the face of death.” (Brueggemann, p,95)

This is a comprehensible act of strength and compassion by Jesus, that is in keeping with his history, and that many others have also committed to with similar results.