Sunday, April 10, 2016

Week 9: Vengeance, Women, & the Emergence of Israel

A poetic scene of battle extolling the leadership of the early Israelite leader Deborah is told in Judges 5:2-31. Reading the poem in its own light and analyzing it as a primary source, we can learn a lot about how and why it was written, even if the historicity of the events told in the poem is questionable.

1) Who is the author and when did they write?
Frankly, we do not know who the author of the text is. The structure of the poem makes it look like it is written by a witness to the victories that Israel was able to achieve in the Transjordan region after their decades of wandering. Of course, we have to bear in mind that, despite the suspected age of this account (it is considered to be among the oldest of recovered Old Testament literature, according to Dennis T. Olson, New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 2, p.787), according to Carol Meyers, “the biblical narratives about ancient Israel reached their final form many centuries after the events they describe. The narrators were not eyewitnesses to events they recount.” (Meyers, “Does the Bible Relate to History”)

The author describes the land shaking when the Lord “set out from Seir” and “marched out from Edom’s fields” (Judges 5:4a). The time period when this would have happened would likely refer to history after Esau’s residence in Edom as described in Genesis, the capital of which was Mt Seir (c.f. Transjordan Territory of Edom). The author clearly could not have known what happened at that time, because the author could not have been there. But the point that s/he is making could be related to the fact that, in that example from Genesis, Esau goes to live there with the Canaanite woman he married; in leaving that place many, many years later, the response of nature was to reject the events that took place there – perhaps chiefly among them the intermarriage of an Israelite with a Canaanite.

2) How has the author brought her/his own bias to the event they are recounting?
Meyers suggests that, “Like other ancient storytellers, the shapers of biblical narratives were not concerned with getting it factually right; rather, their aim was to make an important point.” (Meyers, “Does the Bible Relate to History”). Paula McNutt argues for the same point: “The "history" recorded in the biblical narratives, whether they contain accurate information or not, should be understood first and foremost as representing notions and beliefs constructed to serve some purpose in the social and historical contexts in which they were written, edited, and arranged in their present form.” (McNutt, “Reconstructing the Society of Ancient Israel”).

With this in mind, it is helpful to use a critical eye when reading verses 12-18, when the author celebrates the tribes who fought against the Canaanites and pillories those tribes who did not. It may be that the author was a member of one of the brave tribes, like from Zebulun – “a people that readily risked death” presumably for the sake of Israel’s future (Judges 5:18). Another piece to consider is that the author may have been a woman – or at least someone with an interest in showcasing the successes of women and Israel’s dependence on their leadership and action (e.g. Deborah and Jael).


3) Who is the intended audience for whom the author writes?
While the story, as written, could be interpreted as a panegyric to God, extolling God for protecting the people and leading them in victory against the “enemies” they confronted in Canaan (Judges 5:31a), it seems likely to also be a victory hymn celebrating key Israelite leaders for their military prowess and success defeating their enemies. As such, it is likely written with an audience of Israelite hearers in mind, who will listen to the awe-inspiring accounts of their early leaders and be reminded both of the greatness of their nation and the greatness of their God who led them this far.

4) What symbolism or metaphor is at work in the writing?
There is tremendously powerful metaphor evidenced throughout the piece, but none so as extreme as the story of Jael assassinating the Canannite general Sisera while he slept in her tent. In verses 26 and 27, after Sisera has entered Jael’s tent, which may be a metaphor for rape or sex, he falls asleep. Jael takes the opportunity to grab a stake and mallet and drives it through Sisera’s temple. In verse 27, the poetry is repetitive: “at her feet he sank, fell and lay flat; at her feet he sank, h fell; where he sank, there he fell – dead.” The phrase ‘at her feet’ is a play on words with strong connotations of sexual activity, but here it is Sisera that has been on the receiving (and losing) end of the sexual activity (i.e. rape) at the hands of a woman, Jael. What’s more, in the following verses, as Sisera’s mother waits at the window waiting for her son, she wonders aloud whether the delay in his return is because of the conquests of war: “a girl or two for each warrior” (Judges 5:30a). While only one example of symbolism, the point is a strong one: Israel has turned the tables on these erstwhile stronger opponents and, in contravention of the conventional logic that they would be overcome again, has defeated the Canaanites and made them the victims in this most salacious way.

5) In context of your study of history, what does this text teach you?

On the whole, the text is a pretty powerful series of contrasts about Israel vis-à-vis its wars and encounters with its neighbors. First, throughout this poem, Israel’s benefactors almost wholly come from outside Israel: first God and then Jael (the wife of a Kenite, not an Israelite). For whatever reason, this victory hymn celebrates outsiders as much as it celebrates only some of the tribes who actually fought. Second, the poem is a pretty significant celebration of violence, which is problematic for a reader in today’s context – especially a reader such as myself, whose Christian beliefs are predicated on peace, forgiveness, and reconciliation. Themes of rape (vs 27), making war (v19), and marching with might (v21) stand at the polar opposite of my own understanding. And yet, these were clearly necessary evils that Israel had to experience and to bear in order to establish itself as a nation and create an environment where belief in Yahweh and practice of their ethnic customs could take hold. For me, this is not an easy concept to grasp and accept, and yet it is a tension that exists and must be confronted.

6 comments:

Unknown said...

Thank you for the beautiful summary which is firmly fixed in context. The intermingling of the poetry and fact allows the beauty of the text (for what it is) to exist but also be explained through our lens of context and morality. I too struggle with the violent reality of the ancient time of Israel. I too can at least respect and appreciate the point of the writing despite my struggle. I too can allow enough room to be uncomfortable and remain open to an alternate understanding of the moral fibre which I am thankful to not see in my own life of faith today.
I appreciate the honesty you have maintained throughout your research, acquaintance, and struggle with the text.

Unknown said...

Excellent summary of the text! You have given me a clearer historical context, and added your own thoughts in a compelling manner. I particularly appreciate your use of a wide range of resources to place this passage in its historical context (as much as is possible!). I echo Joseph's appreciation of the intermingling of the poetry and fact in this passage - and I think you have captured this tension well. I also echo your sentiments regarding violence and the tension in which we need to hold these cultural realities. I think it is particularly helpful to look at the context of the time as a starting point with struggling with the violent imagery. Still, it remains difficult to do this from our modern Christian lens. Thanks, again, for helping me think through these issues more deeply. Peace.

Jonathantolbert said...

Thank you for your post! Upon reading your post, I found that we have some similarities and pulled some similar information from the passage. I agree with you that it is interesting that a woman pretty much saved the day in this passage even though it was set in a patriarchal society. It is also interesting that the women mentioned (Jael and Deborah) were given names. Oftentimes, women were not even given names when mentioned throughout the Bible, so that also adds to the credibility. However, I am not sure that I would go so far as to say that the text was written by a woman. I am not saying it was not or that it could not have been, my thoughts are that there is just not enough information to make that call. Also, if it were written by a woman, wouldn't it discredit the abilities of the women mentioned? What I mean is that Deborah and Jael are even more incredible because they did something so great that they were females and were mentioned by name in this passage in a patriarchal, oppressive society. However, if it were a female writing this, that might take some of the prestige off of the women. Not sure, just thoughts. Thanks for the post!

Unknown said...

Wow. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I completed the assignment on the same text, but missed a couple significant points which you very eloquently pointed out…and taught me a couple new words whilst doing so.

I hadn’t thought about the showcasing of violence in the poem (the sexual implications I had missed, so I hadn’t considered that either!). What an interesting thought to wrestle with. I suppose much of the Hebrew Bible poses this quandary – how do we reconcile our idea of a loving God with the images of violence described therein? Adam Hamilton has said that he believes there are parts of the Bible that never captured the heart of God. I wonder if such a dismissal is lazy, brave or misguided. In any case, I definitely see your point, and will definitely give it more thought in the coming weeks!

Unknown said...

Wow. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I completed the assignment on the same text, but missed a couple significant points which you very eloquently pointed out…and taught me a couple new words whilst doing so.

I hadn’t thought about the showcasing of violence in the poem (the sexual implications I had missed, so I hadn’t considered that either!). What an interesting thought to wrestle with. I suppose much of the Hebrew Bible poses this quandary – how do we reconcile our idea of a loving God with the images of violence described therein? Adam Hamilton has said that he believes there are parts of the Bible that never captured the heart of God. I wonder if such a dismissal is lazy, brave or misguided. In any case, I definitely see your point, and will definitely give it more thought in the coming weeks!

Unknown said...

Thanks for your thoughtful post. I was unaware of the sexual connotations implicit in this passage until you outlined them, and if that is indeed true it adds a very different spin to this tale, or at least a new dimension. Your thought on outsiders is also intriguing. It is as if the author is saying that the Israelites themselves are unable to take care of themselves and need the help of someone else. Is this just part of the Deuteronomistic Historian's ongoing advocacy for a king?
Like you and the others, I have struggled with these stories of violence, and despite growing up with the Bible and its stories, I have never really been able to reconcile these with my understanding of a loving God. Even when I chalk it up to "sovereignty of God," I still do not quite get it, although when the narrative is taken as a whole (ie the entire Bible), it does put much of this into context.
At least we have a nice girl-power story for a change!