In chapter 16 of GOD, the author puts forward the charge that YHWH is 'megalomaniac'. I mean, we really don't need anything additionally (other than what we already know from the book thusfar) to believe that this is, in fact, the truth. Barker quotes Deuteronomy 28:58-59 (KJV):
"If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious & fearful name, the Lord thy God; Then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, & the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, & of long continuance, & sore sickness, & of long continuance"
According to my Google search, 'megalomania' is 'an obsession with the exercise of power'. Perhaps no previous descriptor reads better as to YHWH's character. Barker uses Pslam 102:15 as a proof-text in this chapter. The Psalm reads:
"The nations will fear the name of the Lord, & all the kings of the earth thy glory." (RSV) Several times in the Old Testament, YHWH speaks of his own glory, usually while demanding obedience from his favoured race.
Ezekiel 39:21 is also given as evidence of this 'obsession with the exercise of power':
"And I will set my glory among the nations; & all the nations shall see my judgement which I have executed, & my hand which I have laid on them" (RSV)
If the judgement/punishment was or will be evident, then why did it need to be stated at all? If we imagine the Old Testament books as part of YHWH making a sustained case for the wide berth of his power & influence, as well as an apology for the exercise of this power, then perhaps we would conclude that the 'author' of the text was especially insecure about said power. If your might is overwhelming & apparent, if it need not be said, then why even bother? Such evident facts about life do not usually find themselves into religious texts unless they are just the opposite: not apparent at all. To put this into a relevant, Post-Modern context, it is not necessarily self-evident to a non-Christian that wars, natural disasters, & social change (all of which is really 'the usual' for this world) would portend the imminent end of the world. When one is instructed (or inducted, as it were) into the proper ideological framework, then perhaps they can 'get it'. In this way, we must take YHWH's forthcoming statements about his enormous power as evidence of his actual lack of power. The power that YHWH gains as a deity is that which he gains from the distribution of this very text of his followers. From an outsider perspective, Jesus, YHWH, Moroni et al really only start to acquire 'power' once their followers exert theirs. Whether it has been the long Christian history of persecuting others, the founding of religious colonies, the construction of churches, the power of deities, in a non-ideological sense (that which contains no ideological 'lens' through which to perform an interpretation) begins once that particular cult attracts followers, who then exert *their* will upon the world. 'Divine' will is done through very human hands, always (non-ideologically). Of course, within the various religious & spiritual ideologies, we would say that YHWH has always been 'in control' from the beginning of time, to the pre-modern murders committed by his followers, & beyond
 |
| The 'signs of the times' |
My very Christian psychiatrist (called 'med managers' in this anodyne mental health clinic setting) remarked in a session how much easier it is to know that 'someone' is 'in control' other than humanity. She apparently finds much satisfaction & comfort to be derived from a feeling of being out of control. But, if what she imagines as 'god' is simply a medium through which her own id exerts its influence, than who really is in control? God-concepts, as well as values & ideologies have long fulfilled their utility as cyphers, allowing the very faithful to 'act' in accord with god's will, while the actual will they imagine to be god's is but themselves! For example, does it not seem questionable that the many pogroms committed by Christian Europeans were enacted as a form of religious retribution against that god's own chosen people? In cases like these, it is not 'god's' will being done, but that of the humans. In the monotheistic, confessional space, the 'all-powerful' god becomes simply that which legitimizes the imperatives of the id- to murder, to divide, to classify, to act upon in-groups & out, to patrol, to eliminate that which is different. God's will tends to dovetail closely with the 'will' of human followers in many cases. Is that not something to consider when looking at these ancient Jewish texts as well. I.e., it is no surprise that god says he favours the Jews, the Jews are the ones who wrote the book! This is one instance in which the social construction of religion is evident.
Barker addresses the notable Henotheism of the ancient Hebrew civilization in this chapter as follows:
"The first commandment prohibits having other gods, & the second commandment states that god is jealous of those other gods...you can't be jealous of someone who does not exist...The Promised Land was to be their love nest, cleared free of any potential challenges to his dominance & her compliance...The early Israelites indeed believed there were many gods, but imagined that their was supreme (what a coincidence, jm)..."
All in all, the author continues to make his case, long after even the proof-texts are necessary: We already quite understand that YHWH is not the nicest god on the block -- convinced of his own glory, yet jealous & insecure (at least he is honest about his insecurity, unlike some humans!). This insecurity is also found within his followers, of which I encounter many in Jacksonville, all of these centuries after his debut in the books of the Old Testament. The Christianity & Biblicalism is not simply loud-&-proud, but screamed & deafening, to the point where I wonder if the residents of Jacksonville are not experiencing a collective crisis of faith: If they really believed & really knew that theirs was *the* god, that their religious worldview, was the only correct & worthwhile project, then why make such a constant public show of it? Perhaps there is a religious experience that I lack understanding of phenomenologically speaking because I am not of that creed.
What I can know: YHWH's personality is reflective of his followers, yesterday & today.
No comments:
Post a Comment