From Oppressed to Oppressor: The Oppressed Hebrews Become Oppressors Themselves

One of the many things that we encounter when we study the history of national and social groups, is that many times those groups that have been in a condition of subjugation and oppression, when they are liberated from those conditions, in turn subjugate and oppress others.  That appears to be the history of humankind.  Even those nations that at one time have been colonies of others, in turn become the colonizing nations of the world.  Our own nation, the U.S.A. is a perfect example of what I am saying.  Our history is one of genocide, land-grabbing, and slavery.  After liberating ourselves from British colonialism, we engaged in making colonies out of other nations in the Caribbean and in the Pacific.

In one of my recent classes on Liberation Theology at the college where I serve as Visiting Professor, one of our international students who happens to be a pastor in his home country (Malawi) posed the question of how we can justify from a biblical/theological standpoint, the people of Israel coming out of bondage in Egypt, and then upon their release, go and commit acts of genocide and colonization against other nations. That question, indeed, invites us to think about inconsistency and even outright hypocrisy.  My answer to the student was that if one takes the approach that the Bible in its entirety is the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God, then one would arrive at the conclusion that it was God Herself/Himself who ordered the Hebrew people to carry out these atrocities against the Canaanites. After all, (according to this view), God had promised Abraham that he and his descendants would be given and inherit this land.  Therefore, according to this scheme of biblical interpretation, God was the engineer and master-mind of the Hebrew massacre and the land-grabbing colonization that we find alluded to in the pages of the Old Testament.

On the other hand, I told the student, if one takes the approach that the Bible is a mixture of divine inspiration and human concoction, then it would be possible for one to see that the writers of Scripture used the name of God to justify the land-grabbing and accompanying genocide.  This approach would require that one does not subscribe to the belief in the inerrant and infallible Scripture.  It would leave room for the human element in initiating the writings.

These questions pose problems for the most ardent believer in the biblical message.  Even a pastor whom I happen to know personally, has recently shared with me that he is "having problems with the Bible."  The Bible, as a literary document, challenges those of us who live many centuries after the original writings of Scripture.  The standards by which we judge fairness and justice are not necessarily the same standards that were utilized at the time that the Bible was written.  The challenges posed by these questions, pose, in turn, another set of questions such as:

What do we mean by "inspiration?"  How relevant, if so, are the issues of inerrancy and infallibility? Do we claim these characteristics only for the original autographs of the Bible, or do we believe that these characteristics also apply to the subsequent manuscripts (hand-written copies of the originals) and the translations which were based on the manuscripts?

These challenges are in turn, generated by what I referred to in a previous writing as our "enslavement to the text."  We become so enslaved to the text (in the modern languages, totally ignoring the history of the transmission of the text), that we can't think outside of the "textual box."

As a theologian who believes in the biblical message, I confess that these questions pose for me, a conundrum.  They are a challenge to my faith and to my image of a just and loving God.  I have no answer to these very puzzling questions.

The task of theology relative to the field of biblical studies is a very daunting one.  I recently shared with my spouse that the task of theology is, among other things, to demonstrate that there are no absolute and final answers to every single question that we can raise.  In the attempt to make the Christian faith a "thinking faith," theology simultaneously makes it clear that our faith is accompanied by and blended with doubt and speculation.  No one, whether it be the average everyday Christian, or whether it be a clergy person, scholar, and/or theologian, can claim to have "all the answers" in her/his pocket.  Theology, just like our faith journey, is full of questions and surprises.  We are called, however, to believe that the God who has invited us on this journey, will guide us, progressively, albeit, to the knowledge of the truth, and to an eventual understanding of the complexities which are posed by those questions.

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Word, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology, Tainan Theological College/Seminary

Beyond the Bible

Most of the faith communities in the world have a body or collection of writings which they consider to be "sacred," and also "authoritative and normative" for faith and practice.  These writings are considered to be the guide for what people should believe and how they should live.

In the Judaeo-Christian tradition we have the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and the Christian Scriptures (New Testament).  This body of writings is considered to have been "given by God," i.e. divinely inspired, and therefore inerrant and infallible.  Many in these two faith communities do not "question" the contents of these scriptures, because they believe that the mere fact of questioning is rooted in doubt and speculation.  Furthermore, they believe that to question what they consider to be "the Word of God" is equivalent to committing blasphemy.

Today, I pose the question for our consideration: Is God's truth limited to that text which we call "the Bible?" Many Christians believe that.  In subscribing to that belief, they make two mistakes.  The first mistake they make is to disregard the cultural, historical, and linguistic origins of the Bible.  They treat the Bible as if it were written in a historical vacuum, independent of the life situation of the biblical authors.  The second mistake they make is to ignore the biblical doctrine of divine sovereignty, i.e. that God speaks and works how and through He/She wants. They limit God to a particular text, ignoring the fact that God's existence predates the text itself.  The Scriptures themselves are a witness to the universality of God who is revealed in a variety of ways.  To limit God's disclosure to a particular text is to be guilty of the act of "bibliolatry," i.e. worship of the Bible instead of worship of the God who inspired the Bible.

Many Christians prefer to limit their conception of God to the biblical text for the simple reason that they do not want to make the effort to inquire and research about other possibilities.  They are entrenched in their mindset that to study the scriptures (Hindu Scriptures, Buddhist texts, Holy Qu'aran, etc,) "is to go against  the Word of God."   How can one hold to such a preposterous position when there are scriptures that were written long before the Bible, and then there were scriptures that were written long after the Bible?  Nowhere in the Bible itself do we find any indication that it is "a sin" to read the scriptures of other religions.  Furthermore, to evaluate and judge the contents and truth that may exist in other sacred writings on the basis of "what the Bible says," is equivalent and tantamount to evaluating and judging an individual on the basis of what another individual says.  To evaluate other religious texts on the basis of second and even third hand hearsay is the equivalent of forming an opinion of someone on the basis of rumors that we have heard "through the grapevine."  This happens very often when people who do not want to go through the trouble of searching out these other texts prefer the comfortable route of quoting others who they consider to be "authorities and experts" on the subject matter.  More often than not, these other sources are just as unreliable in that they themselves have not done the necessary research.  

To at least partially solve this conundrum, I recommend the following:

1.  Read and research the history on the origins and formation of the Bible.  This research should include, but not be limited to the biblical languages (Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew).

2.  Read and research the history on the origins and formation of other sacred texts.  This study should include the origin and formation of religions outside the Judaeo-Christian tradition.

3.  Compare the contents of all of the sacred scriptures, focusing on the differences and similarities of each.

4.   After going through this process, draw you own conclusions as to how God's truth is revealed and manifested in the scriptures of the various religious traditions.

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen.

Dr. Juan A. Carmona

God is Unstable: You're Kidding, Right?

One of the several issues that Ruth and I "fight about (lol )" is change.  Every now and then she likes to make changes in the house. Or, she might alter the plans we had about going somewhere, and change to something else midstream as we are headed there.  I don't always feel comfortable with her "changing the batting order," unless there is a compelling reason.  I have to confess that nine out of ten times, the changes are for the better in spite of my initial opposition.

I tend to see change as a sign of instability.  One moment the person wants this, and the next moment they want that.  It drives me crazy.  I am more inclined towards being rooted and stable unless there is, in my opinion, a need for change.  In the years of my pastoral experience in Rochester, New York, I witnessed members of our church and others in the community moving from one place to another "on the spur of the moment."  I asked myself "How can people makes these decisions without weighting the subsequent impact on other members of the family, especially the smaller children?"  I know that there are external factors besides people's volition that contribute to their being "on the move," but it is still unnerving.

But now, we have a real problem.  When we read then Scriptures, we find that God is also "on the move."  God migrates with people from place to place.  Is that a sign of God being unstable?  Let's explore that.

We are informed in Scripture that when humankind fell into sin, that they were expelled from the mythological Garden of Eden (no offense intended to my sisters and brothers who take a literal approach to Scripture and who may be offended by my use of the worth "mythological").  It would appear, that whether we take the stories as literally true or as legend and myth, that God goes through a process of self-eviction out of the Garden and moves with humankind wherever they move.  Even in the story of the rebellious attempt to construct a tower (Tower of Babel), we find God intervening by descending to thwart the plan of the rebels. And then we find God migrating with Abraham and his offspring into Canaan, Egypt, back to Canaan, Babylon, back to Palestine, etc.  We ask "Why does God migrate so much?"  Does God get tired of being in one place?  Is God "illegal" and "undocumented?"  Is God unstable? Why does this notion of a God "on the move" upset our view of a static and unchanging God?  Aren't we informed in Scripture that God is "never-changing?"

A school of thought known as Process Theology informs us that God is constantly evolving with nature and the universe.  In other words, God is involved the process of change and motion.  In that process, God allures the creation to Herself/Himself.  God is not considered to be static, stale and/or "stuck in one place."  In Process Theology, God is in all things and moves with all things.

In Scripture, God's migration is related to the migration of the people.  The migration is generated by many factors, i.e. corporate disobedience and sin, imperialism and land-grabbing colonization leading to uprooting and forced migration, etc.  Human migration is not merely volitional.  It is generated by different factors such as economic survival, fleeing from persecution, the search for settling down and stability, etc.  God's migration is in solidarity with the people who suffer because of forced migration.  God's migration is one of "hearing the cry of the people and descending to aid them."  God's migration is an affirmation of hope and assurance that God is in the process.  God's migration is also an assurance that God not only sympathizes, but also empathizes with the suffering community.  God suffers along with them and is moving history in the direction of the eradication of suffering.  Thanks be to God who gives us this message which inspires us to keep hope alive while we are migrating.  God is not unstable.  God is "on the move" at every moment of our lives.

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen!

Dr. Juan A. Carmona