Ben Zvi’s Commentary on Micah

I read Ehud Ben Zvi’s commentary on the Book of Micah.  Ben Zvi is skeptical about scholarly tendencies to trace prophecies back to an eighth century figure named Micah, for at least two reasons:

First of all, Ben Zvi does not think that contents of the Book of Micah can be securely tied to the eighth century, for several of its claims are general rather than specific to a particular time.  Ben Zvi dismisses attempts to emend the text to conform to the eighth century B.C.E. (which is probably done because the book’s superscription says that Micah prophesied in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah), such as replacing “Babylon” in Micah 4:10 with “Assyria”.  Although Ben Zvi regards several parts of Micah as practically a-historical, he thinks that it best fits Israel’s post-monarchic period, for it talks about such concepts as exile and the remnant, plus it manifests a struggle by powerless people to hold on to hope—as they fantasize about having power over the territory of Israel and the nations.  Micah 4:10 refers to Babylon as “there”, not “here”, so Ben Zvi regards Judah as the provenance of the Book of Micah, more specifically, post-exilic Achaemenid Judah, a time when Jews still regarded themselves as under God’s punishment and awaited restoration.  While Micah 5 mentions the threat of the Assyrians, Ben Zvi does not think that offers any indication of an eighth century date, for Micah 5:6 refers to the land of Nimrod, which is Babylon.  For Ben Zvi, Micah 5 is simply referring to Israel’s enemies according to historical examples, or is presenting hypotheticals (Suppose the Assyrians…).

According to Ben Zvi, the function of the Book of Micah was to show that Israel was punished on account of her sins, and to offer her hope that restoration would occur in the future.  While many scholars have argued that there are Deuteronomistic additions to Micah, which may be how some have accounted for exilic elements of the Book, Ben Zvi does not agree, for he contends that the Book of Micah draws from the Books of Kings, just like the post-exilic Books of Chronicles do. And, as he argued regarding the Book of Zephaniah, Ben Zvi affirms that the Book of Micah, too, was intended to encourage Israel that she could trust God’s word that restoration would occur, for God’s prophecies of catastrophe for Israel had come to pass.

Second, in contrast to scholars who try to identify traces of Micah’s orally-performed prophecies, Ben Zvi regards the Book of Micah as primarily literary—a document to be read, reread, and studied by a literate elite, who communicated God’s words to others in Israel.  On page 110, Ben Zvi offers a reason that speeches in the Book of Micah are literary rather than oral: “Of course, as in other sections in the book of Micah (e.g., 2:1-5), that the words uttered by the speaker in one speech reported in the book depend on those uttered in another speech in close proximity in the book militates against the idea that we have before us the very words said by an actual speaker on two separate occasions.  This observation and those advanced before…indicate that implied author constructed the voice of the speaker with the readership of the book in mind.”  For Ben Zvi, the dependence of one speech on another in the Book of Micah is evidence that the speeches are literary, not oral, perhaps because a literary work has inter-related pieces that are part of a broader whole, whereas sermons are not as neat and interconnected with each other.

Micah’s Search for an Honest Man

In the fourth century B.C.E., Diogenes the Cynic carried a lamp in the streets of Greece in search of an honest man. Similarly, about four centuries earlier, the prophet Micah was looking for at least one honest person in Judah. Unfortunately, like Diogenes, he could not find any. Micah 7:1-7 states the following:

“Woe is me! For I have become like one who, after the summer fruit has been gathered, after the vintage has been gleaned, finds no cluster to eat; there is no first-ripe fig for which I hunger. The faithful have disappeared from the land, and there is no one left who is upright; they all lie in wait for blood, and they hunt each other with nets. Their hands are skilled to do evil; the official and the judge ask for a bribe, and the powerful dictate what they desire; thus they pervert justice. The best of them is like a brier, the most upright of them a thorn hedge. The day of their sentinels, of their punishment, has come; now their confusion is at hand. Put no trust in a friend, have no confidence in a loved one; guard the doors of your mouth from her who lies in your embrace; for the son treats the father with contempt, the daughter rises up against her mother, the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; your enemies are members of your own household. But as for me, I will look to the LORD, I will wait for the God of my salvation; my God will hear me” (NRSV).

According to this passage, Micah is hungering to find just one righteous person in Judah, but he can’t, for everyone around him is murderous, conniving, and skilled in evil. Justice is perverted, as corrupt judges accept bribes and allow the rich to run roughshod over the poor. And things are so bad that people cannot trust their friends, even the people in their own immediate families. Micah concludes that God is the only one he can really trust.

Psalm 14:2-3 presents God himself as failing in his search for an honest person. The passage states, “The LORD looks down from heaven on humankind to see if there are any who are wise, who seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike perverse; there is no one who does good, no, not one.”

The apostle Paul quotes Psalm 14:2-3 in Romans 3:10-11 to support his argument that all people are sinful. In Paul’s thought, that reality sets the stage for the coming of Jesus, who died to redeem and transform corrupt humanity.

My reaction to Micah 7:1-7, Psalm 14:2-3, and Romans 3:10-11 is mixed. Can I truly say that I’ve never met a righteous person, not even one? No. Not everyone I meet is bloodthirsty, dishonest, or thoroughly selfish. Sure, there are times in my alienation when I have a “nobody loves me” attitude and feel that all human beings are cold and uncaring. When I am in this state of mind, I scoff whenever I hear the word “community,” for I have a hard time developing warm feelings towards other people. “What have they ever done for me?” I think. But my impression is not entirely accurate, for there actually are good people out there who really do want to help others. And these people can be found among both Christians and also non-Christians, so I have a hard time accepting the notion that unredeemed human beings are more corrupt than those who have been transformed by Jesus Christ. There are good people and there are bad people in both camps.

I know how many evangelicals would respond. “Sure, there are unbelievers who do good things, but they are not perfect, and God only accepts perfection.” Part of me can see their point on this, since God in Leviticus only accepts unblemished sacrifices. At the same time, however, Paul does not present human beings as slightly less than perfect. Read what he says about the human race in Romans 3:12-18: “All have turned aside, together they have become worthless; there is no one who shows kindness, there is not even one. Their throats are opened graves; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of vipers is under their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery are in their paths, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Can you honestly say that you have never met one non-Christian human being who shows kindness to others? Is every human being you encounter a liar who is quick to shed innocent blood?

Also, how would the idea that all human beings are corrupt affect my interactions with them? I think it would do so rather negatively. How are you around people you cannot trust?

Did Micah or the author of Psalm 14 figure that all human beings are inherently corrupt and incapable of goodness? Would they agree with the Calvinist doctrine of total depravity? I am hesitant to answer “yes.” Why would Micah and God even look for a righteous person if they thought that human nature precluded the existence of such a one? Psalm 14:5 says that “God is with the company of the righteous.” So now there are righteous people, Mr. Psalmist? And there was a time when God was not completely unsuccessful in his search for an upright person: he spared Noah because he alone was righteous in his generation (Genesis 7:1).

But I said that my reaction to Micah 7:1-7, Psalm 14:2-3, and Romans 3:10-11 was mixed, so there is a sense in which I can identify with those passages’ utter despair about humanity. For one, Jonathan Edwards noted in his book, Original Sin, that virtually every historical attempt to reform society has failed. Like Edwards, I attribute this to inherent flaws in human nature, such as selfishness and greed.

But I also think that human beings are getting worse. One of my favorite blogs, Things on Bryan’s Mind, has an interesting post entitled, “Does this Mean that Patristic Writers Disconnect Human Redemption from the Cross of Jesus?” In the “Comments” section, Bryan states that “humanity has grown more and more corrupt, in Athanasius‘ view, subject to a kind of epidemic of evil.” In many respects, I agree with that assessment. Humanity has become worse and worse as time has progressed. At one point in American history, there was a greater sense of community, as people actually looked out for one another. But that does not exist as much today. In their desire to make more and more money, insurance companies often deny coverage to certain individuals, showing a lack of concern about whether they live or die. Marital infidelity is rampant, to the point that it is glamorized on television and in movies. School shootings have occurred with greater frequency over the last decade than they ever did before.

A counselor of mine once told me a story that further confirmed my belief in the degeneration of humanity. He said that he has a granddaughter who is bullied in school because she is overweight. One time, she made an unsuccessful attempt to kill herself. Shortly afterwards, she received a number of messages from her classmates expressing their wish that she had succeeded.

That is shocking. There were bullies when I was a kid, but I can’t think of anyone who wished for another person to die. Things are worse now than they were when I was a kid, and I’m only 31. Jesus said in Matthew 24:12, “And because of the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold.” Are we seeing that today?

I have a hard time saying that human beings are totally bad, but I’m not about to suggest that they are inherently good. I’m not like Anne Frank, who could actually write that all people (even her Nazi captors) were good at heart. And I see both good and bad in myself. The question that faces all of is us, “To which will I yield?”

More on Atheism

I promised Scott Gray that I would take on evangelicals today, but I find that I have more to say about atheism. Some of it will overlap with what I said yesterday, and some of it will be different. Like some of my recent posts, it will have a lot of rambling, but it will hopefully be good, thought-provoking, insightful, edifying rambling.

When I was at that Bible study meeting–the one in which the leader said he was glad he was not a non-Christian–my mind turned to something specific: I thought about professors I knew who fought with one another for prominence in their departments. Most of these professors were atheists, agnostics, or not that religious.

Why is this important? Well, suppose that there is no God, and that this life is all there is. If that were my belief system, then I would want to get the most that I can out of this life. I would want to make my mark on the world rather than fading into obscurity. I’d be in continual competition with people as I pursued my desires. Also, since I wouldn’t be satisfied with God or eternal things, I’d seek my thrills in what the temporal world has to offer (e.g., power, money, sex, prominence, admiration from others, etc.).

Of course, on some level, the above paragraph describes me anyway. It also fits other Christians. Let me draw on my daily quiet time to illustrate what I mean. I am reading the Book of Micah right now. Like a lot of the biblical prophets, Micah criticizes the false prophets of Israel. In Micah 3, Micah accuses them of being prophets-for-hire. They may indeed have had the gift of prophecy at some point, for v 6 promises that they will have no visions or revelations, which only makes sense if they once had these things. But, at some time, they decided to go for the gold. They did not speak truth to power, but they told the powerful what they wanted to hear, even though those very people were oppressing the poor. After all, the people with power had the money, so they could give the false prophets what they wanted: a comfortable lifestyle.

My point? This world was more real to the false prophets than God was, and so they tried to improve their temporal lot. And that is true with many people inside and outside of the body of Christ: we try to make our mark in this world. Sadly, a thought that enters my mind when I encounter people is, “How can this person help me?” And that’s the way the false prophets were operating: they figured that the rich people could give them a comfortable lifestyle, whereas their lowly victims could not. And so they prophesied divine favor for the rich, even as they ignored the plight of the poor. They did not think that God could take care of them, since, as I said, the world around them was more real in their eyes than God.

So is God necessary for morality to exist? On some level, yes. On some level, no. Let me explain. I get annoyed with Christians who act as if a divine super-cop is the only possible basis for morality, for I believe that morality by itself has practical benefits. Whether there is a God or not, we would all feel better in a society in which people did not kill, steal, lie, or commit adultery, and chose instead to love and help one another. But a lot of us do not have this sort of long-term vision. I know I don’t. A good society often appears to me to be an abstract and unattainable ideal, plus I usually do not think that anything little old me does can have grand consequences for society as a whole. And so I tend to act according to what benefits me at the moment, without regard for the bigger picture. So is a divine super-cop who enforces moral laws on an individual basis necessary for me to be moral? Yes, and I would say that this is true of many others as well.

Of course, I don’t kill or steal, but there are times when I act with selfish calculation. And this brings me to another point: I often do not succeed in getting what I want. Tim Keller of Redeemer Presbyterian Church once gave a sermon on greed that caused me to think. He said that a poor person can be greedy if he thinks about wealth all the time and resents rich people. His covetousness is still there, even if he does not have what he wants. And that fits me to a T. I may not have all the power, money, or women I desire, but if I resent those who do have them, then my heart is attached to this world. And that is something that leads to hatred, strife, and jealousy. These things have a negative effect on others, and they also rob me of any peace of mind.

Here’s another thought: I look at my life with Asperger’s, and I blame God. I wonder why I had to be cursed with this sort of life. Come to think of it, why does anyone have to go through life with a handicap? But an atheist would not necessarily bemoan the unfairness of life. Since she does not believe in a God, she is not exactly expecting fairness. For her, the afflicted person simply has to endure the cards he’s dealt, as he finds some way to move on.

So perhaps this is a positive aspect of atheism, and maybe I can somehow incorporate it into my Christianity. But, overall, I have problems with the atheistic worldview because it sees this life as all that there is. And, when one holds that perspective, he or she may tend to idolize this world. And once that happens, selfishness can result, along with its negative consequences.