The postcolonial and liberation critical interpretations of the Exodus narrative rest on the ability of the narrative to be used analogically and to apply to people’s other than the Jews. Those who argue that the intentio auctoris (the authorial intention) determines the “true” meaning of Sacred Scripture, such as Schleiermacher,[1] would likely disagree with this notion and argue that the text-centred and reader-centred approach is eisegetical, although whether it is possible to undertake exegesis without eisegesis is highly questionable.[2]
Nevertheless, it cannot be avoided that the Exodus narrative is essentially a history – albeit a history grounded in faith[3] – and narrates the particular: a specific case of God’s liberating a chosen group of people from one historical incident of oppression. In the history of Ancient Israel and Judah this was unfortunately not the only case of occupation, exile or oppression – the Babylonian exile, the occupation by the Hellenistic empire and the Persians as well as Imperial Roman domination were all endured long after the Exodus from Egypt. Indeed, Jeremiah seems to suggest that YHWH desires Israel to endure persecution as a punishment for not heeding His word.[4] Furthermore, the messianic expectations of second temples Jews were likely, in part, characterised by the expectation a political liberator to re-establish Davidic rule over the land,[5] a reality that was not realised by Christ’s coming, even if he is interpreted as carrying a social and political message. This challenges the view that the Exodus narrative represents the paradigm of God’s interaction with the poor and oppressed.
Furthermore, the Exodus is not simple liberation from enslavement to an autonomous nation state or the state of self-determining freedom for the sake of community and solidarity for which the Marxist strives.[6] St Paul’s description of himself as a “δουλος” (slave/servant) of Christ,[7] suggests that the enslavement of the Israelites to the Egyptians has been replaced by an indebted servitude to YHWH[8] – Israel is not liberated to do as it pleases, but is to establish a theocratic nation.[9]
Indeed, whilst the Mosaic law certainly demonstrates profound concern for ensuring justice and solidarity with the vulnerable[10] – justice is not equated with equality as it is in many modern models. The provision within the law for slavery[11] assumes that slaves will be bought and sold and even provides for the marking of slaves by way of an earring. The society is markedly hierarchical and patriarchal, with women occupying a lower status than men, having fewer rights.[12] Whilst the Israelite society undoubtedly demonstrated relatively more concern with justice than its contemporary neighbours, it is far from the egalitarian, “classless,” ideal envisaged by many liberation theologians.
Postcolonial and liberation readings of Exodus generally regard the passage of the Red Sea or Moses’ reception of the law at Sinai (which is interpreted in political terms) as the culmination of the Exodus narrative. Arguably, however, the conquest of the “promised land” is the direct fulfilment of God’s liberating promise to Moses in Exodus 3:7-8. If the Exodus narrative is taken as including the conquest narrative, the postcolonial and liberation readings are compromised by the divine command to “utterly destroy”[13] the seven nations occupying the land which had been promised to Abraham.[14] The account of the Israelite’s discharge of this command is narrated at length in Joshua, a text which has been described by some as a narrative of genocide.[15]
[1] McEnhill P, Newlands GM. Fifty Key Christian Thinkers. (London: Routledge, 2004): p236.
[2] Beker JC. Paul the Apostle. (London: Fortress Press, 1980): p.xiii.
[3] Plaut WG, Stein DE. The Torah: A Modern Commentary. (New York: Union for Reform Judaism, 2004): p145.
[4] Jeremiah 25:1-11.
[5] Theissen G, Merz A. The Historical Jesus. (London: Fortress Press, 1998): p539.
[6] Moore SD, Segovia FF. Postcolonial Biblical Criticism. (Leicester: Continuum Press, 2005): p192.
[7] Barclay W. The Letter to the Romans. (London: Westminster John Knox, 2002): p14.
[8] Leviticus 25:55.
[9] Knierim R. Cosmos and History in Israel’s Theology. Horizon’s in Biblical Theology. 3.1 (1981): 59-62.
[10] Exodus 23:9.
[11] Exodus 21.
[12] Exodus 21:7, 23:17.
[13] Deuteronomy 7:1-2.
[14] Genesis 15.
[15] Prior JM. ‘Power’ and the ‘Other’ in Joshua: the brutal birthing of a group identity. Mission Studies. 23.1 (2006): 27-43.
