The Deuteronomic, or Deuteronomistic History, or “D,” tradition is found mostly in the book of Deuteronomy, and its influence extends from Deuteronomy to 2 Kings. It emphasizes the relationship between God and humankind. It has a style that serves to encourage or urge Israelites to good deeds. The language points to a period of religious crisis. One such period was following the collapse of Israel when the Assyrian threat to Judah continued and a number of evil kings endangered Yahwistic religion. “D” asserts that salvation is gained by loyal response to Yahweh’s covenant laws and by returning to pure worship of God at Jerusalem. The basic theme of “D” is that the judgment of Israel was due to the serious sins of the people; the judgment was justified and explained to the people so they would change their ways and return to obedience to God’s law.
The Priestly, or “P,” tradition was shaped by the priests of Jerusalem and emphasizes a concern for liturgy. The “P” materials are primarily religious and legal documents. The “P” tradition reworks “J” and “E” materials to reflect the point of view of the Jerusalem priesthood with its various rituals and regulations. The tradition originates during the time of Moses and gets its authority from the revelation on Mt. Sinai. “P’s” style is abstract and redundant. This tradition makes extensive use of genealogies. It is concerned about chronological correctness and gives very detailed descriptions of rituals and procedures. It avoids anthropomorphisms. The major theme of this tradition is that as YHWH is holy, so must Israel remain holy. Israel must separate itself from and remain uncontaminated by any human-made cult or morality. “P” provides guidelines for ritual and legal cleanness, like those we find in the book of Leviticus.
The Redactor, or “R,” tradition is a way of talking about redaction criticism. “Redaction” is the manner in which biblical texts were edited. The redactor took various stories and wove them together into a new understanding that reflected a change in context. Redaction criticism has been helpful in our understanding of the Christian Bible (New Testament). We know through other means of biblical criticism and archeological findings that Mark is the earliest Gospel. Both Matthew and Luke use Mark as a foundation for their Gospels. However, both Matthew and Luke added to and reinterpreted various stories and incidents in Mark. This was not an uncommon practice, and we do this today. The changes they made reflected their larger purposes as well as the changing needs of their communities. Preachers redact texts in order to make a point about God’s activity in the world today. The redactor helps us to see a bigger theological picture.
While these traditions may seem confusing and meaningless without concrete biblical examples, it is important to have some knowledge about them. This overview may seem a bit too technical and uninteresting. However, some sense of the traditions will help to unpack the texts when we study the individual men. The traditions will help us to get some sense of a bigger picture when we focus on selected stories and characters.
The predominant framework for the shape of the stories we will explore is a system known as patriarchy. The underlying assumption for all of the traditions is the superiority of men. God-loving people in the early centuries of the church reaffirmed and maintained patriarchy in spite of Jesus’ explicit affirmation of the worth and equality of all people—men, women, children, and outcast.
Patriarchy sets up the legal systems and makes official male dominance over women and children. It means that men hold the power and leadership in the important public and military institutions of society. For ancient Israel, aspects of patriarchy include the understandings that the family is the basic unit and is headed by a father, that family history is traced through the father’s blood lines, and that women’s roles are primarily those of wife and mother, especially mother of male children.
In contrast to patriarchy, feminism is the perspective in which women are understood to be fully human and thus entitled to equal rights and privileges. Feminism sees God as an important “character” in the biblical story. Feminism enables us to see more clearly the outrageous behavior of men especially in their interactions with women in biblical stories. Further, feminism claims a voice for voiceless and silent women. By uncovering women’s stories, feminist biblical interpreters highlight Jesus’ explicit affirmation of women and break through the stereotypes of women in the Bible.
The issues of culture, status, and class are important in our understanding of the Bible. Some biblical interpreters feel that feminism does not adequately deal with these issues in interpretation and another perspective is needed. “Womanism” is a term created by Alice Walker, an African American writer. It has been used to describe a theological and interpretive perspective that is inclusive rather than exclusive. Womanism deals with survival in an unpredictable and uncertain world and revisits biblical stories seeking a God we can trust. Womanism deals with issues of sexual and economic exploitation, rape, domestic violence, and alienation. It also raises issues of authority, suffering, obedience, liberation, reconciliation, and power. These are important themes that emerge in the stories of the “bad boys” in their interactions both with women and other men.
These three concepts—patriarchy, feminism, and womanism—will be focal points as we attempt to cast the “bad boys” in lights under which we can see them more clearly for the human beings they are. Our exploration of their stories will be guided by the following questions:
1 What is the background of the biblical men?
2 What patriarchal functions do their stories serve?
3 What character traits do the biblical men exhibit?
4 What can we learn about leadership from their stories?
5 What can we learn about faith from their stories?
We may not be able to answer all these questions, and some of our answers may be unsatisfactory. The point is to try to uncover as much as we can and recognize that there is much to be learned in the process. The stories of men in the Bible are interpretations by storytellers who left out some important details and embellished others. When distortion was necessary to make a point, storytellers distorted the story. Men in the Bible will not always behave in the ways we would want them to. We must withhold judgment and try to let them speak for themselves.
Despite the difficulties, the Bible provides a word of Good News for all of us. The Bible, when read from different perspectives, can be the source of inspiration and comfort for women and men. We find ourselves reflected in the stories of these men and we celebrate their joys and triumphs, their courage and dedication. We learn from their tragedies and despair, their pains and sorrows. We are blessed when we analyze the traditions and rejoice that God is still in our midst—working to make us whole.
1
ADAM: “BUT IT’S NOT MY FAULT!”
Read Genesis 3:8–19.
Adam exhibits imagination (he named all the animals—gnat, zebra, aardvark, firefly) and tenderness (Eve was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh). He was created in the image and likeness of God and had a solid connection to the earth. But he was mute during Eve’s theological conversation with the serpent. He experienced shame and guilt and hid from God and got defensive when God interrogated him. He blamed God for giving him the woman in the first place and blamed her because he ate the fruit. He assumed no responsibility for his own actions and did not correct Eve’s understanding of God’s command although it was given directly to him (she had not been created when the command was given). He rightly got the roughest of the sentences as a consequence of his eating.
In many ways, our lives as humans would be less complicated if Adam had never been created! His influence is keenly felt, although he occupies a fairly small place in the Bible. His story is embedded in the creation stories of Genesis, and that is part of the problem.
It is