Exodus: An Allegorical Portrait of the Human Mind in its Relationship to God

[guillaumeb]

From the short article:

Midrash is not purely a scholarly endeavor, because its goal is not scholarship per se. Rather, midrashic interpretation reflects an ongoing attempt to unearth the hidden truth latent in scripture........and reveal the pure shining essence of divine wisdom..........

As the Passover Haggadah makes abundantly clear, the story of Moses and Pharaoh applies to all of us, now, in the present tense. We’re enjoined to celebrate as if God had led us personally from bondage in Egypt.......

So, what is this midrash? How can we use it to bring forth the true colors of Exodus? We start with the understanding that Exodus is far more than just a simple story about winning freedom. It is an allegorical portrait of the human mind. Its two central characters—Pharaoh and Moses—are not just historical figures, not just characters in a biblical drama. They are archetypes that portray opposing aspects of the human mind in its relationship to Spirit.....

To read more:

http://www.tikkun.org/nextgen/exodus-an-allegorical-portrait-of-the-human-mind-in-its-relationship-to-god

I write this partly in response to some posters here who apparently insist on a literal interpretation of the Bible. Perhaps because it allows them to feel that by refuting a literal interpretation of certain passages, such as Exodus, that they are somehow refuting the existence of the Creator.

And, as has been said before, when I was a child, I thought as a child. When I was very young, the Bible stories seemed to me to be literal descriptions of things that had actually happened.

But in my years at a Jesuit university, I was exposed to a far more complex view of the Bible.

The Exodus story, while it makes for interesting reading if read as a story, is actually about the spiritual wandering that took place as a people found God. Similar to the story about Saul of Tarsus, whose revelation was presented as being struck from his horse.

[MineralMan]

1. "in my years at a Jesuit university..."

Ah. I believe that is the first piece of information about yourself I have ever read. How many years? Which university? Have you a degree from that university, Guillaume? Finally, something to know about you.

[guillaumeb]

4. 5 years.

Loyola, in Chicago.

Yes. One in French literature, one in English literature.

And you, would you like to repond about yourself?


The Jesuits taught me to question my faith, and taught me how to strengthen my faith.

[MineralMan]

10. I completed a Masters program in

Literature at a State University in California. I also spent a year at Syracuse University in a total immersion Russian Language program while in the USAF. I worked as a Russian linguist based on that. Prior to that I completed two years of study as an Electronics Engineering major at the university in California.

In several other areas, including mineralogy, I am an auto-didact.

Throughout my education, I learned to think for myself and how to learn other disciplines for myself.

[guillaumeb]

16. Russian? Not an unexpected choice for the time.

I would assume that all of the armed services welcomed Russian language expertise.

Have you continued to pursue Russian?

As to my further education, 33 years of union representation and many courses on labor law, and various labor representation techniques, as well as playing guitar for 53 years. And 3 years of German language prior to vacationing in Germany.

[MineralMan]

20. It was the USAF that sent me to that language program.

They apparently had a need for me to learn Russian. I used that during the rest of my enlistment. How, I cannot relate. I did not continue as a linguist after leaving the USAF, although I did enroll at UCSB as a Russian major, but left during the first semester for various reasons.

I do continue to read literature in Russian, but have few opportunities to speak it, although I can, if need be.

[trotsky]

2. "some posters here who apparently insist on a literal interpretation of the Bible"

You still have yet to tell everyone here what parts of the bible YOU take literally, gil.

Can you answer that question now? Is the answer "all", or "none", or somewhere in between? (And if that last option, WHICH parts do you take literally?)

I think this is a very fair point to ask for clarification on, since you are bashing people who are engaging in behavior that you evidently also engage in.

If you choose once again to refuse to answer, you've pretty much torpedoed any semblance of legitimacy to your complaints and attacks.

[guillaumeb]

6. Did you read the article?

If so, you have read a very interesting analysis that expresses my own views far better than I could.

As to your question, it is irrelevant to the article, and the dialogue because I have previously stated that I am not a literalist.

But this article concerns how one can interpret the Exodus story.

[trotsky]

8. "...I have previously stated that I am not a literalist."

Please define the word "literalist" as you are using it in that sentence.

[guillaumeb]

11. No. This post is about the article.

If you have something to say about the article, feel free to share it.

[trotsky]

15. No. If this post was ONLY about the article,

you wouldn't have included your additional editorial commentary and condemnations IN THE OP.

Your tactics are on display once again. Make wild attacks, tell falsehoods, then when called out to defend those comments, claim that they are off-topic.

That's some major league intellectual dishonesty, gil. You are fooling no one.

[guillaumeb]

24. Ah yes, a return to your constant refrain.

That none of this is actually evident in this post does not matter. It is a matter of the taint of the original sin affecting all of my responses, correct?

[trotsky]

28. What refrain?

Did you, or did you not, include your own editorial comments in the OP?

And now, when I'm trying to find out exactly what you meant BY YOUR OWN COMMENTS, I'm off-topic.

Stop this bullshit and discuss things honestly.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Jesuits, eh? My father went to Fordham in the 30's and always spoke well of Jesuits...

Not many here seem to take the Bible literally-- more deny it completely. But, like every great work that has lasted, it has many layers of meaning.

[guillaumeb]

7. I ahve not read any replies in this group from anyone who insists on a literal interpretation,

except, interestingly enough, from some non-theists.

[trotsky]

13. How strange.

You'd think if a non-theist was insisting on interpreting the whole bible literally, why, they'd be a theist.

Do you supposed that perhaps, just perhaps, when non-theists are discussing a story or passage from a literal translation standpoint, they are perhaps engaging in a rhetorical argument?

Or are those non-theists just really, really stupid and you've exposed their idiocy with your brilliant post?

[guillaumeb]

23. I believe that some non-theists might be insisting on a literal view

so they can point out historical and scientific inconsistencies as a way of, in their view, discrediting the book.

[trotsky]

30. There are so many things wrong with what you just wrote, it's hard to know where to start.

First, when you refer to "the book," which version of the Christian bible are you referring to?

[MineralMan]

5. And here is an interesting reply on this Midrash:

Steve Lewis November 19, 2012 at 9:29 pm

You can’t have any real moral lesson learned from a monstrous lie than good liars with excellent p.r. can get away fooling the whole world for, what? 2500 years? The Exodus never happened. Hebrews were not held slaves in ancient Egypt. Archeologists have thoroughly debunked the Exodus Story as Jewish propaganda that covers up the real history of how ancient Israelites were kicked out of Egypt as part and parcel of the failed Hyksos invasion and comparatively brief takeover of Egypt. Israelites were Hyksos as archeology show identical styles of house layout in ancient Upper Egypt and Palestine. Without piggybacking on Christianity, Jewish myths of origin would have long ago met the same fate as other ancient religious mythologies, but Christianity dominating things, allows Jewish priesthoods to continue their lying as well. And the world suffers for this as even today Israeli Jews attack Gentile Palestinians using these ancient lies as rationale for religiously based fascist aggression and occupation.

Chuck the Exodus lie to begin to wipe the moral slate clean of false theologies that are proven dividers of humanity

One interpretation followed by a different one. Cool beans. Who is correct? Who will judge that? Not me.

[guillaumeb]

9. I would say a very angry reply, from a person with much anger to share.

One hopes that the anger finds a suitable outlet, perhaps in replies such as this. Repressed anger can be very unhealthy.

[MineralMan]

12. He also raises several good points.

A Midrash is not a scholarly study. It is an opinion. The validity of such an opinion is open to discussion.

The author of the Midrash is not a theologian, but rather a psychologist and psychotherapist. As such, he is commenting as an amateur student of scripture.

[guillaumeb]

18. Of course.

It is an opinion, but an opinion that is widely shared.

Is it the opinion of the majority of Jews? I have no idea.

[MineralMan]

22. I see. So, we have two opinions by two different

people. Neither opinion is a scholarly one.

[guillaumeb]

27. One was written in anger,

the other as an exploration of meaning. And the anger does not invalidate the opinion, but the opinion seems to me to require a literal view.

And a search reveals many views regarding Exodus as allegory.

[Lordquinton]

38. Again with the angry trope

Because we all know that being angry completely negates anything they have to say.

[guillaumeb]

44. I commented on what I saw as the anger.

And I stated that repressed anger can be a bad thing.

[Lordquinton]

57. You intentionally ignored the content

And used a stale old trope that's been often used to keep oppressed people down (as you have been told before)

[guillaumeb]

58. The anger was the content. In my opinion.

The anger overrode all substance.

[Lordquinton]

62. And you double down on the tone policing

Which, you should really know, is something used very often by sexists, racists and all manner of right wing ilk. You claim to be progressive, but keep using tactics of the other side, why is that?

If it walks like a duck...

[guillaumeb]

63. Another unsupported claim.

A tactic often used by the right.

So why is that?

[Irish_Dem]

14. Very impressive, the Jesuits are the intelligentsia of the Catholic Church.

Every society has a mythology, and religion is often a part of the mythology.

[guillaumeb]

19. I found the opinion to be well written.

And I share the interpretation as well. A spiritual journey framed as a literal journey.

[Irish_Dem]

25. I agree with it also, and do not understand why the author calls it radical.

Seems like an obvious interpretation, spiritual journey described as a literal one.

(Like the birth of Jesus story is about the birth of a new religion.)

Interesting, we see the Pharaoh- Moses dynamic play out here
in this group.

[guillaumeb]

31. Perhaps radical in the earliest meaning of the word.

The word radical is from the Latin radix, meaning root.

In French, racine.

In Italian, radice.


So in this sense, a return to the original intent.

[Irish_Dem]

34. Makes sense.

I also agree that God has sent us stories based on human development level.
As a primitive people we see the stories in a literal, simple way.

As we mature spiritually, we see the stories as symbolic, as metaphors through a
more sophisticated lens.

Currently however, even still, I believe God has only given us the kindergarten reader's digest version of spirituality. We are not yet ready for more than this.

[guillaumeb]

35. I agree.

Creation stories were suitable for a Bronze Age knowledge base, but even the creation stories have layers of meaning.

The story of Adam and Eve as first humans is one such layered story. In the superficial layer, they are the parents of humanity.

But the name Adam also derives from the Hebrew word for life, and the name Eve derives from the Hebrew word for earth. Thus, from the earth comes life.

[Irish_Dem]

39. The stories are simple on the surface, but really complex layers, like an onion.

You can peel off as many layers as you like.
A lot is packed into the seemingly simple story.

[trotsky]

36. How do you know which stories are meant to be symbolic, and which are still literal?

Perhaps the point is to eventually grow to the point where ALL are viewed as symbolic, none literal, and therefore atheists have reached the most advanced stage of human theological development?

[Irish_Dem]

40. Perhaps the end point is that we no longer need God.

I think most of the religious stories are metaphor.
God is trying to instruct us, help humans develop a moral core.
So tells us stories to entertain and educate us.

Perhaps the end point is that we don't NEED God.
Not that he doesn't exist.
But we have become like him and learned what we need to learn.

[trotsky]

48. "I think most of the religious stories are metaphor."

That's why I asked my question.

You think that. Great. How do you know which are metaphor, and which are literal?

Are you using an external reference to judge the validity of information in the bible?

[Irish_Dem]

50. It doesn't matter. If there is a God, if the stories are literal, if man believes in God.

Did God make man, or did man make God?

None of it is the point, but humans like to argue about how many angels can dance
on the head of a pin for hundreds of years.

I believe the end point is for man to evolve to a higher level.
That is why God created us, so that we could attain a status equal to his.

And if man created God, it was for the same reason.
Man needs guidelines, goals and a support system to attain a moral core.
Unfortunately the dark side of religion can do the opposite.
But the intent is for man to move forward.

And each of us has our own unique journey.
Trained as a scientist and skeptic, I had to ask all the questions you are now
asking to develop my own spirituality. I have had proof to my satisfaction,
but it is a very personal journey for me.

I think asking questions is good thing, some people want information
in order to grow spiritually. Other people rail about the idea a God may exist.
And wish to persuade others to their viewpoint.
Such is human nature. And we are each at a different point in our evolution
and lessons we need to learn.

But it doesn't really matter, God or no God.
The point for humans, can they learn to do the right thing,
can they develop a moral core and move forward.
Whether they do it with our with out a belief in God is immaterial.
The righteous atheist goes to heaven faster than a hypocritical and sinful Christian.

[trotsky]

51. Oh but it DOES matter, quite a bit.

If one person says god forbids homosexuality, and another says god is fine with it, under what rules should we live? Who decides?

It's one thing to wax philosophical about spiritual growth and being on "journeys."

It's another to recognize that bad religious ideas are harming and killing people, and by simply punting on the issue of "how do we actually determine what god wants?" you're leaving those people in limbo.

[Irish_Dem]

52. Religion is man made and reflects the dark side of human nature.

Religion is merely a reflection of human flaws, foibles and sins.
And is an excuse to act badly.

Blindly following any dogma is a more primitive level of development.
This is more about the person than the religion.

The point of spiritual evolution, is that it is an internal orientation, not external.
So you can see currently that mankind is mixed, some primitive spiritually,
some more advanced. Earth is like a one room school house.
But no level is better than any other level.
A kindergartner is just as valued as a grad student.

But those who do evil in the name of God, will have some karmic lessons to learn.

[trotsky]

55. You're almost there.

But you're not seeing the forest for the trees.

Yes, religion can be a mess, but it's for the exact reasons I'm telling you. NO ONE CAN KNOW what your god wants. Ever. If someone claims to know, you have NO WAY to conclusively determine whether they are correct or not.

So when you start getting misty about "spiritual evolution," how do you know when you've evolved? How do you even know if you're on the right path at all?

I'm not seeing any attempt at answering questions by you, just vague feel-good statements. If you are not interested in analyzing these problems about how we determine truth and how we determine what rules we will live together under, then I am not interested in further dialog with you.

[Irish_Dem]

54. Frustration comes from thinking others can answer your questions.

Spirituality is a unique, individualized process in which we must
each answer our own questions.

Religion has easy cookbook answers. Perhaps that is where the argument lies,
I am not religious and do swallow the dogma 100%.
Others can do that much better than I can.

[trotsky]

56. "Spirituality is a unique, individualized process in which we must each answer our own questions."

Which is how you end up with neo-Nazis who are just as supported in their beliefs as you are in yours. I'm sure the average alt-righter thinks they have conclusively found answers to their own questions.

Do you get it yet?

[guillaumeb]

45. Can there be a thological development absent a theos?

Theos does mean god.

[trotsky]

49. Theos could just be an operational idea of god.

We humans have come up with lots of ideas that have no actual basis in reality. Your god could very well be one of them. You can't prove it's not.

[Irish_Dem]

53. Depends upon the definition of theological.

If you define it narrowly as a belief in God, then probably not.

If you define it more widely as a belief in a moral core,
doing the right thing, and living a righteous life than yes.
One does not need a God to follow His ways.

[TygrBright]

17. Thanks for this. I've always considered midrash one of the great spiritual disciplines.

And in my view, it applies to all of the human scriptures.

Some cultures have more practice and greater acceptance for its value.

appreciatively,
Bright

[guillaumeb]

21. It was, in my opinion, well written as well.

And illustrates the many layers on the text.

[MineralMan]

26. And here is another point of view:

https://reformjudaism.org/exodus-not-fiction

The Exodus Is Not Fiction
An interview with Richard Elliott Friedman

Richard Elliott Friedman, who holds a Th.D from Harvard, is the Ann and Jay Davis Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Georgia and the Katzin Professor of Jewish Civilization Emeritus of the University of California, San Diego, and was a visiting fellow at Cambridge and Oxford and a Senior Fellow of the American Schools of Oriental Research in Jerusalem. He is the author of seven books, including the bestselling Who Wrote the Bible? and Commentary on the Torah. He participated in the City of David Project archaeological excavations of biblical Jerusalem and served as a consultant for PBS’s Nova: The People of the Covenant: The Origins of Ancient Israel and the Emergence of Judaism and A&E’s Who Wrote the Bible? and Mysteries of the Bible.

Following publication of Reform Judaism’s Spring 2013 edition in which Professor David Sperling and Rabbi David Wolpe asserted that the biblical Exodus is a fiction, you wrote expressing concern to the magazine editors. Why?

After reading those articles, your readers may have concluded that scholarship shows that the Exodus is fictional, when, in fact, that is not so. There is archaeological evidence and especially textual evidence for the Exodus.

I respect Professor Sperling and Rabbi Wolpe. They were understandably following the claims of some of our archaeologists. Those archaeologists’ claims that the Exodus never happened are not based on evidence, but largely on its absence. They assert that we’ve combed the Sinai and not found any evidence of the mass of millions of people whom the Bible says were there for 40 years. That assertion is just not true. There have not been many major excavations in the Sinai, and we most certainly have not combed it. Moreover, uncovering objects buried 3,200 years ago is a daunting endeavor. An Israeli colleague laughingly told me that a vehicle that had been lost in the 1973 Yom Kippur War was recently uncovered under 16 meters—that’s 52 feet—of sand. Fifty-two feet in 40 years!

More at the link...

This article is a scholarly article by a Jewish scholar whose credentials are in the first paragraph.

[trotsky]

32. Why, this just can't be.

I have it on good authority that only stupid non-theists trying to discredit the bible insist on literal interpretations!

I'm so confused!

[MineralMan]

43. Well, I'm going to wait to see if someone will

Tell us why this eminent Jewish theologian is wrong, while the psychiatrist/midrasher is correct. I am waiting with bated breath.

[yallerdawg]

29. In matters of faith regarding religions...

very often the faithful take things for granted and never even give them a second thought.

It's only in the attacks and criticisms of others who wish to justify irreligion or other faiths that we even begin to contemplate what never even crossed our minds!

Our relationship with God is not based on every line in every book of the Bible. Yet it is assumed that THIS one thing here will destroy your faith, or at least ridicule it effectively - as if faith is based on evidence and proof and historical events as recorded in ancient texts.

It is bewildering that what they profess DENIES them faith would have any impact on those who HAVE faith!

And for those who say they have LOST their faith, it has to be about more than whether the Red Sea ACTUALLY parted and then swallowed up the Egyptians.

[guillaumeb]

33. Well said.

And Exodus as spiritual journey adds a layer to the text. A layer that is later echoed when Jesus goes into the wilderness.

Edited to add: Jesus journeyed for 40 days.

[Lordquinton]

37. It's funny you say all that

You have been pushing that literalist meme on anyone who questions anything in the Bible, yet you just down the throat of any non-theist who hints at others motives/beliefs, isn't there a line in your book "be not like the hipocrites" or is that a literal interpretation that you stay away from?

[Irish_Dem]

41. May I buy you a drink? The religion group is starting a cash bar,

but the drinks are free for a select group.

[guillaumeb]

47. No. I simply give my own opinions in my comments, and often my own

interpretations of passages. I do not suggest that my opinion is the definitive one. But I do regard many of the Biblical stories as essentially metaphoric.

[Lordquinton]

59. Riiiiight

Do you think people buy that?

There was a whole thread where you got really angry (and no one singled you out for your anger) that someone assumed motives and spawned a lot of discussion, then you turn right aroud and call people literalist for wanting to just discuss the stories in the Bible as stories.

[guillaumeb]

60. Which thread was that?

I welcome the opportunity to learn more about myself.

[Lordquinton]

61. The one where you exposed yourself as a massive hipocrite

Wait, that doesn't narrow it down, does it?

[guillaumeb]

64. Another unsupported claim.

Consistency is not necessarily a virtue.

[cornball 24]

42. Guillaumeb, thank you for sharing EXODUS. In my extremely finite mind, that which

seem so complex, can be explained in simplistic terms, employing wisdom as the facilitator. During my journey, I have been on a quest for wisdom and, thus far, nada. I have always espoused wisdom as the greatest quality one could possess and I so appreciate your wisdom.

[guillaumeb]

46. I share what I find relevant and helpful to me.

I keep hoping for wisdom, and someday I might find it. But thank you for liking the article, and your kind words.