Adult Sabbath School: Meaning Without Literalism

Doubting the Story of Exodus

Many scholars have quietly concluded that the epic of Moses never happened, and even Jewish clerics are raising questions. Others think it combines myth, cultural memories and kernels of truth.

                                        http://articles.latimes.com/2001/apr/13/news/mn-50481

"It's one of the greatest stories ever told:

A baby is found in a basket adrift in the Egyptian Nile and is adopted into the pharaoh's household. He grows up as Moses, rediscovers his roots and leads his enslaved Israelite brethren to freedom after God sends down 10 plagues against Egypt and parts the Red Sea to allow them to escape. They wander for 40 years in the wilderness and, under the leadership of Joshua, conquer the land of Canaan to enter their promised land.

For centuries, the biblical account of the Exodus has been revered as the founding story of the Jewish people, sacred scripture for three world religions and a universal symbol of freedom that has inspired liberation movements around the globe.

But did the Exodus ever actually occur?

On Passover last Sunday, Rabbi David Wolpe raised that provocative question before 2,200 faithful at Sinai Temple in Westwood. He minced no words.

"The truth is that virtually every modern archeologist who has investigated the story of the Exodus, with very few exceptions, agrees that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way it happened, if it happened at all," Wolpe told his congregants.

Wolpe's startling sermon may have seemed blasphemy to some. In fact, however, the rabbi was merely telling his flock what scholars have known for more than a decade. Slowly and often outside wide public purview, archeologists are radically reshaping modern understanding of the Bible. It was time for his people to know about it, Wolpe decided.

After a century of excavations trying to prove the ancient accounts true, archeologists say there is no conclusive evidence that the Israelites were ever in Egypt, were ever enslaved, ever wandered in the Sinai wilderness for 40 years or ever conquered the land of Canaan under Joshua's leadership. To the contrary, the prevailing view is that most of Joshua's fabled military campaigns never occurred--archeologists have uncovered ash layers and other signs of destruction at the relevant time at only one of the many battlegrounds mentioned in the Bible.

Today, the prevailing theory is that Israel probably emerged peacefully out of Canaan--modern-day Lebanon, southern Syria, Jordan and the West Bank of Israel--whose people are portrayed in the Bible as wicked idolators. Under this theory, the Canaanites who took on a new identity as Israelites were perhaps joined or led by a small group of Semites from Egypt--explaining a possible source of the Exodus story, scholars say. As they expanded their settlement, they may have begun to clash with neighbors, perhaps providing the historical nuggets for the conflicts recorded in Joshua and Judges.

"Scholars have known these things for a long time, but we've broken the news very gently," said William Dever, a professor of Near Eastern archeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona and one of America's preeminent archeologists.

Dever's view is emblematic of a fundamental shift in archeology. Three decades ago as a Christian seminary student, he wrote a paper defending the Exodus and got an A, but "no one would do that today," he says. The old emphasis on trying to prove the Bible--often in excavations by amateur archeologists funded by religious groups--has given way to more objective professionals aiming to piece together the reality of ancient lifestyles.

But the modern archeological consensus over the Exodus is just beginning to reach the public. In 1999, an Israeli archeologist, Ze'ev Herzog of Tel Aviv University, set off a furor in Israel by writing in a popular magazine that stories of the patriarchs were myths and that neither the Exodus nor Joshua's conquests ever occurred. In the hottest controversy today, Herzog also argued that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, described as grand and glorious in the Bible, was at best a small tribal kingdom....

...At Sinai Temple, Sunday's sermon--and a follow-up discussion at Monday's service--provoked tremendous, and varied, response. Many praised Wolpe for his courage and vision. "It was the best sermon possible, because it is preparing the young generation to understand all the truth about religion," said Eddia Mirharooni, a Beverly Hills fashion designer.

A few said they were hurt--"I didn't want to hear this," one woman said--or even a bit angry. Others said the sermon did nothing to shake their faith that the Exodus story is true.

Added Aman Massi, a 60-year-old Los Angeles businessman: "For sure it was true, 100%. If it were not true, how could we follow it for 3,300 years?"

But most congregants, along with secular Jews and several rabbis interviewed, said that whether the Exodus is historically true or not is almost beside the point. The power of the sweeping epic lies in its profound and timeless message about freedom, they say.

The story of liberation from bondage into a promised land has inspired the haunting spirituals of African American slaves, the emancipation and civil rights movements, Latin America's liberation theology, peasant revolts in Germany, nationalist struggles in South Africa, the American Revolution, even Leninist politics, according to Michael Walzer in the book "Exodus and Revolution."

Many of Wolpe's congregants said the story of the Exodus has been personally true for them even if the details are not factual: when they fled the Nazis during World War II, for instance, or, more recently, the Islamic revolution in Iran. Daniel Navid Rastein, an Encino medical professional, said he has always regarded the story as a metaphor for a greater truth: "We all have our own Egypts--we are prisoners of something, either alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, overeating. We have to use [the story] as a way to free ourselves from difficulty and make ourselves a better person."

Wolpe, Sinai Temple's senior rabbi, said he decided to deliver the sermon to lead his congregation into a deeper understanding of their faith. On Sunday, he told his flock that questioning the Jewish people's founding story could be justified for one reason alone: to honor the ancient rabbinical declaration that "You do not serve God if you do not seek truth."

"I think faith ought not rest on splitting seas," Wolpe said in an interview. "For a Jew, it should rest on the wonder of God's world, the marvel of the human soul and the miracle of this small people's survival through the millennia."

Next year, the rabbi plans to teach a course on the Bible that he says will "pull no punches" in presenting the latest scholarship questioning the text's historical basis.

But he and others say that Judaism has also traditionally been more open to nonliteral interpretations of the text than, say, some conservative Christian traditions.

"Among Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist Jews, there is a much greater willingness to see the Torah as an extended metaphor in which truth comes through story and law," said Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson, dean of the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies at the University of Judaism in Los Angeles.,,,

The Shameful Practice of "Disfellowshipment" in the Churches of God

One of the more appalling "traditions" in Armstrongism has been the practice of shunning, or in Armstrongite speak - disfellowshipment.

Families have turned their backs on other family members.  Long held friendships evaporated over night.  People would meet each other in stores and turn their backs and walk away.  Others would cross the street if they saw former friends walking down the street towards them.

I saw this over and over in the Dayton, Ohio church and especially in Pasadena where disfellowshipments were a weekly occurrence, as people were deliberately shamed from the pulpit by vengeful ministers. Even more revolting is when these jerks stood up there and said this was being done out of "love" and it was to be a time for the person to reflect upon whatever they had done wrong. Never had a disfellowhipment in the Church of God ever been done out of love.  Its main purpose was to instill fear into the wayward member that their eternal salvation was now at risk.  They had lost their chance to go to Petra and eventually into the Kingdom of God.

This is not something unique to us, but is also a tool of oppression in other Millerite cults.

Checkout this article from a Jehovahs Witness on the vile tradition in their own group which is exactly like I have seen COG members do to their own family members.

This is a picture of my dad eating. He had just made lunch for me, but he couldn’t eat it with me. I had to eat it at another table with my four-year-old son while he sat there away from me.

Why? Because that’s what the Watch Tower Society tells him to do.

I posted this picture on a Facebook forum October 26, 2013. The first response I received was, “Don’t know what to say. This boggles the mind; mind-control religion at its very worst!”

Minutes later a flood of comments and “Likes” followed, reminding me that a good picture can easily replace a thousand words.

For those of you who are curious, I must explain that my extended family began shunning me a year ago after I questioned the authority of the Watchtower’s Governing Body. My family’s unanimous well-meaning response to my doubts was by expressing their opinion that I “must be an apostate” and “severe shunning would surely bring me to my senses.”

After my mother died eight months ago, my dad, being all alone, went to the elders in the congregation he attended to see if he’d be allowed to visit with me. They said that since I was his son, he could visit with me at his house. But he could not discuss religion – nor could he share a meal with me at the same table.

Two weeks ago, I called my dad and asked if his grandson and I could visit him. He said “yes” and even offered to make lunch. But shortly before serving the meal, he said that he wasn’t going to sit at the same table with us. When I asked why, his reply was, “The organization says so.”

That confession allowed me to vent my feelings for maybe thirty minutes, describing to him about the harm caused by shunning and other Watchtower policies. He listened politely. But I could see that he was not in a “cognitive dissonance mode” – so nothing I said registered with him.

After I spoke my piece, he served a nice meal to me and my son. Then he chose to sit alone in a small area of the kitchen with his back turned to us while eating his lunch. I sat there speechless, trying to figure out what was going on in his mind.  Shameful Shunning in a Thousand Word

You can read here how the JW's justify why they do it, and it is just as sick as the COG excuses.

Why Disfellowshipping Is a Loving Provision

Living Church of God even feels they can "mark" you even if you are not a member of their group.

Here is what Dexter Wakefield has to say on it:

Can a person who is not a member of the Living Church of God be disfellowshipped? No. Can a person who is not a member of the Living Church of God be “marked?” Yes. So there is a difference in the two. Can you explain what it is?  Disfellowhipping and Marking

21st Century Foot-washing Ceremony For COG Leaders

"BUT, he was the one God had chosen, and he had to accept that, and submit to God’s will. "

This post ties in with the previous post on the Branch Davidians.  This is a quote by Neil Godfrey of the Vridar blog. Neil is a former Worldwide Church of God member who runs an excellent blog on "Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science."

It’s a story of dashed idealism, sordid and cruel moments, the power of belief, and too much that I can personally relate to. I watched the TV mini-series on the Waco story late last year and, as I expected, found myself too easily able to identify with some of the followers. My experience was with the Worldwide Church of God. Not that that was my only experience with religion, but it was the one that echoed aspects of the Branch Davidians history. 

One moment in the movie that left me shaking my head in all too believable “disbelief” was when one of the most loyal followers of Dave Koresh was challenged by an outsider pointing to some of Koresh’s blatant moral failings. With unshakable faith the loyal follower replied that he wished with all his being that God had chosen anyone else except Vernon Howell (who took the name Dave Koresh) to be his prophet because he could scarcely imagine a less likeable person, . . .  BUT, he was the one God had chosen, and he had to accept that, and submit to God’s will. 

How often did the ministry in the Worldwide Church of God, especially the upper leadership, find opportunities to preach the message of King David, a “man after God’s own heart”, chosen by God, and David’s moral failings, his adultery, his murders, made no difference. Those who rebelled against this David when he was getting older and losing his grip on the kingdom were the ones led by Satan against “God’s anointed”.

The hypocrisy, the self-serving message, it’s all sickening in hindsight. But that’s how many of us were. If it hadn’t been the Armstrongs I suppose in another time and place it could have been Vernon Howell and it could have been me there. The one “saving grace” for the Worldwide Church of God was that it’s top leader was old and had no desire to give up his comforts or put himself in any serious physical risks. Those things come so much more easily to one in his early 30s. (For a number of years we were seriously expecting our leader to be given a vision or sign that would be the signal for us to “flee” to a “place in the wilderness”.)  Waco (the background story)

The Story Behind Waco’s Tragedy | James Haught

The Story Behind Waco’s Tragedy | James Haught

"As we go about our daily lives, it’s unsettling to realize that some people among us are capable of believing far-out fantasies, 

enough even to die for them."

(Here is the fascinating story of how the Branch Davidians evolved from the Seventh Day Adventist movement, which formed after the William Miller fiasco.s of 1843 - 1844.  This is also the heritage of Armstrongism. Given the fact how crazy some of the men are who are leading present-day splinter cults in the Church of God, Armstrongism has the potential to face a future tragedy of massive scale.)

By James A. Haught

Most Americans remember the historic 1993 siege of the Branch Davidian cult compound at Waco, Texas, which left eighty cultists and four federal officers dead. But did you know that the story actually began 150 years ago with a famous fiasco?

Since watching weird religion is my hobby, I’ll tell you the tale:

In the 1830s, a New England Baptist preacher, William Miller, computed from obscure prophecies in the Book of Daniel that Jesus would return to Earth between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844. Miller began warning of the approaching apocalypse. By the 1840s, he had drawn nearly 100,000 followers.

When the fateful time arrived, the “Millerites” prayed and prayed – but nothing happened. Then Miller re-examined the Bible verses and announced that he had erred; the correct date would be Oct. 22, 1844. As it neared, many of the faithful gave away their possessions and waited on hilltops for the heavens to open. Again, zilch.

Many Millerites lost their faith, but a hard core held firm. Some of them insisted that doomsday actually had occurred on Oct. 22, but it was a preparatory event in heaven that would be followed soon by Jesus bursting forth onto Earth. This group formed the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

As the Seventh-day Adventists grew more than 3 million strong, some members felt that the church wasn’t holy enough. In the 1930s, a Los Angeles Adventist, Victor Houteff, said Jesus wouldn’t return until an ultra-pure church was ready to greet him. So Houteff opened a Waco commune for pure believers, calling them Davidian Seventh-day Adventists.

He died in 1955, and the Davidians prayerfully awaited his resurrection. When it didn’t happen, his widow Florence took over. She proclaimed that the Second Coming would be on Easter Day, 1959. Hundreds of followers around America quit their jobs, sold their belongings, and hurried to Waco for the rapture. Wrong again.

Once more, the disillusioned departed, and a hard core persisted. A member named Ben Roden took command and named the survivors Branch Davidians. He died in 1978, leaving the commune, called Mount Carmel, to his widow Lois and son George.

Soon afterward, a 23-year-old Texas Adventist named Vernon Howell, a ninth-grade dropout, moved into the compound (and reportedly became the lover of the 67-year-old widow). He had hypnotic charisma, electrifying the others with his revelations of the coming apocalypse.

He married the 14-year-old daughter of a commune couple – but soon declared that God had commanded him to establish a House of David, in which he was to have as many wives as King David. He bedded more than a dozen commune females, one merely 11, another 50. He gave each a Star of David to wear as an emblem that she had been chosen by the king.

After Lois Roden died in 1986, her son George vied with Howell for command. Roden won, temporarily. Howell took his followers and left Mount Carmel, wandering as nomads. Then in 1987, Howell’s band returned to challenge Roden for leadership.

Roden proposed an epic contest: From a graveyard, he dug up the corpse of an 85-year-old woman, and declared that whoever could resurrect her would be the true prophet of Mount Carmel. Howell evaded, and urged police to arrest Roden for corpse abuse.

Then Howell and seven armed supporters crept into Mount Carmel in after-midnight darkness. Roden grabbed his Uzi machine gun and engaged the intruders in a firefight. He was wounded slightly in the hand and chest. Howell’s band was charged with attempted murder, and released on bond.

Next, Roden was jailed for contempt of court because he filed grossly obscene motions in an unrelated case. While Roden was locked up, Howell moved his followers back into the compound and took over.

Their subsequent trial for attempted murder ended in acquittals. The dethroned Roden later killed a man and was put in a state mental hospital.

Reigning as sole prophet, Howell preached that he was an angel sent by God to implement the Second Coming. He said God ordained him to move to Israel and convert the Jews, which would trigger the Battle of Armageddon and make Earth a paradise for the surviving faithful. Howell visited Israel – but failed to convert the Jews.

Traveling around the globe, the dynamic young prophet attracted converts who sold their possessions, gave all their money to him, and followed him to Waco to live in the compound. In 1989, he proclaimed that all women in the compound were his brides, and the rest of the men must remain celibate. Some married couples rebelled and left. Others, utterly dominated by him, obeyed.

In 1990, Howell changed his name to David Koresh and began preaching that the great doomsday battle would occur in Texas. He and his lieutenants bought hundreds of guns and machine guns, plus ammunition, plus gas masks and other war supplies.

Federal agents heard that the commune contained illegal machine guns, and took steps to disarm the cult. The siege and its outcome are a well-known American tragedy. Surrounded zealots allowed themselves and their children to burn to death, rather than walk out to safety.

The Waco saga has entered history, like Jonestown, the witch-hunts and other bizarre episodes. As we go about our daily lives, it’s unsettling to realize that some people among us are capable of believing far-out fantasies, enough even to die for them.

(Haught is editor of West Virginia’s largest newspaper, The Charleston Gazette, and a senior editor of Free Inquiry. This article previously appeared in Free Inquiry, summer 1994.)