Michael J. Williams, ‘Lies, Lies, I Tell You! The Deceptions of Genesis’, Calvin Theological Journal 43, 1 (2008), 9-20.
This entire fascicle of Calvin Theological Journal contains essays on Genesis, based on papers first given at a Bible and Ministry Conference in June 2007, ‘Hearing and Reading Genesis: Texts of Order, Disorder, Deceit, and Destruction’.
Michael J. Williams kicks off with an essay on the deceptions of Genesis, noting that ‘almost every significant narrative in the book contains an incident of deception’ (9).
In defining deception, he notes the importance of intentionality: ‘Deception takes place when Party A intentionally distorts, withholds, or otherwise manipulates information reaching Party B in order to stimulate in B a belief that A does not believe in order to serve A’s purpose’ (11).
This being the case, he lists the deceptions in Genesis as follows (11):
(1) The serpent’s deception of Adam and Eve (3:1-19)
(2) Abram’s deception of Pharaoh (12:10-20)
(3) Abraham’s deception of Abimelech (20:1-18)
(4) Isaac’s deception of Abimelech (26:6-11)
(5) Rebekah’s and Jacobs’s deception of Isaac and Esau (27:1-40)
(6) Laban’s deception of Jacob regarding his wife (29:15-30)
(7) Laban’s deception of Jacob regarding his wages (31:4-9, 38-42)
(8) Jacob’s deception of Laban (31:17-18, 20-29)
(9) Rachel’s deception of Laban (31:19, 30-35)
(10) Jacob’s sons’ deception of the Shechemites (34:1-31)
(11) Joseph’s brothers’ deception of Jacob (37:29-35)
(12) Tamar’s deception of Judah (38:1-26)
(13) Potiphar’s wife’s deception of Potiphar (39:1-20)
(14) Joseph’s first deception of his brothers (42:7-28)
(15) Joseph’s second deception of his brothers (44:1-34)
Although most of the deceptions are evaluated negatively by the text, events 12, 14, and 15, he claims, ‘are evaluated positively, at least implicitly, by the narrative itself’ (12).
He rejects the views that deception is positive if (1) a person of lower social standing deceives a person of higher social standing, (2) if it is perpetrated by a patriarch, and (3) if an Israelite deceives a non-Israelite (13-14).
Instead, he suggests ‘that the only criterion for positive deception in the Bible is the motive of the deceiver, and the only acceptable motive for perpetrating deception on someone else is… the restoration of shalom… the normal relationship of things or people to each other’ (14).
When shalom is disturbed, where expectations and responsibilities in relationship have become imbalanced, then ‘the wronged part may legitimately use deception to restore that shalom to what it was before’ – providing that the deception is ‘limited to the person who caused the original wrong’, that it does not ‘disadvantage the deceived person’, and does not ‘advantage the deceiver beyond his/her status prior to what it was before suffering the original wrong’ (14-15). He argues that these criteria fit Tamar’s deception of Judah, and Joseph’s deception of his brothers, but not the other incidents of deception in Genesis.
From a big picture perspective, the deceptions show that God ‘continues to advance his plan of salvation’, and ‘will accomplish his purposes in spite of, and even by means of… human deceitfulness’ (16).
On the issue of whether the conclusions about deceptions in Genesis apply to deception elsewhere in the Bible, he notes the change in social structure from family groups to a multi-tribal people, but holds that there are places where the same principle of protecting or restoring shalom in the covenant community is operative – notably in the Hebrew midwives (Exodus 1:15-20), Rahab (Joshua 2:1-21), Ehud (Judges 3:12-30), Jael (Judges 4:17-22), Nahash the Ammonite (1 Samuel 11:1-11), and David (1 Samuel 21:10-15) (18-19).
On the matter of whether there are instances in the Bible where God himself deceives, Williams points to Exodus 3:18; 14:1-4; 1 Samuel 16:1-5; 1 Kings 22:19-23; Ezekiel 14:1-11 (19-20), as well as making something of the church fathers’ view that God deceived Satan through the cross of Christ (17).
On the question of whether this understanding of deception weakens the ninth commandment about not giving false testimony (Exodus 20:16; Deuteronomy 5:20), he argues that the commandment, presupposing a covenantal context, ‘is in effect prohibiting exactly the kind of violation of the responsibilities and expectations of this preexisting relationship that positively evaluated deception rectifies’, and thus ‘deception that is perpetrated for the purpose of restoring shalom does not violate the ninth commandment; just the opposite!’ (20).
[Williams has also written a full-length study on this subject: Michael J. Williams, Deception in Genesis: An Investigation into the Morality of a Unique Biblical Phenomenon, Studies in Biblical Literature 32 (New York: Peter Lang, 2001).]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment