Myth: A Dynamic Teaching Method
The word 'Myth' has gained a negative connotation among the general public, giving the sense of something that is either a lie, or simply inherently not true.
In the ancient worldview, what we view as Myth were teaching devices - a dynamic easy-to-visualize story framework - usually based on historical events – used as a vehicle to teach otherwise immaterial and ethereal principles and Truths that were difficult to convey otherwise.
Throughout time, the content of the Myths (the vehicle) change and adapt for the times and culture, in order to best present the Truth contained within them to the next generation.
The Older Testament
The title of this post takes its cue from the volume "The Older Testament" by Methodist Biblical Scholar Margaret Barker. The Book of this title is the first in a series of important works which explore the role of the Temple in Israelite tradition, and seek to uncover the earliest form of Israelite belief and religious expression that pre-dates even the texts we have in their current form as the Old Testament.
A key premise of the work of Margaret Barker (and many other biblical scholars) is that much of what we have in the Old Testament has been colored through the eyes of the Religious Reformation at the time of King Josiah (a period that can have an interesting parallel to the Councils of Nicea), where Doctrine and Practice were re-regulated, certain interpretations of past events and scriptures were declared as authoritative, and power and religious authority were centralized and reformed. While the surviving Authorized Nationalistic Histories which became our canonized records in the Old Testament present this reform in a favorable light, there are other texts and histories (such as in the Enochic literature) that present the view that Josiah's reform was a religious travesty, that the temple and original Heavenly Wisdom was defiled, and that, one may say, "Many plain and precious things" were taken away from the True Religious Tradition. (Where shall Wisdom be found? (pdf, 70KB)
While the work of Margaret Barker1 is extensive, it can, coupled with other works of Biblical Scholarship ( that, as I, do not always share all of her conclusions) be condensed into a cohesive picture that enlightens much of the most ancient texts and worldviews of the Old Testament, especially the imagery utilized as the backbone to many Psalms and Prophetic writings of Isaiah and Ezekiel.
What is presented below, based on my research and understanding, is a general outline of what appears to be one of the earliest Frameworks (Myths) of Israelite Ritual and Belief that was centralized and promulgated through the Temple. While many of the details have changed through Israelite and Christian history, I think it is very possible to find that the key elements and themes (Creation, Rebellion, Probation, Atonement, Enthronement/Exaltation) have remained.
While I will plan on discussing more of these in greater detail at a later point, I present here a general outline of my understanding of the core Myth underlying the earliest Temple Tradition in the Old Testament. With these in mind, re-read the Old Testament. You may be surprised what you see!
- Creation
- El (or Yahweh) defeats the powers of the Chaotic Deep , personified by the Dragon (Leviathan, or Rahab), and orders the Creation through the power of Divine Wisdom. (cf: Isaiah 27:1, Isaiah 51:9, Psalms 136:5, Jeremiah 51:15)
- An Eternal Covenant Bond is set in place which governs the creation, and keeps it in order.
- El, victorious, is enthroned on the Exalted Holy Mountain with his 70 Sons, the Holy Ones. The chief of the Sons of El is Yahweh. (cf: Psalms 97:9, Psalms 82)
- Rebellion
- Certain of the Holy Ones (lead by Azazel) rebel, trespass the Eternal Covenant, leave their First Estate, and sow the seeds of contaminating destruction on the Earth, throwing the world and its inhabitants again on the road to Chaos (cf: Jude 1:6, Isaiah 24:5, Isaiah 14:12-14, Ezekiel 28:13-17)
- Probation
- The Fallen Ones (Watchers) are bound by the authority of the LORD until the Day of the LORD (Jude 1:6, 1 Peter 3:19-20)
- Atonement
- Atonement is the removal of all the effects of the broken covenant, a restoration of purity, and a healing renewal of the Creation (see Atonement: the Rite of Healing (pdf, 68KB)
- The LORD will imminently return to cleanse the Earth, and to restore the order of Creation
- The Role of Kings
- The Anointed Kings of Nations, (associated and personified by Melchizedek) ,granted the Gift of Divine Wisdom (Isaiah 11:2), are the earthly representatives of the 70 Sons of El. They are Shepherds (Jeremiah 25:34-36, Isaiah 44:28, Jeremiah 50:6), and responsible for and representative of their respective realms of authority. Yahweh is the Holy One (the Shepherd) of Israel. (Psalms 80:1)
- The Kings receive the Law from God on His Holy Mountain in order to make known the ways of maintaining the purity of Creation, and separating the Holy (that which is like God) from the Unholy (that which is unlike God). They have the ability (and duty) to teach and safeguard purity.
- Kings suffer and bear the consequences of impurity for and behalf of their people. Just as they personify the LORD to their people, to the LORD, the King personified his people. (Isaiah 53 - see also The Original Setting of the Fourth Servant Song (pdf, 40KB)
- When the proper sacrifice is made, They may then cast the iniquity to the Rebel Nations (Fallen Angels), that they alone may suffer the fullness of wrath - purity and order is restored to their Nation.
- Temple
- The temple is the stage on which this instructional drama is played out.
- Creation
- Rebellion
- Atonement
- Enthronement
- The temple is the stage on which this instructional drama is played out.
- The temple is simultaneously on Earth and in Heaven. In the temple, those involved in the drama are viewed as being their heavenly counterparts.
- Prophets and Priests are Servants and Messengers (angels) of the Holy Ones.
The Day of the LORD is the finalization of the Final Atonement, where the LORD returns from His Throne on the Holy Mountain (The Holy of Holies) to cleanse the whole earth.
- For a Latter-day saint view of Margaret’s work, see Paradigms Regained [↩]
DearScriptures.com
This is a great summary. Thanks for sharing it.
“the Role of Kings” portion identifies roles one might normally associate with a prophet or high priest. Is that what is meant by “Anointed Kings of Nations”? I’ve begun to believe that the High Priest by anointing is the rightful king, but that they don’t always actively take this role as the people often want a separate political king. Is this a fair understanding?
I just now stopped to read this post and I’m glad I did. This is a great analysis and summary of the major themes of the Old Testament, especially in light of the work of scholars like Margaret Barker. You’ve done a great job here and a service to students of the Old Testament.
I wanted to comment on the points of Creation, Rebellion, and Probation that you outline here. Although there is much debate regarding what precise setting we should see for Psalm 82, I would venture to say that it likely shares in background mythology for all three of these points. In some of the research I’ve recently done for my dissertation, I’ve found evidence to suggest that this is the case.
Psalm 82 seems to be depicting God as presiding in the Divine Council and pronouncing judgment on the assembled gods. Hugh Rowland Page, Jr., in his study of The Myth of Cosmic Rebellion, sees this psalm as part of the pre-exilic Israelite Temple liturgy, and understands it to describe the lesser gods of the assembly as being condemned, in vv. 6-7 to die like "Adam" and fall like the "Shining One." The fall of the Shining One, according to Page, likely has reference to a widespread Ancient Near Eastern myth of a divine being (or multiple divine beings) that, in the mythical past, rebelled against God's sovereignty. This narrative is reflected in such biblical passages as Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28:1-10, Daniel 11-12, and also, less directly, in Genesis 6:1-4 and Job 38. Page outlines, based on his analysis of these passages, the content of this primordial conflict:
From the foregoing analysis, it can be seen that in each of these texts: (1) a god is described who possesses one or more of the following traits--an astral nature, wisdom, beauty, or pride; (2) this god is said to have enjoyed favorable status within the divine assembly at some point in time; (3) a verbal or physical attack is made against the chief-god; (4) the holy mount functions in one or more of the following capacities--(a) as the desired dwelling place of the usurper, (b) as the site of cosmic conflict, or (c) as the original home of the usurper; (5) the reversal of fates is expressed in one of the following ways--(a) in the descent of the usurper to Sheol, (b) in the expulsion of the usurper from the holy mount, or (c) in the mustering of the armies of the chief-god in response to the usurper's attack.
(Hugh Rowland Page, Jr., The Myth of Cosmic Rebellion: A Study of Its Reflexes in Ugaritic and Biblical Literature (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1996), 203)
Page further notes that the "Shining One(s)" should be seen to be symbolic of chaos and disorder. Based on these observations, the Israelites likely understood God's battle with the forces of Chaos, the Sea, the Monsters, Death, the Rebellious God(s), and the other gods to be referring to the same myth, at least for the purposes of the ritual retelling in festival settings. Yahweh overcomes all of these, and his victory and (resulting) kingship are celebrated.
The Davidic kingship ideology is modeled on the Kingship of Yahweh. The way that the Israelite king is raised to his throne is patterned after the way that Yahweh was enthroned. Some great books to read (if you haven’t already) on Israelite kingship are A.R. Johnson, “Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel,” Aage Bentzen, “King and Messiah”, and John Eaton, “Kingship and the Psalms.” There are other good ones, but these are pretty fair and even-handed treatments.
Based on the quality of this initial assessment, I look forward to seeing what else you do with these ideas. Thanks!
David L.
Ferriera: I think you’re not far off! My understanding of reading the Moses narratives is that, in this context, Moses plays the role of Melchizedek King, and that the Aaron/Levite narratives were framed the way they were to grant a stronger legitimacy and place for the Levite Priesthood in place of the Kingly Zadokite/Melchizedek Priesthood.
Moses filled many of the roles of the Anointed King: He ascended the mountain of God, became a Holy One, viewed, received, and declared the Heavenly Tablets, and even attempted to perform an act of personal Atonement on behalf of Israel (see Exodus 32:30-35).
It was this Kingly Priesthood which is referenced in the Psalms, such as 110 (which appears to be part of a ritual coronation).
In other words, it is my thought that at one point, the High Priest _was_ the King, and only later were the roles separated. The histories as they have come down to us obscure this with a ‘re-written’ religious history.
David: Great comments! Your comments reminded me of how in Barker’s ‘The Revelation of Jesus Christ’ there is a specific chapter where she points out how, in Revelation, the three different key historical archetypal roles of the ‘adversary’ figure throughout the presentation of Israelite Mythology…
*Leviathan the Dragon of Chaos
*Azazel the fallen rebel, the source of sin
*and Satan the accuser
…are craftily and plainly identified together by John the Revelator as a single composite figure. The separate roles – and the archetypal punishments presented for them – are all specifically addressed. Having that pointed out was one of the high points of the book for me, and it made me wonder how I hadn’t seen it before.
Great insights, David, concerning the composite evil figure. The way that symbol and myth are used in Scripture can get confusing if we can’t figure out when to conflate or separate when multiple symbols are being used for the same principle. As you note, Satan is depicted in different forms, and we also see this with Yahweh, Adam, Michael, the Son of Man, etc. Sometimes there are different names/descriptions for the same person, and sometimes different people can fit the same description or position. It all gets quite confusing.
As for the question of kings and priests (from Ferreira) — I totally agree with you, David. The ancient Israelite ideal was that the leader of Israel is supposed to be prophet, priest, and king all at once. It is evident that Moses was seen to be all three, as you stated, David. The Israelite kings were also the high priest of the order of Melchizedek and recognized as having prophetic gifts (they used the priestly/prophetic oracles and spoke by the Spirit of the Lord). I also believe that the Aaronic “high” priests of the post-exilic times usurped this role that previously was held by the kings. In pre-exilic times, I doubt there was an Aaronic high priest — the king already held the role of high priest. When there were no more kings (after the Exile), the Aaronic priests assumed that authority and called themselves “high priest” and left no place for king or prophet. That’s why so many saw the Second Temple as corrupt — they had changed the ancient order of things.
I’m still a novice in this arena, but from a spiritual standpoint this is yet another argument for continuing revelation. I don’t think the world in general would be as critical of the JST if they were more familiar with the origins of the Bible.