Transactional Failure:
The Negative Ethic of
(Stipulation Against) Idolatry
Rev. Douglas Olds
May 2019
It is sometimes implied (Moe-Lobeda [2013;
2017]; Jenkins [2013, 8; 2014], Jenkins, et al. [2018]) that there is no direct
Biblical message or historical analogy to apply to the issue of Global Warming
and Climate Change so that secular
ethical foundations must be developed. A
canonical approach to the theological condemnation
of idolatry in Deutero-Isaiah may offer a productive pastoral and proclamatory
approach. Isaiah 44.9-20 is centrally occupied
with the use of combustible resources--the unbounded and unsustainable scale of
exploitation of which is at the root of the Greenhouse Effect. In my research,
I have yet to find this passage linked with Global Climate Change. Yet, in the parodic account of Deutero-Isaiah
(Watts 2005, Holter 1995, Baltzer 2001), the idol maker is charged with
diverting combustible resources away from their stated,
intended function--instrumental sufficiency for personal warming and
cooking--toward the creation of idols.
Isaiah 44.9 All who
make idols are nothing, and the things they delight in do not profit; their
witnesses neither see nor know. And so they will be put to shame. 10 Who would
fashion a god or cast an image that can do no good? 11 Look, all its devotees
shall be put to shame; the artisans too are merely human. Let them all
assemble, let them stand up; they shall be terrified, they shall all be put to
shame.
12 The ironsmith fashions it and
works it over the coals, shaping it with hammers, and forging it with his strong
arm; he becomes hungry and his strength fails, he drinks no water and is faint.
13 The carpenter stretches a line, marks it out with a stylus, fashions it with
planes, and marks it with a compass; he makes it in human form, with human
beauty, to be set up in a shrine. 14 He cuts down cedars or chooses a holm
tree or an oak and lets it grow strong among the trees of the forest. He plants
a cedar and the rain nourishes it. 15 Then it can be used as fuel. Part of it
he takes and warms himself; he kindles a fire and bakes bread. Then he makes a
god and worships it, makes it a carved image and bows down before it. 16 Half
of it he burns in the fire; over this half he roasts meat, eats it and is
satisfied. He also warms himself and says, “Ah, I am warm, I can feel the
fire!” 17 The rest of it he makes into a god, his idol, bows down to it and
worships it; he prays to it and says, “Save me, for you are my god!”
18 They do not know, nor do they
comprehend; for their eyes are shut, so that they cannot see, and their minds
as well, so that they cannot understand. 19 No one considers, nor is there
knowledge or discernment to say, “Half of it I burned in the fire; I also baked
bread on its coals, I roasted meat and have eaten. Now shall I make the rest of
it an abomination? Shall I fall down before a block of wood?” 20 He
feeds on ashes; a deluded mind has led him astray, and he cannot save
himself or say, “Is not this thing in my right hand a fraud?”
A. Centrality of Message: Form and Rhetorical
Criticism of Is. 44. 9-20
Is. 44.9-20 is the conclusion to dramatic center of
the Deutero-Isaianic corpus of Is. 40-55 (Sweeney 2016, 19-20) concerned with YHWH’s
redemption of Israel. Specifically, Is. 42.14-44.23 concludes the third of five
successive arguments for God’s agency in determining Israel’s prospects
(Sweeney 2016, 20). Is. 44. 9-20 is thus
marked as a climax to this central motif.
Moreover, Is. 44. 9-20 is noted by Matheus (1987,
324) as the thematic center of a chiasm, or ring-structure, concerning the
incomparability of God against the abomination of idol fabrication:
A Is. 40.18ff. Introduction: with whom can one compare
God?
Β 41. 6-7 the intent for creating idols
C 42.17 who trusts in idols will be confounded
D 44. 9-20 process of idol fabrication
C' 45.16-17 who trusts in idols will be ashamed
B' 45.20 the ineffectuality of created idols
A' 46. 5-8 concluding query: with whom can one compare
God?
The
centrality of Is. 44. 9-20 in this chiastic structure rhetorically marks and
emphasizes the human failure to recognize God for who God is: The Creator and
redeemer of the people of Israel.
Not only is Is. 44. 9-22 recognized literarily as the
rhetorical center in Matheus’ (1987) and Sweeney’s (2016) formal structuring of
the Deutero-Isaianic account, Holter (1995) and Spykerboer (1976) note that Is.
44. 9-20 makes up the third and far most important of the polemical
presentations against idolatry in Deutero-Isaiah.
Both Matheus (1987) and Spykerboer (1976) note the marked
literary form of Is. 44. 9-22: it is poetic in meter and structure, but “it is
more descriptive than most other parts of [Deutero-Isaiah]” (Spykerboer 1976,
117). The meter and descriptive poetry
of Is. 44. 9-22 markedly changes that of the meter and rhetoric of the poetry
of the rest of Is. 40-48 in which it is embedded. The language and flow of this passage is so
marked that many scholars have taken the passage to be an interpolation (Watt
2005, Baltzer 2001). However, Goldingay and
Payne (2006, I, 303) discern that both thematically and linguistically the
passage forms part of a “spiral” within the more characteristic versification
and poesy beginning in 42.14. Matheus (1987) agrees that poetic form characterizes
this passage, and Spykerboer (1976, 117) sees no argument for this passage’s
lack of originality or genuineness despite its “markedly prose form.”
The sum of these illustrations of poetic,
rhetorical markedness and thematic centrality serve to demonstrate the
importance of Is 44. 9-22 as a Biblical message. The passage demonstrates the process of idol
fabrication forward and backward (Goldingay
and Payne 2006, I, 356) which compares with
Wisdom13.10–13. Verse 19 recapitulates
verse 17, doubly emphasizing its condemnation of the diversion of carbon combustible
resources from subsistence heating and cooking to that upon which the idol
fabricator makes his abomination. I conclude that this repetition of the framing
of the diversion of combustible resources as idolatry to be the most highly
marked passage of this demonstrably thematic and literarily central hinge sequence. The diversion of carbon combustible resources
from subsistence needs into an idol-making process is thus germane to the
ethical and Biblical evaluation of the carbon combustion-intensive political
economy.
Because God’s primary commandment (Exod. 20.3) and
protological curse (Deut. 27.15) concern idolatry, and because Deutero-Isaiah
45 involves a creation account set inside a critique of empire, a theological
foundation of concern for nature affected by the misuse of carbon combustible
resources may be derived from the Trinitarian ethic of trusteeship as promoted
earlier. If the charge of idolatry
holds, a society heedless of the misuse of combustible fuels might be recognized
as engaging in a foundational, covenantal sin against the Creator, one that
assaults God’s atmospheric mover (Gen. 1.2), the Holy ruach.
Trusteeship of nature by humanity requires
something to motivate the execution of its covenantal duties. To that end, we turn to God’s final judgment flowing
from the negative principle of idolatry. It may be noted how modern Judaism employs
Isaiah 44 (including 44.9-20) in its regular sequence of parashah and haftarah
readings. That sequence implies the covenantal structure suggested above: idolatry
in contravention of the covenant of trusteeship is followed by God’s Final
Judgment. In the year 2020, the Va-yikra
service of 5 Nisan 5780 (March 28) has as its haftarah reading Is. 44.6-23, with the liturgical description, “God’s
greatness contrasted with the sin of idolatry.”
The following week (Tzav) has
a haftarah reading of Malachi 3.4-24,
described as “Approach of the Day of Judgment” (Assembly of Reform Rabbis 2017).
This sequence of haftarot that follows
the betrayal of God through idolatry by the Approach of the Day of Judgment is
repeated in the year 2021, on 7 and 14 Nisan 5781. This sequence is instructive as to Judaism’s seriousness
with which it makes of idolatry described by Is. 44. 9-20: It is to be followed
by God’s Judgment.
B. Canonical Arc of Condemnation of Idolatry from
the Prophets to Revelation 18
Coote (2004) locates the impetus for
Deutero-Isaiah’s condemnation of idolatry during the Persian period; it was
applied, in part, to calling for the return to Jerusalem of the offspring of
exiled Judahites who were continuing to find employment and residence in
Babylon. Many of these were craftsmen employed in the Babylon religious
establishment. Yet the context of
(Deutero-) Isaiah 40-55 may be more general than particular in its condemnation
of Babylonian society. Read
intertextually with Rev. 17-19, the entire Babylonian economy may have been
seen by early Christian readers as by “Persian Isaiah” (Coote 2004): as
idolatrous, and the prophet’s charge of idol fabrication might be applied to
all exiled Judahites participating in the Babylonian economy, whatever their
occupation or sector.
Other prophets condemn Israel’s idolatry, which
they characterize as “adultery,” the fundamental disloyalty of Israel to its partner
YHWH. Hosea (4.12-13), Jeremiah (9.2), and Ezekiel (16.36) join Isaiah (57.7-8)
in naming idolatry as adultery. This characterization is significant because
the charge of adultery is applied to encompass Babylon’s society in Rev.
18. That charge of adultery is linked to
and envisions a political economy idolatrous in the production of luxuries, a
diversion of resources from subsistence needs to the vanities of the rich.
Rev.
18.1 After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great
authority; and the earth was made bright with his splendor. 2 He called
out with a mighty voice,
“Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!
It has become a dwelling place of demons,
a haunt of every foul spirit,
a haunt of every foul bird,
a haunt of every foul and hateful beast.
3For all the nations have drunk
of the wine of the wrath of her
fornication,
and the kings of the earth have committed
fornication with her,
and the merchants of the earth have grown
rich from the power of her luxury.”
…
9 And
the kings of the earth, who committed fornication and lived in luxury with her,
will weep and wail over her when they see the smoke of her burning;
10 they will stand far off, in fear of her torment, and say,
“Alas, alas, the great city,
Babylon, the mighty city!
For in one hour your judgment has come.”
11 And
the merchants of the earth weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their
cargo anymore, 12 cargo of gold, silver, jewels and pearls, fine linen,
purple, silk and scarlet, all kinds of scented wood, all articles of ivory, all
articles of costly wood, bronze, iron, and marble, 13 cinnamon, spice,
incense, myrrh, frankincense, wine, olive oil, choice flour and wheat, cattle
and sheep, horses and chariots, slaves—and human lives.
14“The fruit for which your soul longed
has gone from you,
and all your dainties and your splendor
are lost to you,
never to be found again!”
15 The
merchants of these wares, who gained wealth from her, will stand far off, in
fear of her torment, weeping and mourning aloud,
16“Alas, alas, the great city,
clothed in fine linen,
in purple and scarlet,
adorned with gold,
with jewels, and with pearls!
17For in one hour all this wealth has been
laid waste!”
And all shipmasters
and seafarers, sailors and all whose trade is on the sea, stood far off
18 and cried out as they saw the smoke of her burning,
“What city was like the great city?”
19And they threw dust on their heads, as
they wept and mourned, crying out,
“Alas, alas, the great city,
where all who had ships at sea
grew rich by her wealth!
For in one hour she has been laid waste.
20Rejoice over her, O heaven,
you saints and apostles and prophets!
For God has given judgment for you against
her.”
Adultery
is linked in this passage with the luxury production by idol fabricators. This
vision, which is meant to be applied to Rome of New Testament times, picks up
on the Old Testament’s condemnation of Babylon’s society during the exile of
Judah there during the time of Deutero-Isaiah.
This condemnation of the resource-diverting—especially combustible
resource-diverting—economic society has ready application to this day and age
when a carbon-intensive economy degrades the atmosphere and does not provide
sufficient subsistence opportunities to the poor, future generations, and other
species.
II.
Covenant Performance of Atmospheric Trusteeship
Alienation
may be humankind’s greatest existential problem--alienation from God, from nature, from society, of the human soul
from the human body. Because of alienation, humankind
struggles with feelings of insecurity and insufficiency. In their idolatrous desire to become like
gods, Adam and Eve as the mythological representatives of fallen human nature
misapply their freedom in what they misconstrue as capricious and chaotic
nature—nature perceived at times graciously fecund or punitively hostile. This psychological dualism leads humanity
through history to fantasize looming, recurrent scarcities and consequently to
build stores of hoarded goods and commodities to serve as material security.
Alienation stimulates Adam and Eve’s modern human heirs to pursue a destructive
environmental ethic of hoarding and extractive exploitation of resources relatively
unbounded by concerns of future generations, marginalized groups, indigenous
peoples with historical land tenure, and
other species.
To describe and repair this alienation, the Bible structures
the environmental surroundings of humanity on a Trinitarian basis. Ontogenetically primary is nature as a
“garden,” the realm of humanity’s creation by God the Father and therefore an
average child’s first experience of his or her surroundings. It stands to reason that God’s directive to
Adam to serve and preserve the garden in Gen. 2.15 is directed at this fecund
household inside a parenting and sustaining nature. The environmental ethic that results is
“usufruct,” the non-exploitative culling of nature’s yearly harvest without
depletion of its productive capacity. This trustee’s task derives from the
Creator’s blessing. Leithart (2018) illustrates this blessing by inverting the
curse of Cain:
The Lord curses Cain in Genesis 4:12: ‘When you
serve [abad] the ground (adamah), it will not give (natan) its strength (koach) to you.’
Invert that, and we have a fair summary of God’s
blessing, and a mini theology of the natural environment. Humanity’s stance
toward the earth: Service, not exploitation, pillage, or rape.
When the adamah
is well served, she gives.
The relation of humanity to creation is not
master-servant. Humanity doesn’t dominate but serves; and the exchange that
results is an exchange of gifts.
The adamah
gives strength, which means that the adamah
has power to give. It also implies that the adamah shares power.
Humanity’s
task inside the Creator’s garden is to respect, tend, and serve. Humanity is to recognize its fellowship with
other created natural entities.
The second conceptualization of humanity’s ambient
surroundings is the Bible’s consideration of אֶרֶץ ʾerets
“the land” as a
political, historical, and cultural construct. This is the realm of the
Logos—God the Son. It is in adulthood
that the denizen of the garden of creation goes forth to encounter the world in
its historical and cultural complexity and risk. It is within this latter, blended milieu of terrestrial
substrate and human sociological forces that an individual created being learns
how to function and what existential choices to make. It is within adulthood in the land that a
person learns whether to pursue violence and Machiavellian stratagems to survive,
or whether to take up the challenge of the moral lifestyle of God the Son to
extend the garden for others, not only to embody and exploit it solipsistically. In such a case, the directive toward
trusteeship of nature’s garden continues.
If, however, the alternative is pursued for a reckless individualism and
selfish self-centeredness, an exploitative ethic of economic intensification
and depletion results.
The third Trinitarian state of nature is dichotomous:
the landing of the Holy Spirit or its absence. It is the bifurcate exit either to grave—dead
earth—or renewal: Paradise/new earth.
To illustrate, Robb (2010) contrasts the “Kingdom
of Oil” with the Kingdom of God. After establishing a moral foundation in liberation
and the insurrectionist Jesus, she demonstrates the necessity to collectively
deliberate over the vision of the good society, which in Church circles
involves the Gospel kerygma
(proclamation) of the Kingdom. I (not Robb) argue that if a person’s values in
this life are the extensions of life to others in the form of trusteeship of
nature and the Kingdom ethics of God the Son, then those values will be
realized anew in the Creator’s Final Judgment that brings the individual’s
final destiny inside an ambient and productive paradise that instantiate those
values. If self-centeredness and
exploitation were the core of an individual’s lifetime in both garden and land,
then the prospect from God’s judgment is a destiny in a cold grave and the self-created,
non-productive values that represents.
The Holy Spirit’s absence or presence in the
environmental surroundings of land and garden leads to the “double exit” of life
and death within the Creator. In death,
there is no ruach’s breath of air,
only its cessation. By this prospect, we
again return to the necessity in this life to promote the sustaining fellowship
with the atmosphere as a value that demonstrates to the Creator our seriousness
with which we take life in the garden and life in the land. We demonstrate our
respect for life by fellowshipping with and acting as a trustee of the atmosphere
while living the Kingdom ethics of God the Son.
We receive fellowship in return by pneumatic companionship with God’s
breath, the ruach of Creation, and
the love poured out into our hearts by the Son. The Gospel of our receiving
redemption by grace may be existentially primary, but the Gospel announced by
the Son of the Kingdom of God surely includes our awakening to the covenantal
requirements that focus on the life-sustaining surroundings of our neighbors no
less than ourselves.
