Biblical Hebrew Forum

[John Ronning <ronning AT ilink.nis.za>]

Lloyd Barre wrote:

> Dear List Members:
>
> I suspect that this passages has been edited so as to reverse a positive 
> >portrayal of Micayehu and his mother into a negative one.  I suspect 
> >editorial glosses in the compound definition of the image or two images 
> (?) >made for his shrine (pesel wemassekah [vv 3, 4]) and in the seemingly 
> >intrusive and corrective statement in v 6 that "In those days there was no 
> >king in Israel; everyman did what was right in his own eyes."(cp. 18:1; 
> >19:1).  If we bracket out these alleged glosses, do we find a positive 
> >portrayal of Micayehu in which none of his actions are cast in negative 
> >light, but rather advocated by its author?
>
> For Your Consideration,
>
> Lloyd M. Barre, Ph.D.
>
>

Dear Lloyd,

It seems to me that the general avoidance of giving "editorial comments"
by the HB narrators means that you could fairly easily turn almost
anything you want into something with a previously opposite message to
what is now given.  In my opinion part of the reason for this is that
the stories narrated/told/recited can serve somewhat as diagnostic tools
for the teacher (parent, Levite, etc.).  I.e. how does the reader react
on hearing the story?  If he sympathizes with Micaiah, what does that
say about him?

To put it another way, the narrator doesn't need to overtly condemn
Micaiah - the law does that (and it's the job of the teacher to point
that out).  The description of his creation - PESEL UMASSEKAH - is in
verbatim agreement with Deut 27:15 - "Cursed is the man who makes an
idol or a molten image - PESEL UMASSEKAH - , an abomination to the LORD,
the work of the hands of the craftsman, and sets it up in secret.' And
all the people shall answer and say, 'Amen.'

As to whether "In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did
what was right in his own eyes" is intrusive, I think it's actually
integral to the narrative's portrayal of Micaiah as a prototype of
Jeroboam:

Micah                                         Jeroboam I

from hill country of Ephraim         an Ephraimite (1 K 11:26)

set up an idolatrous shrine           set up idolatrous shrines
in his home - eventually              in Bethel and Dan for
taken to Dan for northern             his whole nation
Danites

consecrated a son                       set up non-Levitical priesthood
-
(non-Levite) to be priest -           excluded priests and Levites
later got a Levite                         from service

in those days there was no          Jeroboam was king in Israel
king in Israel: every man             (everyone did what was right
did what was right in his              in Jeroboam's eyes)
own eyes (17:6)


Message - addresses the feeling of the faithful who agreed with Samuel
that the desire for a monarchy was an expression of apostasy on the part
of Israel against their king Yhwh, and that although Israel could
prosper under a monarchy it would not and things would actually get
worse in the long term.  Thus faithful Israelites could easily see
Jeroboam and his successors as "the problem," whereas this incident
shows that getting rid of the apostate monarchy would not necessarily
solve the people's spiritual problem; they would just go back to doing
what is right in their own eyes.

Yours,

John Ronning