In the old times stories always had a teaching.
The Finnish national epic Kalevala of course has some teachings. Elias Lönnrot took only poems of the heroic time to Kalevala, the others are in Kanteletar. I remember one valuable teaching from Kanteletar: a young wife is advised (by an uncle or so, from her family side) to pick up the children from the floor before wiping the floor, so that children are not wiped away with the dust. That sounds very reasonable. I know how modern Finnish women would react to such a kind advice. They either have little sense of humor or feel very vulnerable. I am sure that half of them would first shout “Do you think that I am that stupid!” and then start crying – women always cry. (Though, I admit that my experiments on this topic are not quite up to date; modern – as in modern Finnish women – is to be read as Holocene and the data were collected from public sources or in (very) private communication by the author in the year one and two.)
Naturally, it would not help to tell them that the poem is meant to be funny and that it is a ritual advice from the older men of your family when getting married. Sisters of a girl getting married warned about the terrible mother-in-law that the young bride is soon going to have. She will be a slave with no chance of returning to the sweet home. I guess it would not help to point out that, just like the earlier teaching, this also is a ritual advice, and that mothers-in-law were in those days probably not any worse than they are today. If somebody is sure that has understood everything correctly, usually there is no way to change that opinion. And these people always get offended.
Kanteletar has wedding poems and such, but Kalevala has the more serious stuff. The poem of Väinämöinen trying to marry a gir, Aino, who drowns herself, ends to a teaching that an old man must not look for a young wife. I have not noticed that Finns would be following this good advice. In another poem the great shaman Väinämöinen descends to the realms of death, Tuonela, to find knowledge. He has some trouble getting back and the poem ends by warning anybody from going to Tuonela before their natural time. I have not noticed that Finns would be following this advice either. The poem of Kullervo teaches not to treat children badly. This is enforced today by the law and police. Many poems in Kalevala and Kanteletar teach wives valuable lesions. A wife should be obedient to her husband, as he can kill her. A young wife is badly treated by her mother in law, but later she becomes the matriarch. The family of a young wife will not take her back, so she has to accept her fate. Needless to say, these advices are not taken.
We see that there are teachings in Kalevala, though they are not so actual in the modern life. The teachings of Kalevala are in epic poems, the poems tell a story. Sometimes the poem formulates the teaching at the end, sometimes it is left for the listener to figure it out. This is just what we should expect: there are always teachings in old stories and the old way of teaching is not listing command and prohibitions, it is telling a story or a myth.
This being so, what does the Old Testament teach? Especially, what do the stories on the patriarchs teach a Christian?
That is, the main moral teachings should be just on the stories of Israelite patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Josef and in the Exodus narrative and the conquest of the land and up to David and Solomon, not on the creation myths up to Noah’s flood, nor in the historical parts telling of kings of Israel and Judea which describe actual events. Those stories of Israelite patriarchs are not history: they were created to teach to the people something.
The Old Testament is both older and younger than Kalevala, older because the poems of Kalevala are from the Northern iron age, maybe composed around 1000 AD, while the older parts of the Old Testament are from 700-400 BC, but also younger since the poem is a much older form than the prosaic expression and the illiterate tribal culture where Kalevala was sang reflects much older times in human history than the high culture of Babylon and Persia where the Old Testament was written. Time just went faster in lower latitudes.
The holiest books of the Old Testament are the Books of Moses. They have older and younger parts. Deuteronomy is probably the oldest, and was composed in different stages. The early from of Deuteronomy is told to be in chapters 5-26 and was composed in Jerusalem in the time of Josiah, 641–609 BC. Chapters 27-28 were apparently added in Babylonian captivity after 586 BC and chapters 1-4, 29-30 and 31-34 were added in the Persian time. Or this is what the majority of biblical researchers say. I cannot know if it is this way or that way, but let’s accept those conclusions.
The other four books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus) are dated to 6th or 5th century BC, but it does not mean that these books do not contain older traditions. The early form of Deuteronomy, Chapters 5-26, tries to change the original form of the Israelite religion, which is reflected in some of the stories of the four other books of Moses.
Unlike the poems of Kalevala, the Books of Moses have a political setting. Jews had lost their independence, the temple was destroyed and their leaders were taken to captivity. A bit later Persia conquered Babylon and allowed Jews to rebuild their temple and return to their land, but did not give Israel independence. In Deuteronomy Israelites are ready to enter the Promised Land, while in the Persian time when the book was finished, Jews were preparing to return to the homeland.
Now, where are the teachings that the work must contain?
The new theological point of Deuteronomy is the covenant between God and Israel in Deuteronomy. The covenant says that if the people keep the law, they can live in their land, but if they do not, God will punish them by sending an invader and the people will lose their land. This is the message of Deuteronomy, but it is not the main teaching in the stories of the patriarchs, the Exodus and battle for the land. It is clear that it is not the original main teaching of the stories of patriarchs, since the message of Deuteronomy is rather artificially added as a talk and blessing given by Moses.
The main teachings were already there before Deuteronomy was written, so before King Josiah, and the teachings must be found in the stories.
Abraham leaves his home, is promised the land, his son Isaac is almost sacrificed, Abraham’s descendants manage to get the possession of the land, Jacob also called Israel uses clever but crooked ways to gain a fortune in another country, he has many sons, finally a drought comes, Jacob and his sons must take refuge abroad.
There must be some kind of a moral teaching in Jacob earning the name Israel while clearly being a cheater. Jacob steals from his brother twice. He does not marry a local woman but from his own people. Jacob set up a stone on a high place. Jacob steals the property of his uncle and his favorite wife Rebecca steals her father’s home gods. Jacob tells his men to dig a well into somebody’s land and claims it is his well since his men dug it. The Torah does not blame Jacob, though some prophets reproach him for cheating his brother. What he does is good for Israel and what is good for Israel is good. Jacob used magic to increase his cattle, or maybe that magic was only make believe to cover the cheating.
Abraham cheats the Pharaoh by telling that his sister-wife is his sister. Abraham gets property from the Pharaoh as a compensation of his shrewdness. Abraham intends to steal all land from the local inhabitants, but hides his intentions and shrewdly buys a small land with the pretext that it is for burying his wife. Abraham gives up his rightful claim to spoils of war in order to avoid creating any feudal obligation to a local ruler. Abraham throws out his son and the slave girl mother, because the son had a rightful claim for Abraham’s inheritance but the mother was not from the correct people. God took care of them, but not Abraham.
Taking over the Promised Land and becoming wealthy happen through deception, and the land from the Nile to the Euphrates is only for Israelites, not for Arabs.
The Torah declares that each firstborn male is to be sacrificed to El. Abraham must sacrifice the firstborn son Isaac, but the child is redeemed: God replaces the human sacrifice by an animal sacrifice. This cannot be the original teaching of the story: the prophets complain that Israelites did sacrifice their children. The version of animal sacrifices must be from King Josiah’s time, and it tries to change the original human sacrifice to the Jerusalem centered animal sacrifice cult. Assuming that originally Isaac was sacrificed, he may have been the older brother, not the father of Jacob. The role of Esau is to be the child God hated. The grandson of Abraham was probably not hated as God loves even Ishmael, the child of Abraham by a slave girl Hagar.
As the story now is, the Bible teaches that there is the enemy: Esau who God hates, identified as the tribe of Amalekites who have to be exterminated, identified as the Kings of Edom. In medieval times and in Zohar the enemy is identified with Christians.
The biblical narrative continues with the story of Joseph. Joseph is credited for having invented storages of grain for famine years. This idea was in reality invented by the Egyptians about a thousand years before the purported time of Joseph, and the credit usually goes to Imhotep, the ingenious architect of step pyramid of Pharaoh Djoser circa 2600 BC, but in the Bible Joseph added a nasty twist to the management of grain storages. Joseph took a part of the grain from local farmers as tax in good years. In the bad years he sold the grain with high price. He squeezed everything from the Egyptians and finally reduced them to slaves, while he favored his own kind and associated with the ruler.
This story teaches the basic idea of usury. You cannot always rob people with grain, but money works just as well. Take deposits and give out loans. Take interest on loans and use them for usury. Control the money. The biblical stories do not seem to contain any explicit teaching about the usefulness of fomenting wars, but wars offer many possibilities: they cause shortages and create debts. If well played, a war can be very good for debtors.
In the overall story of Joseph, dreams tell in the beginning that Joseph will rise over the others. He is captured and thrown into a well by his own kin. He is thought to have died, but he survived and become the next man to the living god, Pharaoh. In other words, Joseph was almost sacrificed by being thrown into a well, but he did not die. He uses clever but crooked ways to become rich in another country. Joseph rules over many people and reduces them to slavery but favors his own kin. Israelites prosper and grow into a large nation, but finally they are suppressed. They return to the homeland and destroy the people, who lived there.
Some of this is the story of Messiah ben Joseph, the suffering servant of the Lord, who is sacrificed but rises up and is elevated above others and rules over all people. Prophets and visions tell that the Messiah has come, as the angel told Mary and as dreams tell Joseph. In the reign of the Messiah, Israelites have all the wealth and power, but no era lasts forever. Also the Messianic era ends.
There were three eternal characters: Messiah ben Joseph, Messiah ben David and the Prophet like Moses. The story of the prototypical prophet is in the Second Book of Moses, Exodus. Moses kills an Egyptian and it is revenged by suppression of Israelites. The suppression is necessary because without it Israelites would not return to their home country.
Notice this teaching: the prophet is the messiah, which leads the people to the homeland. It is one of the three roles of the messiah. This prophet messiah creates suppression of Israelites by his deeds, and so it has to be, because otherwise there is no return.
The home country of Israelites is the Promised Land. Joshua steals the land from the local inhabitants and kills them all, or in some cases allows them to live as servants but not equal. Joshua destroys shrines of local people. Joshua, like King David, is the Messiah ben David, the conqueror and suppressor of other nations.
A prostitute, who helps Israelites against her own people, is allowed to live in Israel. There has to be prostitutes, preferably not from their own people, and the definition of a good non-Israelite is one who helps Israelites.
There is an old claim, often called a classical anti-Semitic canard, that Jews have a plan for taking over the world. Let us agree that they do not have any such plan. There are only the teachings of the Holy Scriptures. I will make a short list of the main moral teachings that I found from the stories. It is definitely not a plan.
As Joseph did:
- Always favor your own.
- Become advisors of rulers of the locals.
- Abuse a difficult position of local people in order to rob them.
- By usury destroy the locals or reduce them to slavery.
Locals will hate you after all this, but it is good as it leads to an exodus to the homeland. To become advisors of rulers, your people need education. Make schools and preferably take over elite schools from which the advisors of rulers are selected.
As Jacob did:
- Do not assimilate with locals or marry them.
- Magic and belief in supernatural can be used for gaining wealth.
If you assimilate with the locals, it is not possible to exploit them, and you lose your identity.
As Abraham did:
- When weaker use deception and their greed for money or sex.
- Use your women for seducing the local rulers.
Use the weaknesses of the people and pretend to be their friend and helper.
As Moses did:
- Use terrorism, it leads to suppression of your people and prepares them for exodus.
This teaching is controversial, but it is quite necessary to create anti-Israelite feelings.
As Joshua did:
- Destroy and profane the religion of the locals.
- Good non-Israelites are those, who betray their own people and help Israelites.
- Exterminate the worst locals.
If you do not exterminate them, they will keep the claims to the land. If you do not destroy their religion, they will remain strong. The war against locals, since it is a war, can be fought on many fronts. The target of attacks is not only their religion. There are other pillars. Indeed, there are some pillars which keep a nation standing. If these pillars are destroyed, the nation collapses. At some point these pillars were the king, the home and the religion. Consequently, you have to destroy the home by promoting alternative families, gay rights, feminism and immigration for locals, and at the same time suppress these ideas among your own people. These movements should be in your control, so you have to support them and provide them with leaders.
These may look a bit (or even quite much) like the anti-Semitic canard of a Jewish plan for taking over the world, but one essential element is missing. Biblical stories do not mention media control. Of course, one may answer that the need of controlling the minds of the local, that is enemy, people has arisen only relatively recently. In biblical times kings decided all matters, not their people, and it was rather irrelevant what the people thought. It was still so in medieval times, and no special effort was made to control the public opinion among enemy population. For influencing kings it was sufficient to get own people as advisors of local (that is, enemy) rulers. The minds of own people had to be controlled, but being able to write and to interpret the sacred texts gave a complete control.
No story in the Old Testament probably teaches anything about controlling the minds and souls of local enemy people, the goal of media control today. The mission of Jesus was certainly an effort to control the mind and the soul of own people: the message was that the end of the times is near, meaning that the war against the Romans was near and the war would lead to the liberation of the people, as the messiah had redeemed the people and paid their sins by dying as the sacrifice of the firstborn son. This message must have been accepted quite widely as the Jews started the rebel in 66 AD after seeing the signs of the second coming of the messiah: the comet, the cross or sword shape of stars, and hearing the noises in the sky.
The Jewish disciples of Jesus probably did not fight in the war, but this does not show that the Jews, who fought in the war, had not accepted Jesus as Messiah ben Joseph, the suffering servant, who would be crucified. The Jewish disciples of Jesus were expected to follow Jesus and to preach the good message, but some of them wanted to do as Jesus did, that is, be sacrificed. The purpose of the sacrifice was redeeming the people so that God would remove his punishment, which at that time was the presence of Romans in Israel.
By the law, the sacrificed lamb had to be perfect. A perfect sacrifice would rise to God’s realms in the Heaven, and would live forever in the Heaven. Jesus required filling the law in the strictest fashion where even thinking of a sin means committing it. Those disciples, who wanted to follow Jesus to the Heaven, had to be perfect as God is perfect. It is in this context that the disciples were required to love their enemy and not to resist evil. This meant nothing good for the enemy, since mistreating the righteous would only add to their punishment in the terrible Day of the Lord.
Can the New Testament be seen as an effort to control the minds of the enemy people? It is a good question. Paul promised Gentiles a place in Heaven, provided that they followed what Christ taught, like love your enemy and do not resist the evil. Through such principles Christianity may have weakened Rome, and Western Rome indeed collapsed soon after Christianity became the only accepted religion, but there is no indication that Paul tried to weaken the Romans. He seems quite sincere in his belief.
In the Epistles of Paul, Jews are often presented as enemies. It is unclear which Jews these are, but apparently Jews from James, those, who want to circumcise and Judaize. If these are the enemies, then they are the ones who should be loved. Paul indeed collected money to the poor of Jerusalem. Were the poor the Jerusalem Church or the Essenes? Both used the same name and probably were parts of the same Messianic sect. Both sects expected that in a short time there would be the war and persecution of the end of the times. But there is nothing to suggest that Paul meant that loving the enemy meant loving the Messianic Jews.
Pauline Christians did not fight in the First Jewish war, as they were told to love the enemy and sacrifice themselves. Jewish Christians probably also did not fight, as their task was spreading the good news. In the Gospels Jesus seems to be against Sadducees and Pharisees. These were the sects that co-operated with Romans. Usually the population is against elites, which co-operate with the enemy. It is likely that James the brother of Jesus and Jesus himself were anti-Roman and popular among the people. Messianic Jews fought the war and at least one leader was from the sect of Essenes. The good news of Jesus was intended to turn the Jews into messianic fighters, not into disciples who would only spread the message.
For Romans none of these fine differences mattered. They saw all Christians as enemies and did not differentiate between Jewish Christians and other Messianic Jews. For Jesus the opinions among Gentiles probably did not matter: he did not preach to Gentiles.
If there was any effort to influence the minds and souls of Gentiles, it would have been Paul. He is rather understanding to Romans, but he seems to have been preaching a new religion rather than a propaganda operation for war purposes.
Probably the idea of controlling enemy mind and soul developed a bit later. Now, of course, it is a central theme in any psychological operations.
What should a Christian learn from these teachings of the Old Testament? One thing is that there are teachings in the Books of Moses, but that these teachings are even less recommendable than those in Kalevala. Another is that the claim that there is no plan to conquer the world must be taken with a grain of salt, as there is a biblical doctrine, which, while not a plan, is not that far from outlines of a plan.
Even an outlines of a plan is rather unique. In the Greek tradition Odysseus outsmarted his enemies, but Ilias and Odyssey were not holy script to the Greeks and they are not obsessed with thinking of methods how the Greeks can be supreme over other people. It was not so in Egypt either. Egyptians of the Old Kingdom did not plot to rob everything from the locals and to reduce them to slavery, as Joseph is said to have done. It seems that the pyramids were built by free people.
On maybe the New Kingdom of Egypt was different. There were slave children among the builders of Amarna, the capital city of Akhenaten. Amarna was built around 1330 BC, possibly mainly by slave children. Akhenaten’s time is one of the two historical models behind the biblical Exodus, the other being the expulsion of Hyksos around 1550 BC. Pharaoh Hatshepsut wrote a negative description of Hyksos. Maybe the stories of the Books of Moses are based on oral tradition from these dark centuries when foreign invaders held power in Lower Egypt, or a fanatic and insane Pharaoh created a new religion. Later it became holy script and still later oral law, which interpreted what the written law had intended.
Maybe there is still one last teaching that a Christian could learn from the Old Testament: it is not dead letter. It is very easy nowadays to search from the web various religious texts, such as the Bible and Talmud, and the translations are excellent. The most important and most controversial parts are often highlighted in these web versions. Verifying if there really exists some teaching of dubious morals can today be done in minutes. That is a great improvement to the situation still some decades ago, when everything could be denied and blamed on a poor translation.