Review of Related Studies
Latuvus finds out that it only involves several specific groups or those who are wealthy and have special social status and professional skills. In another side,
those who are left are “the poor of the land”. This marginalized group then by Latuvus, is never been mentioned again in the latter text.
Compared to those who are politically related to the empire, this group are not important at all to be named, deported and even killed. This group, during the
exile, establish a new governmental system in their homeland. They even make a rebellion but fail which cause the destruction of the city, temple, and palace,
houses and walls Sugirtharajah, 2006: 188. Latuvus finds out that all Babylonian cruelties mentioned in the text are always caused by the deeds of Israelites that do
something against what their God wills. Both Jehoiachin and Zedekiah were the main people who caused the major destruction of Jerusalem as they both with
their people committed a rebellion against the empire. Every rebellious activity they make only let them to the disastrous facts. Hence, Latuvus finds the
inferiority attitude of the writer of 2 Kings. This inferior attitude is found in the characteristic of Gedaliah 25: 24. Babylonian Empire is considered as the one
which “is not to be afraid of...Babylonian should be “served” and the colonial power would let good things happen” and everything will be alright
Sugirtharajah, 2006: 189. This shows how inferior Gedaliah is. In deuteronomistic theology, Latuvus finds out that the way Israelites make
relationship with Yahweh is by serving. However, in this colonial context, it is not Yahweh to be served but the empire. Latuvus argues that
It seems as if the deuteronomistic Yahweh- talked had been transferred into a new context to create loyalty towards the colonial power, as if it
would be the divine. Imperial power is seen and described by divine nations in order to underline how good it is Sugirtharajah, 2006: 189.
This means that the power of imperialism causes a transformation of context constructed by the Israelites in order to fit with the colonial reality they
are undergoing. The empire then should be considered good by the colonized. Latuvus says that the last two episodes of 2 Kings have the more colonialism
interpretation from all parts of the book which means that these episodes maintain also the inferior attitude. In these episodes, mentioned how kind the empire is.
Jehoiachin is released, he is allowed to change his clothes, and he is given a special status in the empire. He can sit down and eat in the same table with the
king. However, according to Latuvus, this is a form of “inner colonization of the
writer ”. This means the writer of 2 Kings focuses more on the good relationship
between the imperial power and colonized than the nationalistic spirit and rebellion. Jehoiachin is free from prison and
“rehabilitated” but he is still under the control and strict rule of the
“superior forces” Sugirtharajah, 2006: 190. Latuvus says that Yahweh plays an important role in the story though he is
mentioned very little, just like the poor of the land. Latuvus says that three important things in the whole story which affect the changes of Yahweh
characterization; king of Judah does evil things, it was Yahweh who hands the Israelites to the Babylonian, and Yahweh has an anger-based-act personality. He
is the man behind the incidents and the ally of the imperial power, different to what classical liberation theological view that he is the one who will set free the
oppressed and the poor in the story of Exodus. This will strengthen the
characteristic of Yahweh as the one who is very responsible of Babylonian imperialism in the deuteronomistic history. The whole God-talks also changed
because Yahweh acts based on his anger. It is different with Yahweh characteristic in pre- deuteronomistic tradition where Yahweh is seen as the love
giver, source of life and blessing, and the creator of life. All these transformation, according to Latuvus, is basically influenced by the political power which
compelled in theology Sugirtharajah, 2006: 190. Latuvus ends his essay by giving some steps of decolonizing this image of Yahweh.
From this essay, the writer finds out that the colonization does affect the writing of the scribe and Jewish theology. Jewish nation really have a high regard
for their Hebrew Bible. The figuration of Yahweh in the scribes which is constructed by colonial reality influences the Jewish way of thinking and acts. In
shor t, the Jews‟ Hebrew Bible also plays an important and determined role in
constructing the Jews way of thinking and acts. This study shows its relevance with this research as it talks about how important The Hebrew Bible is for the
Jewish People. In this research, the writer uses this idea to see how the Jewish people recognize Torah as part of their scribes which finally put them in
opposition with Jesus. The fact that Hebrew Bible also takes part in shaping the Jews‟ way of
thinking and acts becomes the very precious opportunity for the empire to strengthen the imperial ideology and extraction. This argument is proved by Jon
L. Berquist in his essay with the title, “Postcolonialism and Imperial Motives for Canonization”. In this essay, Berquist uses Posctolonial theory in order to see the
problem of Persian imperialism internalized by the Jewish people, in this case the Yehud people in Jerusalem. The aim of his study is to describe the relation of
Persian imperialism to the Yehudites, how the Persia‟s imperialism finally affects the canonization; what motivates the process of reproducing the Yehudites‟
canonical scripture. During the time of Persian Empire in Yehud, the empire has been taking away the resources of the land which are the food, products and even
human as the necessary task of imperialism. The empire then dominates also the physical resources of a large are for more than two centuries Sugirtharajah, 2006:
79. In order to easily take control over the land, the empire, in this case under
Darius era, funds the temple construction in Jerusalem. This temple then plays not only its religious role but also political administrative role. Berquist also presumes
that this temple even becomes a storehouse to keep the resources to be given to the empire. The Yehudites are turned into a long-term-extraction colony for the
empire. In order to strengthen this colonial condition, Darius affects not only the material, economy, and infrastructure of the colony but also something more
important related to the “ideological superstructure” of them Sugirtharajah, 2006:
80. During the imperial era, Darius approves the colony to set up their own legal system of society including history and traditions but these are made, of course,
under the imperial‟s control. The empire establishes imperial administrative, consisting of the appointed governors and scribes, which is centred in the temple
to produce then publish documents, known as the King‟s Law contained laws and narrative material which has been censored, edited of fabricated by the empire.
Berquist shows examples of this King‟s Law asserted in the canonical scripture or the Hebrew Bible texts
… the reference of King‟s Law in extant Hebrew Bible texts Ezra 7:26, the emphasis on public proclamation of the law Deut 4:44
–5:1; Josh 24:1
–28; Neh 8:1–18, and the use of Aramaic similar to the imperial language in some texts Gen 31:47; Jer 10:11; Dan 2:4
–7:28; and Ezra 4:8
–68, 7:12–16 … a fifth century canon or pre-canon … and that a body of literature corresponding to the Primary History Genesis
–2 Kings and including the Latter Prophets Isaiah --Malachi Sugirtharajah, 2006:
82. These are the examples of imperial ideology found in the Hebrew Bible
which from them, the empire then constructs the Yehudite commu nity‟s mind to
make such justification about their validity as colony. In this case, the Yehudites‟ mind is constructed to realize that they cannot rule themselves and the destruction
of their land is caused by their own deed. That is why they really need Persia which is
“anointed” by their God to protect them. Moreover, the law and tithes of the empire should be obeyed as the empire is the manifest of their God. The
offerings should be given to the temple which is controlled by the empire Sugirtharajah, 2006: 86. This is the way Darius strengthen the colonial
condition. He affected the ideological superstructure of the colony; the canonical scripture, the Jewish ideology which becomes the consciousness of the Jewish
people themselves. According to Berquist, this is because Canonical scripture played a very important role as religion, along with the scripture conceived the
norms, and assumptions of the ruling class in the society Sugirtharajah, 2006: 87. This is what motivates the canonization and how the strategy worked in the
society: as the empire needs to make Yehud as a long-term-extraction colony and
they finds out that the canonical scripture is very important in the society, the empire takes part in the producing of the canonical scripture and uses it as the best
mean of oppressing the Yehudites then easily advances the ideology of the empire.
What the writer wants to look from the findings of this essay is the problem that the producing of canonical scripture has been affected by the
colonizer‟s ideology. This means that there must be a mixture of the colonised identity and the colonizers‟ as canonical scripture originally conceives the identity
of the Yehudites. These related studies give some adequate information about the background of the Jewish Hebrew Bible, the valuable thing which conceives their
past history, laws, culture and tradition which they honour and preserve as their identity. These studies also give information about the relation of Jewish Hebrew
Bible and imperialism; how imperial power constructs it and how it is used to strengthen imperial power. This study shows its relevance with this research as it
talks about how imperial power managed to dominate the Jewish people using the Jewish Hebrew Bible, the national identity of the Jews. In this research, the writer
uses the idea of this study as the starting point and the background to see why the Jewish people oppose Jesus criticism of Torah.
The Jewish Hebrew Bible or scriptures conceives the norms and assumption of the ruling class in the society Sugirtharajah, 2006: 87. This means
that the Jews must obey all laws written inside. During the Roman era, there is a council, a Jewish authority, established in order to preserve the scripture by
making people always obey it, named the Sanhedrin Houtart, 1976: 18. In the
gospels, this group is many times involved in arguments with Jesus. The reason is the different viewpoint of understanding Torah, part of Jewish scriptures. In order
to see further this problem, as this research aim to see this conflict, the writer uses Helmut Merkel‟s essay with the title, “The Opposition between Jesus and
Judaism” as the related study. In this essay, Merkel argues that the conflicts between the Jewish authority and Jesus are the result of transformation between
the synagogue and the church Bammel and Moule, 1983: 129. This is because, Jesus is considered as the member of
“a nationalistic resistance fighter”. Bultman, in Bammel and Moule, mentions some deeds of Jesus that trigger the conflict:
...breaking the Sabbath commandment, violation of the rules of purity, polemic against Jewish legalism, association with outcasts like tax-
gatherers and prostitutes Bammel and Moule, 1983: 130.
From these examples, these actions Jesus does can be said as the way he attacks the Pharisees or just the Torah itself. Not only as a Zealot, Jesus is also, by
some recent studies, assumed to be the member of Qumran Essenes though there are no clear connection and evidence about it Bammel and Moule, 1983: 131.
Tax-gath erers are the most hated society class in the society. Jesus‟ good attitude
toward the tax-gatherer is considered as disgraceful provocation looking from the Jewish perspective. Along with the tax-gatherers, the Samaritans are also hated by
the Jewish people for their mix of race. The parable of “the good Samaritan” is
considered as an insulting outrage for the Jews especially for the “patriotic Jew”
Bemmel and Moule, 1983: 136. Merkel argues that the most difficult and obscure Christian text which is und
er debate about Jesus‟ characteristic is about his attitude toward the Gentiles. In one side, Jesus seems like avoids seeing the
Samaritans like what is stated in Matthew 10:5. However, in other hand, Merkel in Bemmel and Moule says that Jesus treats the Gentiles the same as the tax-
gatherers, the Samaritans and the sinners Bemmel and Moule, 1983:134-135. Merkel takes some example of Jesus‟ attitude toward the Gentiles from Luke
10:23, 11:29, 13:28. There Jesus puts the Samaritans as the good examples and comparison to the evil Jews. Jesus
”openness” to everybody, according to Merkel, is the way he actually separates religion from the
“national soil”. Through this attitude, he is actually organizing the
“Gentile mission”. Jesus himself many times causes some problems related to the interpretation of Torah. Merkel finds it in the
saying of Matthew 8:21. Though it is not a big problem, this can be the attack to Torah as this is about the Fifth Commandment. Another important case
concerning Torah is about Sabbath violation. Though Jesus himself thinks that he actually keeps the Sabbath holy but the Jews have different idea. Merkel says that
Jesus actually reveals his contemporary understanding of Torah Bemmel and Moule, 1983:138. By many times referring himself to
“Son of Man”, Jesus stands not under but above Torah. This is the biggest reason of the conflict between him
and the Pharisees. Jesus‟ attitude, in this essay, is the trigger of conflict with some of the Jews, especially the Jewish authority. Jesus then is considered as
“a disobedient son
”, a parable in the Torah, who deserves to be stoned as the punishment Bemmel and Moule, 1983: 136. The most ground of conflict is
Torah. In the end of his essay, Merkel concludes that the conflict of the Jewish authority and Jesus is actually inescapable as he brings his new way of thinking
and breaks the old and conventional one.
From this related study, the writer finds out that the persecution of Jesus is caused by his different standpoint of Torah. Jesus‟ way of interpreting Torah is
different from what the Jewish people have in their Law. What the writer wants to see from this related study is what makes the clash between the Jewish authorities
and Jesus. This study shows its relevance with this research as it also talks about the conflict emerged between Jesus and the Jewish people, especially the Jewish
authorities. In this research, the writer also scrutinizes the conflict upholds in this related study but from Postcolonial theory.
These four related studies discuss about the struggle of the Jews in defending their national identity. The first three studies discuss about their
relationship with the colonizers, and the last related studies about relationship with Jesus. In this research, the writer will develop these studies. The first three
studies will be the starting point of the Postcolonial views. Because they discuss the colonial situation in which the Jews are in, these three studies can help the
writer to understand the conflict in the gospel from Postcolonial views. While the last one study will be the starting point to observe the reason of persecuting Jesus
from the Postcolonial perspective.