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.

B. Review of Related Theories

In order to be able to analyze the problems, the writer uses some related theories which can explain the problems in this research.

1. Theory of Characterization

Characterization is the way the author describes a character in his work. Perrine in his book, Literature: Structure, Sound and Sense, says that there are two ways of characterization the author makes. First way is direct presentation. In this way the author directly describes or analyzes the character. The author can also use another character as the medium. The second way is indirect presentation. Here, the author describes the character by showing what the character does. Hence, the author lets the reader think and determine about the characteristics of the character Arp and Johnson, 2009: 162. For the more accurate ways of characterization, the writer uses the theory written by M.J.Murphy. M.J. Murphy in his book Understanding Unseens: An Introduction to English Poetry and the English Novel for Overseas Students mentions some ways of characterizing or how to observe the characteristic of a character in a literary work. a. Characte r‟s speech This is the way the author describes a character to what he or she says in the work. Here, through what the character says, the reader can see the characteristics of the character. b. Character‟s reactions This is the way the author describes a character by showing how the character “reacts” to certain situations and events. Hence, the reader can get a clue about the character‟s characteristics. c. Character‟s thoughts This is the way the author describes a character through what the character is thinking about. Here, as it is in thought, the character can do what do what heshe cannot do in his or her real life. Here, the reader can understand the “secret” or “inmost” thoughts of a character then can understand the characteristics of himher. d. Charac ter‟s mannerism This is the way the author describes a character by showing what the character mannerism; habits, what heshe usually does Murphy, 1972: 161-173. 2. Theory of Conflict Robert Stanton in his book, An Introduction to Fiction says that there are two types of conflict. 1. Internal conflict This conflict happens inside the character himself without any force from the outside. This happens when a character has two desires in his or her mind which make him or herself arguing and do n‟t know which one to take. This conflict happens inside the mind of a character Stanton, 1965: 16. 2. External conflict This conflict happens including other selves. In this case, it happens between a character and other characters. This happens when both of them have their own desires and arguing each other. This conflict happens between a character and other character s and also with nature Stanton, 1965: 16. Perrine added that conflict happens as the impact from the clash of action, ideas, desires or wills. A character may have this conflict against other characters or a group of character. This could be as the external force: physical nature, society or “fate”. The conflict may be physical, mental, emotional and moral Perrine, 2009: 104. This means that a conflict happens when there is a clash between oneself and his mind and also a clash between others. Marvin Olsen in his book, Societal Dynamics: Exploring Macrosociology said that conflict always happens involving two or more actors, individual or organizational units who are looking for a common goal which is limited or may be different goals which are not compatible. When the characters are in conflict, they tend to use social power to his opponent and ties to control or influence the situation Olsen, 1991: 100. He also added that there are some kinds of conflict 1. Latent and overt conflict. This conflict exists when two characters have a desire, goal or interest which is opposing each other but they do not “interact over it ”. This can easily lead into conflict which including social power Olsen, 1991: 101. 2. Verbal and action conflict. This conflict involving words to persuade, “demand, discredit, threaten” other character. This conflict also involving physically, economically, legally, or socially in nature Olsen, 1991: 101. 3. Pragmatic and ideological conflict. This conflict involves the “specific objection ” which is considered as fundamental belief which is deeply held such as to win the election and to obtain any important place in governmental system Olsen, 1991: 101. 4. Regulated and unregulated conflict. The regulated conflict is considered as conflict which is conducted with moral, norms or rules that is accepted by people. The unregulated conflict is different. It is the opposite of the regulated conflict. It is the conflict conducted without any norms or rules Olsen, 1991: 101. From these explanations, conflict can be understood as the clash or the different ways of thinking, act, or understanding something which is done by a certain character or group against he himself, other character s, group, or against nature.

3. Postcolonial theory

Before talking about postcolonial, it is better to know what colonial is. Elleke Boehmer in her book, Colonial and Postcolonial Literature defines colonialism as “a settlement of territory the exploitation development of resources