"The Crossing" and Israel

Share

I recently watched the pilot episode of ABC's new sci-fi drama "The Crossing," created by Jay Beattie and Dan Dworkin. The show definitely holds some potential, and it will be interesting to see if it ends up being binge-worthy or a flop. However, I am intrigued to continue watching how the show develops because the opening episode seems to be developing some interesting themes. In particular, it seems to be setting the stage to use the Old Testament story of the people of Israel as a motif within the show.

If you haven't seen previews for the show or the pilot episode yet, the basic premise of the show is that a rural sheriff (played by Steve Zahn) discovers hundreds of bodies that wash up his Washington beach, including a few dozen survivors. Federal agents quickly gets involved and shut out local officials. As the story unfolds, the survivors disclose that they are refugees from the future. Fleeing war and an oppressive power, they utilized a new time travel technology, but something went wrong and they ended up underwater in the ocean instead of on land. Sheriff Ellis and some federal agents have safety concerns, especially since some of the survivors warn of "others" who have special abilities, some of whom may have crossed over earlier.

In watching the first episode, I couldn't help but notice a number of similarities between the story of these refugees and the story of Israel in the Bible. For starters, the show's title appears to reference the time travel event in which the refugees "crossed" back into the past by passing through the ocean. This event itself could be seen as a powerful biblical image, a group of oppressed people passing through the waters (Pacific Ocean/Red Sea) to escape their oppressors.

Furthermore, like Israel, hope they have entered a "promised land." One refugee describes the America of the past (our present day) as a much more ideal and free place than the one the left. For these refugees, 2000's America may seem like a land full of milk and honey. However, just as in the Pentateuch, the post-oppression journey is not an easy one. Those journeying to freedom find themselves to be small and powerless compared to their neighbors. And like Israel, the refugees in the crossing appear to be entering a wilderness period as the federal government only moves them into temporary housing in the middle of the woods.

I don't know if the show's writers are aware of these similarities or not, but one final piece makes me suspect they are. Less than five minutes into the show, Sheriff Ellis has a conversation with a little girl he pulled from the water a few hours earlier. When she tells him her name is Leah, the sheriff remarks, "That's in the Bible, isn't it?" Interestingly, the girl responds with a blank stare, confused about what a "Bible" is.

It is this line that made me start to pay attention to the biblical themes in the episode. Indeed, as I listened to the names, there definitely seems to be a pattern--all the refugees have biblical names: Leah, Hannah, Rebecca, Caleb, Thomas. Even the names themselves seem to be significant. For example, in the Bible Leah is the daughter-in-law of Rebecca, whereas the show's Rebecca takes on a mother role to the girl Leah. Likewise, the one refugee who seems to be skeptical, self-interested, and perhaps "doubting" is named Thomas.

The only exception to this rule (so far) is a refugee named Reece, who incidentally is different from the others, being the only one to demonstrate special powers and the only one not rescued on the beach. So perhaps her lack of a biblical name is also significant. In contrast, Sheriff Ellis also has a biblical name as his first name is Jude. Perhaps this is an indicator that he will be an ally to the refugees.

The show is clearly poised to deal with a number of social and political issues. For instance, the first episode already has touched on our treatment and views of refugees and immigrants, something our country has been dealing with in real life. Of course, it's hard to determine what directions a show will go and what themes will develop simply from the pilot episode, but if the above allusions are intentional, this show may end up conveying some really potent messages by way of biblical imagery. Perhaps these refugees will find themselves on a similar journey as Israel--oppressed and killed because of their identity, a miraculous escape through water to safety, only to face trials and tribulations in the wilderness as they journey towards a promised land of freedom and prosperity. And with superpowers apparently to play a role, one wonders what "giants" they may find in the land along the way.

Update:
Sadly, ABC recently made the decision to cancel the show after its first season. It would have been interesting to see how the show developed over time given that a number of biblical themes seemed to persist throughout the first season. For example, the trend with biblical names continued consistently, the city where most of the plot takes place is called "Port Canaan" (an invented city name), one character is healed with the blood of another character, and there are numerous references to religion or churches both in dialogue and architecture. Who knows? Perhaps another network will pick it up one day.

Share

Whom are We Goring?

In Exo. 21:28-32, the Israelite law gives some stipulations about what to do when an ox "gores" a human being to death. According to the text, if it is a first time occurrence, then only the ox is to be put to death. However, if the ox has a habit of attacking people that the owner is aware of, then the owner is also to be killed if that ox gores a person to death.

It is interesting that the law codes of Hammurabi also contain passages about ox gorings. Apparently people must have enjoyed taunting oxen or something for this to be a common enough problem to write laws about it. But, nonetheless, when we compare the Exodus text with Hammurabi's laws, it is interesting that the cost to the owner differs. With the Mesopotamian texts, all that is required of an owner is a payment of money to the family of the victim. However, in Exodus, the cost is heightened as it will cost the owner his very life if he acts with negligence. Thus, it might be reasonable to argue here, given the Israelites were probably familiar with other ancient law codes and ethics, that they are also stating something about the character of YHWH. In particular, YHWH very much takes the issue of human life seriously. It is no small matter when a person gets killed. Thus, if the guilty party had prior knowledge that could have prevented the death, it is not something that a payment of money will sufficiently cover. The guilty person's life is required. Thus, God establishes the importance of human life even through a seemingly ordinary rule.

However, as we look at our own lives, I wonder if we face some of the same issues as Israel here. In particular, do we have the same high view of human life, or are we willing to throw away lives when it is convenient for us? In other words, what "oxen" do we use and employ that have a tendency to "gore" others? For example, when we use certain products, such as coffee, do we end up using and supporting "ox" companies that abuse and "gore" employees, particularly those in less fortunate situations. And while perhaps we can be excused based on ignorance like the ox owner whose ox kills a person for the first time, what does it say about us when we do have knowledge of "gorings" and still choose not to act to defend those who are injured in the process? Do we choose our own comfort and convenience over even human life? Do we put up with sweatshops and corruption when it makes our life easier or cheaper? It seems to me that if we worship  the God who places great value on human life and dignity that we cannot make such a choice in good conscience.

Plagues and Cattle

It has long been recognized that the plagues against Egypt seem to work as a polemic against "all the gods of Egypt." For example, YHWH demonstrates his authority over the river and thus over the river gods and goddesses (Hapi, Isis, Khnum, and others). The darkness for 3 days is a clear challenge to Re and Horus. We could keep going through all the plagues and list different gods that YHWH takes on. However, upon reading through the plagues, it was interesting to me how many times cattle seemed to appear in the story:

Ex. 9:3-6: livestock, including cattle, are killed
Ex. 9:19-25- Both livestock and people are struck by hailstones
Ex. 11:5- God promises to kill the firstborn of every household AND "of their cattle as well."

This attention to the Egyptians' cattle is interesting. Perhaps, given the polemical nature of the plagues, this attention is because of the continuing religious climate Israel faced. Within the context of the Exodus, perhaps the writer is trying to draw a clear distinction between Israel and Egypt. Since many of Egypt's gods deal with cattle or bulls in some form (Apis-bull god, Hathor- goddess with cow head, Mnevis-bull god) it makes sense for YHWH to make sure the point that He is greater is communicated. It is the author's way of saying that clearly YHWH is greater than any of these cattle gods, and that is what separates us from Egypt.

Furthermore, throughout the entire ancient near east, bulls were seen as a symbol of fertility and strength. Hence, even outside Egypt there were many such cattle gods and goddesses. In Canaan, both El and Ba'al were sometimes described as a bull. Likewise, in Babylon, the bull was a symbol for their god of fertility and of storms. Thus, this would remain a challenge to YHWH even after the people left Egypt. Indeed, it seems that this was one of the continuing struggles for Israel as they keep trying to mix their religion with these cattle, fertility religions. In fact, even before the book of Exodus if over, they have created a golden calf. Likewise, later in their history the creation of calf idols at Dan and Bethel during Jeroboam I's reign only continues the problem (1 Kgs. 12). Thus, perhaps the continuing judgment against the cattle in the first half is no accident, but is the author's desperate attempt to point out that YHWH, not these other gods of fertility and strength, is the one to be served.