BiAS 7 – The Bible and Politics in Africa
In conclusion, Dube’s perspective on the Exodus is very different from
the other examples presented since her reading joins the Canaanite side.
Her reading is influenced by her experience of (neo-) colonization and
globalization. Within the interpretation a political message is imple-
mented: those who belong to the ‘colonizers’ are not sensitive to the
imperializing structures of the text. The experience of being colonized,
of living in structures of colonization, shapes the interpretation of the
texts. Therefore, Dube’s reading has political intentions when she tries
to read the text against the grain, to listen to the silenced voices, and to
shift the point of view.
Conclusion
In the beginning I stated that ethics is not implemented in biblical texts.
This becomes obvious in the three examples presented which show the
wide range of possible interpretations and applications.
But how can we figure out what the intention of the biblical text really is
and which interpretations are right? To answer this question I want to
highlight four main aspects which can be regarded as a conclusion:
- The redaction history (which is very complex and is discussed very
contradictorily) shows that the text, especially Ex. 13 and 14, was not
written as a historical report but as a vision of how the God of Israel
should liberate his people from severe forms of oppression by the Assyr-
ians and the Babylonians (cf. Bieberstein 2007). If the text is understood
from its original intention, it cannot be seen as an encouragement to do
as the text says since the text is a visionary reflection, a positive and
biased answer on what have happened. - The Native American Robert Warrior wrote a postcolonial interpreta-
tion on the Exodus, too. Like Dube, he identifies with the Canaanites. In
liberation theology for which the Exodus is the most central text, he
explains that “the Canaanites should be the center of Christian theologi-
cal reflection and political action. They are the last remaining voice in
the text” (Warrior 1997:283). Only when the Canaanites are at the center
of biblical interpretation can it be guaranteed that all parts of the Bible
are read, “not just the part that inspires and justifies them [the readers].”
(Warrior 1997:283). The Canaanites remind us of the other side of the
biblical text which is most of the time silent. By not taking the most
attractive aspects of the biblical narrative but by reading the whole story,
by trying to read it against the grain, and by avoiding giving in to the