In a separate post, I’ve written about the significance of the “widows and orphans” motif in the Bible. I’d like to turn our attention, however, to how closely this follows with other ancient near eastern (ANE) societies. It turns out that care for orphans and widows is a very common concern in the ANE. In the April 1962 edition of the Journal of Near Eastern Studies, F. Charles Fensham wrote that the wisdom literature (a form of social protocol) and legal codes of ancient Sumer (as early as the 25th century) venerated any king who was strong enough to care for widows and orphans. Hammurabi himself additionally claimed that the gods had called him “to make justice appear in the land, to destroy the evil and wicked, and so that the strong might not oppress the weak.” In the epilogue to his famous 18th-century code, he says that he has set up these laws “so that the strong might not oppress the weak, to give justice to the orphan and to the widows.” Fensham further points out that the king is required to obey these commands because he is the living representative of Samas, the sun god and lord of justice.
In ancient Egypt, caring for the poor, widow, and orphan is the boast of any strong and benevolent king. Khety III exhorts his son, telling Merikare that a good king does not confiscate an orphan’s property. In the city Ugarit in ancient Syria, the Aqhat Epic tells of King Keret whose son rebukes him, saying: “You did not judge the cause of the widow. You did not adjudicate the case of the wretched. You did not drive out them that preyed upon the poor. You did not feed the orphan before you or the widow behind you.”
So what does this have to do with defending the Christian faith? Well, I actually have three points to make here:
- Morality is universal. From ancient times the world over, certain behaviors, attitudes, and actions are seen as good and others as deplorable. People have not always followed their own laws, and sometimes they have created oppressive and violent laws, but the greatest and best of civilization has always been lawful and moral. More on this at a later date, but suffice it to say that things like marriage, sexuality, and life are always seen as important and sacred in a sense.
- The writers of the Bible were not barbaric, ignorant nomads. This seems very obvious to most, but I’ve often been surprised to read some of the more antagonistic atheists who write that the Bible should be rejected because its human penmen had neither the intelligence nor the sensibility to make them worthy of believing or following. On the contrary, I believe these secular accounts of care and concern for the weakest and poorest in society inform us that ancient near-eastern (ANE) peoples at least were relatively civil and intelligent. They were able to work past the might-makes-right mentality and see that humans are inherently valuable.
- The above two points lead me to also believe that humans may actually be “devolving” intellectually, socially, and spiritually. Ancient social and legal structures were both complex and beautiful in spite of their flaws. The religious systems of their day were equally complex, and they interconnected various aspects of nature and reality as carefully as any Greek philosophical system. They were absolutely wrong in many of their practices and beliefs, of course, but they were at least as sophisticated as any modern worldview- pluralism, atheism, and the like. We can see in just these few references an attempt at a just social and legal code, a world in which honor was more important than money or possessions. This is in stark contrast to the world we live in today. Atheism is a sophomoric (lit. “wise fool”) attempt at a philosophy, and many in America at least have adopted pragmatism unwittingly. Greed and materialism are rampant in the developed world, and many undeveloped nations are either indifferent to or antagonistic toward the weak and helpless. How have the mighty fallen?
Kreitsauce's Musings 