Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

Rabbi Zusya of Annapol was one of the most remarkable figures of Hassidic history. R. Zusya was one of the most God-intoxicated mystics of the 19th century.

He lived in a world where God is everywhere; every incident or happening contains a spiritual lesson that can infuse the soul with a message that is eternally relevant.

According to him, “You can learn three things from a child and seven from a thief. ‘From a child you can learn (1) always to be happy; (2) never to sit idle; and (3) to cry for everything one wants.

He argued that even a thief can serve as a spiritual guide–despite himself.  Zusya explains:

From a thief you should learn:

(1) to work at night;

(2) if he cannot gain what he wants in one night, he will try again the next night;

(3) to love one’s coworkers just as thieves love each other;

(4) to be willing to risk one’s life even for a little thing;

(5) not to attach too much value to things even though one has risked one’s life for them — just as a thief will resell a stolen article for a fraction of its real value

(6) to withstand all kinds of beatings and tortures but to remain what you are; and

(7) to believe that your work is worthwhile and not be willing to change it.

If we wish to embrace a God-filled life, learning to see the world as a spiritual metaphor may help lead us to discovering higher truths that often escape notice because we tend to live in a mindlessly driven world. Continue Reading

From the Pastor’s Desk by Fr. Mike Schaab

“5/9/2010”

Posted on May 5th, ’10

Just a reminder, this coming Thursday is not a Holy Day of Obligation.  The celebration of the Feast of the Ascension in our Diocese has been transferred to next Sunday, May 16.  Speaking of the Diocese of Peoria, if you haven’t made your Annual Diocesan Appeal pledge, please do so this week.

Thanks to everyone who participated in the interfaith dialog last Thursday between Protestants, Catholics, Muslims and Jews.   Rabbi Michael Samuel, Imam Saad Baig, Rev. Ron Quay and I have been meeting for a little over a year and now are friends as well as colleagues in ministry.  It was a pleasure to be able to share a part of our dialog with others last Thursday.  Rabbi Samuel will be leaving the Quad Cities this summer for a new position in San Diego.  It’s a wonderful opportunity for him but a real loss for our dialog group.

But one doesn’t have to go to San Diego to find great weather.  The weather here has been beautiful recently.  It’s been one of the finest springs I can recall.  Most of my farmer friends have also been enjoying a great planting season.  I recall a short Latin phrase, “Spes messis in semine,” which means “The hope of the harvest is in the seed.”  The great beauty of springtime and the planting season is that it is a time of hope.  Just as very small seeds hold great hopes for the future, so also some of the smallest things we say and do may bring great hope to others.

I’m amazed at what I read in the paper, hear on the radio and see on TV that is supposed to be “political commentary.”  The viciousness, personal attacks and character assassination that passes itself off as dialog is like a cancer in our mass media.  I cannot help but come away from these experiences depressed and feeling hopeless.   Then I recall, “spes messis in semine,” and I become more convinced than ever that hope has to begin with quiet little things, not shouting matches or vitriolic denunciations.

For me a real dialog involves people searching for those little things that might unite them, or at least move them along to be closer to one another.  That’s why this past year of interfaith dialog has been so important for me.  The Rabbi, the Imam and the Protestant minister have renewed my faith in the power of dialog.  Some might say our yearlong conversation has accomplished very little compared to the huge problems are world is facing.  However, I would point out that our small dialog has produced hope, which is something that wars, political intrigue, assassinations, regime changes and international boycotts often fail to achieve.

I believe in “Spes messis in semine.” Little words and acts, said and done in a spirit of dialog, are seeds of hope that in time will bring about a great harvest.  Last Thursday evening Farrell Hall was full of hope.  May we continue to dialog as we wait in hope for a future of reconciliation, peace and justice.

Mike Schaab, Pastor

===========

Rabbinic Reflections

Well, tonight we had our last symposium together at St. Pius. The theme of tonight’s program was Our Father Abraham: Transforming Hostility to Hospitality. Both the participants and the crowd really did a wonderful job in trying to affirm what is holy and good about our faith traditions. The question and answer period was especially excellent. The program was a huge success; we had over 350 people attending; they had to bring in extra chairs because it exceeded the room capacity size. I want to thank  Father Michael Schaab, Imam Saad Baig, Rev. Ron Quay and Barbara Rodell for making this program such a huge success. I pray that God will continue to bless their efforts as each faith community works toward the common good of our society. I will treasure the gifts for years to come. Continue Reading

Names in the mythic imagination of humankind has always conveyed something symbolic–even mystical–about the human drama. In the Garden of Eden, Adam is unique among the entities–both physical and spiritual–in his ability to name the animal kingdom (Gen. 2:19). Even the angels are said to be jealous of this power.

To be human, is to possess a name, be named, which serves as our bridge to the external world around us. When somebody forgets our name, we instinctively feel marginalized and unimportant. Yes, the name is our passport to interpersonal recognition. Throughout history, people died to preserve their names in history. In Babel (Gen. 10), humankind went to extreme measures to preserve their name, so they would not disappear from memory.

Many of us will even write a book or a diary on the hope that some ethereal part of ourselves will remain despite our mortality.  Memorial funds operate also on the same principle. Most people are pretty conscious about preserving a sacred memory of a loved one.

In all human communities there is thought to be a close relationship between the name of a person or other phenomenon and its character, status, and very being.

Because of their mysterious nature, names serve to define the external world we live in. They help to navigate the stream of consciousness and even conscience. In the Nazi death-camps, the German henchmen did their best to strip the Jewish prisoners of their names by giving them a number instead. To have a name means that someone will have to deal with you as a concrete person. We name even our pets, much for the same reason.

Since there is power in names, they both participate both in the reality named and give definition and identity to that reality. Both the named and the name exist share an ontological mutuality.

In both Jewish and Christian tradition, the infant child who dies, cannot be buried without first receiving a name. The name defines status; in conversion ceremonies, they symbolize the birth of a new person, in a manner of speaking.

Even in primal societies where female infants are considered expendable,  as we see with the Eskimo communities, once the infant has received a name, she must be dealt with as a living being.

In many faiths, naming an infant in honor of a deceased relative is a way of preserving identity in a transcendental way. Continue Reading

In the Jobian prologue, Satan always operated on the cynical assumption that whatever human beings did or wished to do originated from motives of self-interest. This theme appears in numerous midrashic legends about Abraham’s moment of decision regarding the Akedah, but we will examine this topic at another time. In this famous biblical masterpiece, Satan is depicted not as a devil but as one of the principal angels of God, for God is equally the creator of good and evil. From the Jungian perspective, Satan reflects the dark side of YHWH Himself, and it would appear that the Zohar partially agrees with this assessment!

One of the most succinct descriptions of the purpose of the Satan that reflects the Jewish attitude is  found in the writings of Goethe, who wrote in his classic “Faust”

Of all the spirits of negation
The rogue is least of burdens to be borne.
Man’s efforts sink below his proper level,
And since he seeks for unconditioned ease,
I send this fellow, who must goad and tease And to serve creation, through a devil.[1]

Similar to our citation of Goethe is a passage from the Zohar, which speaks of a parable concerning the role of Satan that should  clarify the purpose and role of Satan in Jewish tradition–as understood by the rabbis of antiquity.

Let us assume for a moment that the rabbis and the allegorical school are correct in identifying the serpent as a metaphor for the evil inclination. But why did God create the impulse for evil? Would humankind have been better off not having to deal with such an urge? The Zohar raises this question, and offers the reader a most intriguing thought-provoking response with respect to the phenomena of moral evil.

Should it be asked, “How can a man love Him with the evil inclination? Is not the evil inclination the seducer, preventing man from approaching the Blessed Holy One to serve him? How, then, can man use the evil inclination as an instrument of love for God?” The answer lies in this, that there can be no greater service done to the Holy One than to bring into subjection the “evil inclination” by the power of love to the Holy One, blessed be He. For, when it is subdued and its power broken by man in this way, then he becomes a true lover of the Holy One, since he has learned how to make the “evil inclination” itself serve the Holy One. Here is a mystery entrusted to the masters of esoteric lore. All that the Holy One has made, both above and below, is for the purpose of manifesting His Glory and to make all things serve Him. Now, would a master permit his servant to work against him, and to continually lay plans to counteract his will? It is the will of the Holy One that men should worship Him and walk in the way of truth that they may be rewarded with many benefits. How, then, can an evil servant come and counteract the will of his Master by tempting man to walk in an evil way, seducing him from the good way and causing him to disobey the will of his Lord? But, indeed, the “evil inclination” also does through this the will of its Lord.

It is as if a king had an only son whom he dearly loved, and just for that cause he warned him not to be enticed by bad women, saying that anyone defiled might not enter his palace. The son promised his father to do his will in love. Outside the palace, however, there lived a beautiful harlot. After a while the King thought: “I will see how far my son is devoted to me.” So he sent to the woman and commanded her, saying: “Entice my son, for I wish to test his obedience to my will.” So she used every trick in her book to lure him into her embraces. But the son, being good, obeyed the commandment of his father. He refused her allurements and thrust her from him. Then did the father rejoice exceedingly, and, bringing him in to the innermost chamber of the palace, bestowed upon him gifts from his best treasures, and showed him every honor. And who was the cause of all this joy? The harlot! Is she to be praised or blamed for it? To be praised, surely, on all accounts, for on the one hand she fulfilled the king’s command and carried out his plans for him, and on the other hand she caused the son to receive all the good gifts and deepened the king’s love to his son. [2]

The Zoharic passage illustrates a remarkable concept that exists in many of the primal religions of the world, the notion of the coincidentia oppositorum, also known as “the reunion of opposites.” As Eliade has already noted, the lost memory of this unitive existence with reality emanates from a part of humanity that yearns to overcome the duality and opposites we now experience in a post-Fallen world. He adds that “on the level of presystematic thought, the mystery of totality embodies man’s endeavor to reach a perspective in which the contraries are abolished, the Spirit of Evil reveals itself as a stimulant for the Good . . .” [3]

Sheneir Zalman of Liadi writes in his Tanya, “The answer lies in this, that there can be no greater service done to the Blessed Holy One than to bring into subjection the “evil inclination by the power of love to the Holy One, blessed be He. For, when it is subdued and its power broken by man in this way, then he becomes a true lover of the Holy One, since he has learns how to make the “evil inclination” itself serve the Blessed Holy One.[4]

Hassidic tradition looks at Satan as a force of good. Indeed, to some, Satan even provides lessons in piety. According to Hassidic tradition, Satan is never lazy in carrying out his responsibilities; the Satan is always out there testing our moral resolve — even when we are performing good deeds! Here is a Hassidic anecdote to illustrate:

Once Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev (18th century) was once asked to lead the congregation in prayer on Simchat Torah. As he ascended the pulpit, he stood in silence for a moment, and then he returned to his seat without reciting a word. His father-in-law wanted to know the reason for such a peculiar action. Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev explained:

When I was ready to begin my prayers, I suddenly felt the Evil Impulse, the Satan, wished to recite them with me. Therefore I asked him: ‘Who are you to dare recite these important prayers before the whole congregation?” ‘And who are you?” was his reply. ‘I am a man learned in the Torah, I answered. So am I, and when you studied, I kept you company,’ answered Satan. But I am also a Hasid of the Mezeritzcher Maggid,’ I rejoined. ‘So am I; I kept you company then as well,’ he said. ‘Since this is so,’ I replied, ‘if you are both a ‘scholar’ and a ‘Hasid,’ go and say the prayers yourself.’ And I descended from the Bimah.”

Maimonides in his Guide to the Perplexed argued that Satan is only a metaphor for the evil inclination (yetzser hara) and is not a supernatural being. This has some basis in the Talmud (cf. BT Bava Batra 16a) but many of the Talmudic rabbis did regard Satan as a supernatural being who serves God by testing humanity’s moral character. If nothing else, the Satanic archetype is a grim reminder that we are not necessarily as righteous as we would like to imagine ourselves to be; beneath the exterior of our conscious minds is the awareness that we are indeed, petty little beings–hardly even worthy of a Creator’s attention. Satan, thus serves to purge us of our hubris and sense of accomplishment. The simple truth is, we have a long way yet to go in matters of spiritual growth and honesty.

======

Notes:

[1] Faust, Part 1‎ – page 42.

[2] Zohar 2:162b–163a (Soncino translation)

[3] Mircea Eliade, The Two and the One (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965), 123.

[4] Tanya, chapter 27; cf. Zohar 2:128.

There is nothing in the Torah, or in the Talmud and Midrash, or Kabbalah that would suggest that there is a supremely evil being that is determined to make war against God.

As a verb, שָׂטַן (śāṭan), means to “be hostile,” or “accuse,” deriving from the root śṭn, whose basic meaning can be rendered “to be hostile to, oppose.” Generally, it implies someone who verbally accuses another. [1] Only in Job 1-2; Zechariah 3:2; and 1 Chronicles 21:1 the same term is translated as a proper name and designates the angel that acts as the  “Public Prosecutor.”  It is interesting to note that the passage in 1 Chronicles 21:1  is based upon the parallel story in 2 Samuel 24:1, but it is God who entices David to count his people and not Satan! The Satanic angel who serves as Public Prosecutor is not an apostate nor is it a fallen being, an idea that is nowhere suggested in the Hebrew Bible.

On the other hand, early Judaic writings in the apocryphal books of the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls describes  Satan  as Beliyal (“the Baseless One”), i.e., the preeminent Adversary of God. [2] It is plain and clear that the apocryphal literature later influenced the early Christian Bible.  In John (16:1) for instance, Satan appears with a capital “S.” Matthew, Mark, and Luke clearly accept and teach a doctrine of a personal Satan and called the Satanic agents “fallen angels” or “demons” (Mark 3:22).  Sometimes referred to as Lucifer, Christian legends teach that Satan vaingloriously sought to overturn the regime in heaven and waged war against God’s loyalists.

Defeated by the Archangel Michael, the angel who had ambition to be God was cast into his inferno, to brood in the darkness, “hatching vain empires.” Satan did not go unescorted, along with him went about a third of the heavenly host, a horde of fallen angels. According to Christian doctrine, angels were created separately and were given free will, just as humans were. Their fallenness had to do with a denial and distortion of angelic life just as human fallenness has to do with the denial and distortion of goodness and truth.

In contrast, Judaism teaches that only humanity was  endowed with freedom of choice. Angles are often described as omdim (beings who occupy a stationary position cf. Isaiah 6:2, Eze. 1:21-25, 10:3-6) while human beings are described as mehalchim (movers) for only human beings are capable of transcending their baser natures. Angels are sometimes compared to animals (cf. Eze.1:5) because the character of angels is instinctive much like an animals’ instinct. Angels cannot help but be what God intended for them to be.

For poets like John Milton, Satan was the archetypal antihero, the rebel waging  eternal guerrilla warfare against his Creator. He is best known for his statement, “ “To reign is worth  ambition though in hell: “Better to reign in hell than serve in heav’n” (Paradise Lost, Book 1:263).

=========

Notes:

[1] This is especially the case with respect to the Psalms, cf. Psa. 38:21; 71:13; 109:4, 20, 29.

[2] See Helmer Ringgren, The Faith of Qumram — Theology of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Fortress Press, N.Y., 1963, later reprinted by Crossroad in 1995).

Bible translations vary considerably; regardless of the translation, the translators will inevitably interpret the text they are rendering into another language. This insight is hardly new. Maimonides writes to his foremost translator, Yehudah Ibn Tibbon, some sobering words about the art of translation:

“One who wishes to translate from one language to another and tries to translate word by word, while adhering to the original order of words, the subject will ultimately produce a confusing and unreadable translation. Instead, the translator should first try to grasp the sense of the subject matter. He should then proceed to explain the material according to his understanding into the other language. Such an undertaking is impossible without transposing the word order of a text. Sometimes, he will have to utilize several words to express a single idea, while at other times the translator will utilize fewer words to express a more complex thought. Adding and deleting words is necessary—if one wishes to produce a lucid translation of an original work . . .”

With this thought in mind, one of the strangest Hebraic passages of the entire Bible demands a thoughtful rendering:

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל־מֹשֶׁה אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה וַיֹּאמֶר כֹּה תֹאמַר לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶהְיֶה שְׁלָחַנִי אֲלֵיכֶם׃

Here are some interesting choices to consider:

“I am He who is. And he said, This is what you are to say to the Israelites, I am has sent me to you.  [Exodus 3:13‑14]. [New Jerusalem Bible]

” I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” [The American Standard Version [1901]]

“I AM WHO I AM.” He said further, “Thus you shall say to the Israelites, “I AM has sent me to you.””  [The New Revised Standard Version and the New International Version, New America Standard Version of 1995]

“I AM; that is who I am.Tell them I AM  has sent you to them.” [New English Bible]

” I Shall Be As I Shall Be” And He said, “I Shall Be has sent you.”  [The ArtScroll Translation ]

” I will be what I will be, ” and He said, “So shall you say to the children of Israel, “Eheyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.” [Judaica Press]

” I AM the One Who Always Is.” He went on: “Thus shall you say to the sons of Israel, I AM has sent me forth to you.” [The Word Biblical Commentary]

“I will always be present as I will always be present”  [Martin Buber--by the way, this is also Rashi's understanding of the phrase.]

Note that the message Moses delivered from God to the Israelites had nothing to do with abstract or obtuse theology, which would have meant nothing to an enslaved people. Instead, Moses informs his people about the new creation God was going to do—the God of Exodus, is a God who initiates new beginnings. YHWH announces that He will not allow those forces that are destructive to reduce the Jewish people to non-being.[1]

Soon, the forces that God created from the beginning of creation would converge and force a change in Egypt. The “nobody”  slaves, whom Pharaoh never even recognized as human beings, would soon bear witness to the creative power of God’s Word that would ultimately deconstruct centuries of exploitation and oppression. Although Moses’ words had little to do with “being” as an abstraction, it had everything to do with the process of “becoming.”

In my opinion, of all the translations that speak to the heart of the matter,  I think Buber’s translation is the best of the group. From Buber’s understanding we may deduce God assured Moses, that He would always be present in the life of His people; He has not abandoned them, for even as they suffer, so too, does God’s Shechina ‑‑ the feminine aspect of Divinity. God promised Moses that He and would bring about a new beginning for a suffering people.

Of special note, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch writes  in his commentary:  “I shall be that which I wish to be” ‑‑ All other beings are what they have to be; their existence is bound up with the will of the One Who alone can say not merely “I am,” but, “I shall be that which I wish to be.”  This name expresses the personal, absolute and free‑willed essence of God.  By declaring not, “I am,” but, “I shall be”; i.e., by speaking in terms of the future which is totally dependent upon His will, He has proclaimed that uniquely Jewish conception of God, an entirely new conception, which is to be made known to mankind through Israel’s deliverance from Mitzrayim and which eventually will bring about the redemption of the whole world.”

=======

Notes:

[1] Seforno’s Commentary to the Torah

The book is inching closer toward publication. We are hoping for a late April date.

=======================

Birth and Rebirth Through Genesis. . . adroitly moderates a virtual conversation between traditions and thinkers. This book is a wondrous springboard into a rewarding dialogue between  biblical scholarship and the philosophical perspective.

Micah D. Halpern, author of THUGS, The Micah Report, and Jewish Legal Writings by Women

“A fascinating, learned, and wide-ranging commentary that creatively blends the  insights of ancients, medievals, moderns, and post-moderns. . .Readers will enjoy this book.”

Prof. Warren Zev Harvey, [Chair, Department of Jewish Thought], The Hebrew University of Jerusalem ,

===========

I believe that all who carefully read this book are in for a deeply rewarding experience. A study of the text and commentary of Birth and Rebirth through Genesis: The Timeless Theological Commentary will contribute greatly to an understanding of the rich and diverse fabric of biblical narrative and provide an appreciation for its creative application to the problems of the modern world . . . Birth and Rebirth through Genesis is a book for Jews and Christians.

Prof. Marvin R. Wilson, Author of Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith

===========

The book is a profound exploration of the important metaphors, symbols and archetypal structures of Genesis. . . Most remarkable about this stunning array of insights is that it leaves space for personal discovery, and time to hear the beat of heart-thoughts behind the words.

Paul Pines, author of My Brother’s Madness. Continue Reading

Bind them as a sign on your hand . . .(Deut. 6:8)

Was Moses speaking  metaphorically? Or was he being quite literal? Rashbam chose the former possibility: The Torah exhorts that your devotion to God should be so ever constant, it should be as though your love were literally inscribed upon your hand:“Set me as a seal on your heart, as a seal on your arm” (Song 8:6) [1]  One 19th century exegete observed:

“Is not this an allusion to an ancient and general custom observed in almost every part of the world? When a person wishes to remember a thing of importance, and is afraid to trust to the common operations of memory, he ties a knot on some part of his clothes, or a cord on his hand or finger, or places something out of its usual order, and in view, that his memory may be whetted to recollection, and his eye affect his heart. God, who knows how slow of heart we are to understand, graciously orders us to make use of every help, and through the means of things sensible, to rise to things spiritual.”

Commenting on Exodus 13:9, Ibn Ezra takes umbrage with the a view found among the Karaite expositors (as well as Rashbam) who also interpreted that “Bind them as a sign on your hand” is meant metaphorically and is similar to “Bind them upon your heart always; tie them around your neck.” (Prov. 6:21). By the same token, “fix them as an emblem on your forehead,“ is similar to “Let faithful love and constancy never leave you: tie them round your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart” (Prov. 3:3).  Strangely, Ibn Ezra seemed to think that metaphor plays a primary role in the Book of Proverbs, but plays virtually no role in this particular passage! History records how Ibn Ezra actually met Rashbam, and, evidently, they did not get along. Rashbam loved metaphor interpretations more than he did literal ones.

Like Ibn Ezra, most rabbinic commentaries view this verse quite literally, and argue that it refers to the tradition better known as tephillin (“phylacteries”). Tephillin consists of two little squared leather boxes that are tied to the forearms and forehead which are faithfully warn by traditional Jews every day barring the Sabbath and the biblical holidays.

There are  four Scriptural passages that  signify three basic themes: (1) the importance of accepting God as the only Deity—to the exclusion of all other deities (Deut. 6:5-9) (2) remembering the Exodus (Exod. 13:1-10; 13:11-16); (3) the acceptance of yoke of God’s commandments (Deut. 11:13-21). Among the Jews of Qumran, their tephillin included the Ten Commandments. Continue Reading

Some Judaic thinkers view Cain’s sacrifice in a positive light. Cain’s expression of worship, though it was not commanded, would seem to reflect, among other things, an earnest desire to worship in the spirit of thanksgiving. Indeed, Cain is to be credited for offering the first recorded sacrifice to God. Yet there must be more to an offering than just a pious display of worship.

The term for offering, מִנְחָה (minhāh), denotes a tribute, gift, or cereal offering; it is the type of gift an inferior offers to a superior as a sign of homage and submission. The verse does not disclose the quality of Cain’s offering.

But based on the wording “of the fruit of the ground,” it would seem that whatever Cain brought was probably from the leftovers of his crops. In other words, Cain neither offers his first fruits (Deut. 26:2), nor is his offering made of choice flour (Lev. 2:1). Philo of Alexandria expresses a similar thought: “One of them took for himself the fruit of the first fruits and impiously thought God worthy (only) of the second fruits.”^[1] Continue Reading

This past week, the subject of UFOs and the Bible came up in conversation. The recent British declassification of its UFO archives in 2008 marks one of the more important events in the history of British journalism.The U.S. government’s reluctance to release these files for Americans might suggest a conspiracy to cover up the case studies.

I have often wondered whether the US government’s silence might in part be due to the fear and shock this disclosure would have in virtually every area of American social life–especially in the faith community. It is easy to imagine scenarios resulting in widespread psychological disintegration and social chaos. On the other hand, it would prove to be the greatest discovery of human history.

Have There Been Past UFO Encounters in Antiquity?

One must wonder: Let us assume (1) the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life is real  and (2) the presence of UFOs does have a scientific basis in fact, then two questions arise: Have such visitations occurred in the past? If they have occurred, then is there any literary or physical evidence that UFOs have  been here long before?

When Erich von Däniken wrote a best-selling book, “Chariots of the Gods,” in 1968, he tried to argue that many of the ancient mythologies of the world contain primitive records of extraterrestrial visitations from space travelers who were welcomed as gods. Historians and scientists have pointed out the numerous weaknesses of the book, but Hollywood’s Stargate SG1 and Marvel Comic’s “The Eternals,” carry out the modern mythologizations of von Däniken. X-Files and Fringe are two more popular cinematic shows that explore this kind of question. Even Carl Sagan, in one of his most memorable books, “Contact,” makes the argument that it is nearly impossible for other intelligent life not to exist in the universe.

Did Ezekiel Have a Close Encounter?

Among von Däniken’s more novel theories is the idea that Ezekiel had a close encounter with an alien spaceship. Yes, the story is quite interesting from a modern perspective. Of course, altered states of consciousness such as visionary experiences, dreams, and so on, cannot be logically ruled out–especially since prophecy in general is usually related to dream-like trances and experiences (Maimonides).  Nevertheless, Ezekiel 1 is fascinating and invites speculation. On the surface, this theory would seem to have some merit, or at the very least, it could generate some interesting conversations about the biblical text that could last for hours.

Just imagine how an ancient Israelite would have viewed a modern day space ship. How would he describe it? In the beginning of Ezekiel’s prophecy, he has what could be described as a “close encounter” with a spacecraft. Though this too is not the simple meaning of the text, it is nevertheless an intriguing interpretation ‑‑especially if we were to imagine how an ancient person might write about a visitation with an extraterrestrial space ship. Here is a partial description from Ezekiel 1:

“As I looked, a stormy wind came from the North, a huge cloud with flashing fire (enveloped in brightness), from the midst of which (the midst of the fire) something gleamed like electrum. Within it were figures resembling four living creatures that looked like this: their form was human,  but each had four faces and four wings. . . . . In among the living creatures something like burning coals of fire could be seen; they seemed like torches, moving to and fro among the living creatures. The fire gleamed, and from it came forth flashes of lightning. As I looked at the living creatures, I saw wheels on the ground, one beside each of the four living creatures. The wheels had the sparkling appearance of chrysolite, and all four of them looked the same: they were constructed as though one wheel were within another. They could move in any of the four directions they faced, without veering as they moved.  The four of them had rims, and I saw that their rims were full of eyes all around. When the living creatures moved, the wheels moved with them; and when the living creatures were raised from the ground, the wheels also were raised. Wherever the spirit wished to go, there the wheels went, and they were raised together with the living creatures; for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels . . . .” Continue Reading