EXODUS: GODS AND KINGS — SOMEWHAT

 

By James Wilson

            I have nothing but the highest respect for storytellers.  I am one myself.  The film, Exodus: Gods and Kings, develops an interesting premise. It depicts Moses as a dedicated atheist who is unmasked as a closet Jew and himself shocked to discover his real origins.  He is exiled after attempts made on his life by Pharoah; upon his return from the burning bush and a boy representing God he leads an insurgency.  Failure moves him to let God free his people.  God wins in the end and Moses comes to faith.  He exhorts his people to live on faith alone hereafter.  My problem is it is only a story, and a stolen one at that.

            Storytellers should let imagination soar anywhere it wants to go.  But to take an existing story, recast it to suit ones’ prejudices, and palm it off as the authentic version is both fraudulent and arrogant.  The result is usually sub-par on multiple levels.

            Exodus defies logic when it depicts the Hebrew people as having the faith Moses lacks; their collective witness leads their leader to recognize God and to follow Him.  Liberation movements have never worked that way and – of course – the authentic story in Scripture has it the other way around – the way it would have to be to work.  Pharoah’s repeated attempts to kill Moses while negotiating with this man he believes invincible make no sense and – of course – the real story expresses Pharoah’s impotent rage, fueled by fear of a man clearly backed by a mighty God.  The film defies common sense when the unbelieving Moses offers unquestioning acceptance and grudging obedience to a vindictive little boy who claims to be an incarnation of the very God in whom Moses does not believe.

            Ridley Scott justifies his abuse of scripture in an interview prior to release.  He says only an atheist can storybook God objectively; atheists alone insist on a story that works.  Why someone ignorant of God is less biased than a person who knows Him personally is beyond me.  But Scott’s ignorance explains the cruel hatred of this God toward the Egyptians who displease Him.  The Bible account – rooted in personal relationship with God – declares God’s desire to save even the Egyptians if they but humble themselves.

            His objectivity falls flat again as we see the whole conflict beginning.  Pharoah – who with Moses believes they are brothers at the  outset – unquestioningly believes the corrupt official that Moses is Hebrew.  His hostility is rooted in a prophecy by an Egyptian priestess he scorns that the one saving his life in battle will one day usurp his throne.  When Moses saves his life in battle it is all over but the shouting.  Really?  This “objective” story does not work.

            Truth to tell, the Bible’s rendition of the story works quite well on every level.  We find a man raised as Egyptian royalty due to the intervention of a daughter to the older Pharoah – everybody knows where he comes from but he is treated as an exception so long as he lives as an exception.  Schooled in the arrogance of ancient aristocracy he expects to be welcomed as a liberator after killing an Egyptian he sees mistreating a Hebrew.  When the people do not bow to him and he fears exposure into the bargain he flees into the desert.  Arriving in Midian he takes a wife and settles down to raising his family and his flock of sheep.  Shocked by an encounter with God in a burning bush that will not consume itself, he finds every excuse he can to avoid the calling from God on his life.  With help from his brother, Aaron, to compensate for his speech impediment he returns to Egypt, warns Pharoah repeatedly to let his people go before each plague comes, and ultimately delivers the Ten Commandments to the people in the face of their idolatry in the Sinai Desert.  Frankly, it is a much more coherent story than the knockoff we are offered by Ridley Scott.  It depicts God as He is – loving and committed to sinners.

            I am not telling anyone to see or ignore this movie.  It has its points and it is reasonably good entertainment.  There is even reason to wonder if Moses – in the gradual relaxation of his militant atheism and journey to a clearly reality-based faith – is a kind of surrogate for the producer/director’s own search for the really real.  But whether readers see the film or not, read the real story.  Compare it to the knockoff.  Think on it.  Pray on it.  There is pure gold in the real thing.