“The Perspective of Death of Emily Dickinson and Robert Frost” Part.2

When it comes to talking about Emily Dickenson, we need to look into her unique worldview in order to understand the true intentions her masterpieces have. Moreover, there is no doubt that she was greatly influenced by the doctrine of the Second Great Awaking movement which was led by Calvinists. The Protestants strongly believed that our life destiny is already determined by God even before we are born. Therefore, those people who were belonged to this community always feared their own fate. In fact, this kind of theory is well known as “Predestination” in the theological field. However, there are many opinions that this ideology do not reflect the proper teachings of Jesus because the main principle of Christianity is to forgive, not to punish. According to those who oppose the Calvinism, it significantly deviates from the way that the authentic theology should follow. Also, they say that it is not a good thing for the shepherds to dominate the people's mind by giving them the fear of the hell. We can assume that Dickinson also found the same contradictions in “Predestination” of Calvinism and tried to criticize them. 

Dickinson wrote a lot of controversial poems which are often regarded as an accusation against Jesus or God. For instance, if we read “I heard a Fly buzz - when I died”, some people might find some Monty-Python-like black jokes in it. Maybe other people think that she tried to ridicule the traditional concept of Christianity. But, the most important thing to grasp her true purposes of those defiant poems is to understand the situation she was trapped in at that time. Among her family members, she was the only person who refused to accept the Calvinism theology. This meant that there was a possibility she could not go to heaven with her family after she dies. Her action should not be evaluated as the resistance to the Jesus. On the contrary, it has to be understood as the faithful protest for the true Christianity. She probably knew that the true Christianity must give the people the peace, not the fear. Therefore, Dickinson’s poems are sometimes quite aggressive because she wanted people to realize which way they should go.

Dickinson mentioned about heaven in her verses many times. Especially, she emphasizes that heaven is not above us. Some people may think this notion is clearly against the teachings of Jesus. However, actually it is not. Jesus never said that the kingdom of God is “physically” above us. As proof of this, he taught the followers the exact location of heaven. “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (Luke 17:21)” Simply speaking, Emily Dickinson’s conception of heaven was much closer to the genuine place than those ambiguous theories. Sometimes, even now, some arrogant theologians create their own weird theological ideas and propagate them as Jesus’s theories. What is worse is that once their contradictions are pointed out, those people try to pass the all buck to Jesus. If Jesus is asked “Is heaven really above us?”, he would reply like this “You have said so.” This poem seems to show her real thought.     

WHO has not found the heaven below

Will fail of it above.

God’s residence is next to mine,

His furniture is love.

(*I could not confirm whether this poem is actually Emily Dickinson’s work or not.)

Some scholars say that Frost’s poems are not religious compared with Dickinson’s verses. Partially, it would be true that we can't find many biblical jargons or quotes from bible or implications for Christian cultures in his works. However, among his works, there are some lyrics which use Christian identities. The prominent example is “The Road Not Taken”, which would be one of the most beloved and famous his legacy. This instructive story seems to be affected by the bible words; “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy[a] that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. (Matthew 7:13-14)” The interesting point of the Frost’s narrow path narrative is that, unlike bible, it never says that the grassy and worn road always gives us good things. It is just saying it makes our life different.  

              All in all, reading through some of the poems written by great poets who are representative of the U.S. was quite useful experience. Also, it is found that the efficient instructors are necessary to enjoy the true intentions of the verses because they are quite difficult to realize or translate into modern expressions especially for the non-native English speakers. Those cultural backgrounds we can see in the works were so intriguing.

“The Perspective of Death of Emily Dickinson and Robert Frost” Part.1

What would be the most influential element which affected the view of death of the two great poets “Emily Dickinson” and “Robert Frost”? One thing is for sure that they had different mindsets for the universal subject. In other words, for Frost, the concept of the death was always related to his loved family. Likewise, for Dickenson, the fear for the uncertain future was linked to the religious ideology. In this paper, we scrutinize some poems written by them which show their inner complicated psychology on this matter. After that, the brief comparison between their writing styles is also being conducted.

Among many Frost’s master pieces, “Out, out--” and “Home Burial” clearly tell us about what kind of obsession on death he had. In addition, this two poems imply how he spent his life. Frost had to face with a lot of tragic events involving family members’ deaths throughout his whole life. First of all, he lost his both parents when he was still young. Moreover, his beloved young sister Jeanie had a severe mental illness which seems to run his family genes. He had to force her to hospitalize into a mental clinic, which must have definitely tormented him. However, the talented poet’s hardship was not limited to those. His children also were destined to get into various difficulties. Among six children, only two could outlive their parents and the rest died young because of either committing suicide or serious diseases. It is reasonable to assume that those harsh experiences affected his attitudes toward death and those verses he created.

The poem “Out, out--” is a short story about a boy, who cut his own hand by “the buzz saw” and died. It seems Frost tried to describe how pitiful a young man, who had a bright future, must die all of a sudden. The same mercy as the one given to his lost children can be seen in this work. Furthermore, it is quite interesting that Frost emphasized how indifferent other people are to the tragedy. This sad story ends with this line; “And they, since they were not the one dead, turned to their affairs.” The reaction of the onlookers in this scene would be similar to the people’s behaviors towards the deaths of Frost's children. Hence, from this verse, we can also feel the strong “Out-cry” against the hypocrites, who pretend to worry about others but actually they do not care about a little bit.

“Home Burial” is a short novel which depicts parents who lost their child. In comparison with the previous one, this poem focuses more on the bereaved people, who are struggling with the unacceptable heavy fact. In addition, we can also sense that this story was based on the author’s own experience. Frost and his wife had to embrace the consecutive calamities, which stole their loved ones. It is not hard to imagine that the bitter life situation assumedly affected the couple’s relationship quite badly. Those dirty words used in the play must have been exchanged truly in the quarrels between Frost and his wife.  

Analysis of Biblical Criticism -Bibliography-

Bibliography

Albert Barnes. “Barnes Notes on the Old and New Testaments”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from

http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb.html

Dean L. Overman. (2009) “A Case for the Divinity of Jesus: Examining the Earliest Evidence”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from

https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=W8ryhaT1tnUC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ja#v=onepage&q&f=false

Henry M. Morris. (2000). “Biblical Creationism: What Each Book of the Bible Teaches about Creation and the Flood”, (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2000)

J. M. Creed. (1957) “The Gospel According to Saint Luke”

John Arthur Thomas Robinson. (1976) “Redating the NEW TESTAMENT”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1976_robinson_redating-testament.html

Robert J. Schadewald. (2008). “Worlds of Their Own: A Brief History of Misguided Ideas: Creationism, Flat-Earthism, Energy Scams, and the Velikovsky Affair.”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=m9BM6DzFGGwC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ja#v=onepage&q&f=false

Robert J. Schneider. “Does the Bible Teach a Spherical Earth?”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2001/PSCF9-01Schneider.html

Richard P. Bargas. (2006) “A RESPONSE TO VATICINIUM EX EVENTU”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from

http://www.gbcwilmington.org/home/180011039/180011039/Images/VaticiniumExEventu.pdf

Thomas L. Stegall. “Reconsidering the Date of John’s Gospel”

Retrieved September 24, 2016, from

http://www.chafer.edu/files/v14no2_date_of_john_s_gospel.pdf

Wikipedia

Analysis of Biblical Criticism -Conclusion-

In conclusion, the attempts that biblical criticism makes would be beneficial for revealing the true nature of the Holy Scriptures only if the scholars do not jump to conclusions. The dispute over the influence of geocentrism on the Bible plainly shows us that there are various interpretations for each biblical passage depending on the individual beliefs. In addition, the idea of vaticinium ex eventu in the New Testament relies on the very thin evidences. Similarly, the vision hypothesis advocated by David Friedrich Strauss teaches us that occasionally biblical criticism can create more miraculous assumptions than the Holy Scriptures tell. Finally, there is no doubt that proper biblical criticism is necessary for the further understanding of the Good Book as long as we scrutinize it very carefully to avoid being misled. “For now we see through a glass, darkly” (1 Cor 13:12). 

Analysis of Biblical Criticism -Fourth-

The 19th and 20th centuries were a period when many drastic changes happened in theological field. One change occurred in the rise of the field of Liberal Theology. This new ideology based on the 17th-century continental rationalism had unique traits that traditional theology had not shown before. The most controversial approach of Liberal Theology is to scrutinize the content of Bible critically in order to gain the proper information academically and historically. The new movement peaked in 20^th-century Germany when a wave of German theologians challenged orthodox Christian beliefs. Around that time, even the crucifixion of Jesus began to become an academic question for those scholars. Eventually, the “Vision Hypothesis” was created as a new standard for the logical understanding of the miracle. The hypothesis was proposed in 1835 by David Friedrich Strauss who was well known for his extreme liberal views in the biblical interpretation field. In this theory, he denied the physical resurrection of Jesus, and instead, supported the idea of visual revelation, something, like hallucinations, by disciples. Many scholars, though, have opposed this opinion. For example, Pinchas Lapide, a Jewish theologian and Israeli historian, claims that ”if the defeated and depressed group of disciples overnight could change into a victorious movement of faith, based only on autosuggestion or self-deception—without a fundamental faith experience—then this would be a much greater miracle than the resurrection itself” (Overman, 162). According to Matthew and Mark, when Jesus was arrested by Roman soldiers, those disciples ran away in fear of getting caught with Jesus (Matthew 26:56[1], Mark 14:50[2]). In consideration of the unfaithful action toward Jesus by his followers, Lapide’s explanation seems rational. Even Strauss, who proposed the hallucination theory, conceded the singularity of the sudden conversion in the end. Intriguingly, Paul suggests over 500 people knew or witnessed the revival of Jesus (1 Cor 15:6[3]). If Strauss is correct and if we can rely on Paul’s post facto account, it would mean that those 500 people were all hallucinating. It surely sounds like a miracle. However, even now, there are many theologians who strongly support Strauss’s theory. For instance, one of my theological professors at Sophia University who is a well-renowned Catholic Japanese priest openly advocated this theory in his lecture. It is apparent that critical review might be essential for learning the proper biblical elements. However, those excessive theories like vision hypothesis seem to be self-advertisement rather than theology. Like Lapide said, their persuasions sometimes tend to be more ambiguous than biblical descriptions are and some of them cannot be regarded as rationalistic or academic at all.

---

[1] But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples deserted him and fled.

[2] Then everyone deserted him and fled.

[3] After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.

Analysis of Biblical Criticism -Third-

Vaticinium ex eventu, is has been argued, is “the term applied to a passage in the prophets or the gospels which has the form of a prediction but is in fact written in the knowledge of the event having occurred[1]”. Among the Holy Scriptures, the book of Daniel has been one of the most discussed areas for the occurance of vaticinium ex eventu since ancient times. Porphyry (A.D. 232–ca. 305), a Neo-platonic philosopher assumed that there could be no predictive element in prophecy so that the Book of Daniel could be only historical in nature, and therefore of a late date (Bargas). Furthermore, some scholars state that there are some vaticinium ex eventu passages in the New Testament as well. For example, a biblical scholar J. M. Creed insisted that Luke 23:34[2] is the “prophecy from the event” for the fulfillment of Psalm 22:18 “the soldiers casting lots for Jesus’ garments” (Creed, 287). In addition, some scholars seriously think that the story of “the Destruction of the Temple” is one example of vaticinium ex eventu. According to their theory, the Jesus’s prophecy was a forged fable based on the First Jewish–Roman War (A.D. 66–73) in which Jerusalem and the Temple were completely destroyed by Roman soldiers (Stegall). When it comes to the New Testament, it is extremely crucial whether the destruction of the temple is vaticinium ex eventu or not because it would immediately settle when the Gospels were written. In other words, if this story is a prophecy from the event, it means the Gospels were penned after the destruction of the temple which actually occurred in A.D. 70. There have been so many heated disputes over this issue so far. Professor Andreas J. Köstenberger, the spearhead advocator of this accusation, asserts that John 11:47-48[3] obviously reveals that the author of this gospel knew about the tragedy (Stegall). However, John Robinson, an English New Testament scholar, hits back at this allegation for the reason that “the chief priests and Pharisees did not leave Jesus “alone” to continue doing His sign-miracles for in fact they crucified Him.” (Stegall). All in all, the suggestions related to “Vaticinium ex eventu” in the New Testament seem to be a lack of sufficient evidences and explanations for various questions. For one thing, if those Gospel authors knew “the Destruction of the Temple”, why did not they boast the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy more directly as they usually did? (John 13:38[4], 18:17[5]). Moreover, if the Gospels were written after the incident (A.D. 70), then why do their descriptions lack other significant events (e.g. the abrupt ending of Acts)? Certainly, there are so many hypotheses over this matter. However, the conclusive truth is still unclear. Sometimes ideas that are said to be supported by majority of the scholars are not more reliable at all in biblical criticism than the Holy Scripture itself.

---

[1] Oxford Biblical Studies Online http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t94/e1988?_hi=0&_pos=7

[2] Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.

[3] Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin. “What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”

[4] Jesus answered, “Will you lay down your life for me? Truly, truly, I say to you, the rooster will not crow till you have denied me three times.

[5] "You aren't one of this man's disciples too, are you?" she asked Peter. He replied, "I am not."

Analysis of Biblical Criticism -Second-

Robert J. Schadewald, of the NCSE is also an expert on pseudoscience. Has pointed out that there are many Biblical references which are affected by “Geocentrism” both in the Old Testament and the New Testament. For instance, as for the Old Testament, he explains that Genesis 1:6[1], Isaiah 40:21-22[2] and many other passages suggest: “the Earth is immovable and others treat the sun and moon as minor bodies” (Schadewald, 95). Interestingly, By contrast, some people strongly refute this perspective by countering that the Old Testament actually states that the earth is spherical. Henry M. Morris, an American Young Earth Creationist, Christian apologist, and engineer, stresses that Isaiah 40:21-22 implies the Earth is spherical saying that “khug” in Isaish 40:22 means "sphericity” and adds that  “thus both earth and the deep are components of the great terrestrial sphere" (Morris, 2000, P113). Schadewald, though, points out the same passage is based on the image of a flat Earth. In this way, Biblical interpretations on various matters occasionally vary quite widely depending on a scholar’s theological stance, and it is often very difficult to determine which opinions are more precise or correct. To confuse matters more, Schadewald also indicates that the New Testament also has passages that express the authors’ geocentric notions. The proofs for the claim are exemplified by the two cases. One is Revelation 1:7[3] and the other is the story of the temptation of Jesus from Matthew and Luke. In terms of Revelation 1:7, the passage at issue is: “Behold, he comes with clouds; and every eye shall see him.” The similar descriptions that Jesus comes with clouds can be found in some Gospels as well. According to Matthew 24:30, “all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven.” Schadewald insists that those scenes portray the geocentric view of the authors of the Holy Scriptures. Furthermore, he points out that Matthew 4:8[4] asserts that the “word translated as ‘world’ is the Greek kosmo, meaning the whole universe.” He adds that “from a sufficiently high mountain, one could see all the kingdoms of a flat world of limited extent, but the passage is nonsense when applied to a spherical Earth” (Schadewald, 95). This explanation about Geocentrism in the Bible might sound firmly rational. Nevertheless, there is always a way to refute any position, especially in theological study, because of its complex nature. Regarding the New Testament’s Geocentrism conspiracy, we might be able to touch a sore spot in that some of the Schadewald’s understandings of the Biblical world might be a little inaccurate. For example, in the story of the temptation of Jesus, the Greek word world which is used in Mark is surely “kosmo” meaning the whole world. On the other hand, In Luke, in the same episode, the word is replaced by a different Greek word “oikoumené” which means “the inhabited world” that implies the both “the whole world” and “the limited world.” Luke 2:1[5] clearly denotes that the word can be grasped as “a part or a large part of the world” instead of “the whole world.” Thus the phrase “of the world” might point to the near regions like “Palestine” or “Canaan.” Moreover, the meaning of the expression “all the kingdoms” in the story translated from the Greek word “basileias” used by both Gospel writers is similarly confusing. It generally suggests “kingdom” in which a king sovereignly rules. Given the characteristic of the Jewish community, it is highly possible that this word directly indicates “all the Judean kingdoms” where the sons of Herod then reigned. Therefore, there can be at least two potential interpretations for the meaning of “all the kingdoms of the world” in this part. One is “all the nations of the whole world” as Schadewald supports, and the other is “all the Judea kingdoms of the Palestine” or “all the Judea kingdoms of the Canaan,” as Barnes notes[6]. Likewise, as for Revelation 1:7, we might be able to regard its message as a regional event or simply as part of the parable: “though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand” (Luke 8:10). This parable, of course, discounts all scientific reasoning when attempting to understand the Bible. When it comes to seeking the truth in the Biblical stories, the result can be greatly changed depending on the approach of the analysis.

---

[1] And God said, "Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water."

[2] Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded?
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

[3] "Look, he is coming with the clouds," and "every eye will see him, even those who pierced him"; and all peoples on earth "will mourn because of him." So shall it be! Amen.

[4] Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.

[5] In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.

[6] http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/matthew-4.html

(Matthew 4:8 commentary)