Where Is God in the Megilloth? A Dialogue on the Ambiguity of Divine Presence and Absence by Brittany N. Melton

Abstract

Reviewed by: Where Is God in the Megilloth? A Dialogue on the Ambiguity of Divine Presence and Absence by Brittany N. Melton Garrett Galvin brittany n. melton, Where Is God in the Megilloth? A Dialogue on the Ambiguity of Divine Presence and Absence (OTS 73; Leiden: Brill, 2018). Pp. xii + 223. $114. This volume is a slightly revised version of Melton's dissertation of the same title (University of Cambridge, 2017). In chap. 1, M. recognizes the increasing consensus on the "decreasing frequency of divine appearances as the story of the HB unfolds, for some to the point of cessation" (p. 14). Here and in her concluding chapter, she challenges this neat trajectory because it misrepresents the biblical evidence and fails to deal with the ambiguity of divine presence and absence. M. will assert that a consensus also exists that hiddenness is an inherent part of divine nature in the Hebrew Bible. Mikhail Bakhtin's "dialogic interaction" heavily influences M's methodology, which is developed in chap. 2. "For the present discussion this means that the reader is also permitted to sense God's presence in the text one day and the next day read it as a text about God's absence" (p. 41). She also focuses on the importance of reading intertextually as "their [i.e., the Megilloth's] placement alongside one another facilitates and embraces dialogic reading" (p. 48). One of the keys ways in which she will advance this is by examining the use of the word and the concept miqreh, which can be understood as providence, fate, or destiny. The word is used in Ecclesiastes and Ruth, but the concept is important for Esther. Chapter 3 deals with divine absence while arguing how ambiguous this can be. For example, Esther never refers to the divine while "mentioning religious practice (fasting) and celebration (Purim)" (p. 65). M. returns repeatedly to Esther in order to explore absence. The hiddenness of God is not absence. The Greek versions of Esther "make God more evident and confirm God's involvement in the story of Esther" (p. 72). Although God never appears or speaks even in the Greek versions, God is present and acts. M. will argue for a similar dynamic in the human erotic love of Song of Songs; it is a metaphor for the spiritual love of Deut 6:5. She claims that the matter cannot be decided as to God's presence or absence; rather, the reader must embrace ambiguity. M. makes many insightful intertextual connections between Ruth and Lamentations in order to illustrate this point. In chap. 4, M. asserts that divine presence can be manifested through "God-talk" and allusions. "A text can imply belief in God's presence without describing the experience of an encounter with God, in other words without recording a revelation of divine presence" (p. 104). Ecclesiastes, Ruth, and Lamentations engage in a lot of "God-talk." Different nuances characterize this "God-talk," with Qoheleth stating that God acts without any experience of this action. Lamentations argues for God's presence, but this can be a punishing presence. M.'s reliance on Bakhtin allows her to mine the different voices and force the reader to endure the tension. Allusions to divine presence are an important part of Lamentations and Song of Songs. Both offer Edenic allusions as the fall of Jerusalem parallels the expulsion from the Garden, and Song of Songs "reimagines intimacy with God's presence in its return to Eden" (p. 123). In chap. 5, M. offers an insightful examination of the concept of divine providence, examining the concept of miqreh in Ruth and Ecclesiastes. She argues that providence, or fate, can be understood "only in retrospect, once all outcomes are realized"; only then "can one see the divine hand's guidance and purposes through seemingly happenstance events" (p. 139). In addition to the importance of the word miqreh, M. also points to the concept of "patterned time" in the famous passage of Eccl 3:1-8 to help the reader understand divine providence. Furthermore, only humans experience time and miqreh (Eccl 9:11); God does [End Page 715] not experience this contingency. Humans can understand God to be...