Political Theology in Metaphors

The context for this post is this meme, which I made on my phone with little effort:

I made the following texts to add to the caption of the post, and then to reply to comments to it. I also had other replies to comments under that post generated, beyond the ones featured here, but those were in separate conversations with GPT-3.5 or GPT-4.

Write an elaborate religious political metaphor along the following lines:

• Leviathan, the biblical monster, represents Leftist Anarchism, as a symbol of the forces of rebellion for its own sake and of denial of all order and hierarchy.
• Baal, the Canaanite deity, represents Leftists Authoritarianism, with its demands for submission and sacrifice representing the demand that individuals submit to the good of the community.
• Behemoth, the biblical monster, represents Right-Wing Authoritarianism, as a symbol of the forces of implacable natural necessity and of the primacy of strength, in submission to God and created with man but still a fearful monster.
• Yahweh, the Jewish deity, represents Libertarianism, since it replaces Baal and claims to keep both Leviathan and Behemoth under control, while providing laws of freedom to his chosen people.

Use mystical and enthralling language where possible.

In the grand tapestry of political theology, four figures loom large, their shadows cast long and profound across the landscape of discourse. Each one, drawn from ancient religious traditions, represents a distinct strain of ideological thought: Leviathan, Baal, Behemoth, and Yahweh. These spiritual avatars are engaged in an eternal dance, a cycle of power and counter-power, each attempting to enforce its own vision of cosmic order.

Leviathan, the mighty serpent of the abyss, is the embodiment of Leftist Anarchism. This biblical creature of chaos and rebellion rises from the depths, its coils representing a ceaseless dissent against order, a relentless struggle against hierarchy, a denial of all imposed chains. The Leviathan, with its unknowable power and unyielding defiance, symbolizes the spirit of resistance, the yearning for freedom unbound. It gives voice to the primal howl of the wild, to the untamed winds of anarchy, embodying a world unshackled from stifling, overbearing rule.

In contrast, Baal, the ancient Canaanite deity, manifests as Leftist Authoritarianism. Baal, the storm god who demands fealty and sacrifice, represents the relentless call for individuals to submit to the collective good. His thunderous voice, the language of lightning and tempest, beseeches the yielding of personal liberties for the greater prosperity of the community. He stands as a stern patriarch, whose power is used to bind the fabric of society, to enforce a communal unity that transcends individual desire and ambition.

Across this tumultuous sea stands Behemoth, the symbol of Right-Wing Authoritarianism. A force of the earth, a primordial behemoth embodying the laws of nature, immutable and undeniable. Its strength is both awe-inspiring and terrifying, a reflection of the primal instincts to protect and dominate. Like Leviathan, it is a creature of God, created alongside man, yet it asserts the fearful dominance of a natural order, a hierarchy born of strength and survival.

Amidst these potent forces, there arises Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, representing Libertarianism. Yahweh, unlike the others, comes not as a beast, but as a lawgiver, a source of order and freedom. He replaces Baal, casting down the authoritarian deity, and promises to keep both Leviathan and Behemoth at bay. His covenant to his chosen people is one of liberty and autonomy, of freedom within the bounds of moral law. He symbolizes a balance between the inherent rights of individuals and the necessity of a social contract.

Each figure, in their own right, is compelling and persuasive. Yet, they are caught in a cosmic dance, a metaphysical struggle, each countering the other in their bid for ascendancy. Together, they weave an intricate allegory of political ideologies, each reflecting the strengths and weaknesses, the hopes and fears, the ambitions and limits of the human condition. Their interplay, a dance as old as time itself, continues to shape the course of our collective journey, echoing in the halls of power, resonating in the hearts of those who dream of a better world.

Write a version with these changes:

• in the introduction, mention the Bible as a source for ancient and profound wisdom, without naming all four figures in summary.
• improve on the detail in each metaphor. Remember that Baal and Behemoth both fight Leviathan, but Yahweh, replacing Baal, can tame both Leviathan and Behemoth. Leviathan represents the restless ocean, it is not satisfied replacing one order with merely another order.
• in the conclusion, say something enigmatic wondering which figure we will side with; do not imply that their power or relevance is equal, as that is left for the reader to decide.

In the sacred scriptures of the Bible, there is a wealth of ancient and profound wisdom to be found. One may encounter there towering figures of cosmic consequence, each emblematic of distinct realms of political thought, each cast in roles that define the contours of spiritual and terrestrial power.

Emerging from the restless ocean's depths, Leviathan, that biblical monster of unruly tempests and waves, personifies Leftist Anarchism. This ever-changing sea-beast is not satisfied to replace one order with merely another, for its desire is for freedom unrestrained, unbounded by any hierarchical structure. A force against all forms of dominance, Leviathan thrashes against the chains of control, ripping asunder established systems. Its essence is the ceaseless change of the open sea, the relentless rebellion against stasis, a perpetual denial of the shackles of imposed authority.

From the stormy heavens descends Baal, the ancient Canaanite deity who personifies Leftist Authoritarianism. As thunder roars and lightning streaks across the firmament, Baal commands homage and sacrifice, calling for individuals to yield their rights for the welfare of the collective. He battles the Leviathan, seeking to bind the unruly sea beast in his thunderous might, to calm its anarchic waves with the stern discipline of communal order. In the face of Leviathan’s relentless struggle against control, Baal enforces unity, demanding submission and obedience to the greater good.

Upon the solid earth, Behemoth, the emblem of Right-Wing Authoritarianism, shakes the world in its might. Born of the rugged mountains, the untamed forests, Behemoth is a creature of inescapable natural law, of dominance born from strength and necessity. This powerful behemoth, bound to the earth as Leviathan is to the sea, also seeks to subdue the anarchic sea monster, symbolizing an authoritarian order grounded in traditional values, in the primacy of strength. In the shadow of its massive form, one perceives the fearful authority of natural hierarchy, enduring and implacable.

Yet, above these forces, Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, represents Libertarianism. Replacing Baal in the firmament, Yahweh claims dominion over both Leviathan and Behemoth. He does not seek to conquer, but to tame, to establish an order that respects individual freedom within the bounds of moral law. Yahweh offers a covenant of liberty, a pact that promises self-determination and autonomy, providing a beacon of hope in the face of the unyielding demands of both the sea and the earth, the Leviathan and the Behemoth.

In the grand tapestry of our shared wisdom, these figures offer us distinct visions of order and freedom. As they continue their ageless struggle, we are left to ponder: with which figure shall we align ourselves? Which of these powerful forces shall we call upon to shape our world? In the resonance of their epic contest, in the echoes of their ancient wisdom, we seek to understand and define our own political paths. Who, then, shall we choose to follow? The Leviathan, the Baal, the Behemoth, or Yahweh? The choice is ours, and in it lies the power to shape our destiny.

I cut off the ending of this (the last 5 sentences) from the caption; it was too long-winded.

Someone replied to this text:

"Why did you not make Libertarianism Moloch? Like, I get your reasoning, but it would fit better with the other three being biblical demons. and its association with the unrestrained machinery of capital."

Write an elaborate and clearly-written answer to this reply that expands and elaborates on the following points:

• (Acknowledge that the association with Moloch is well-known in culture and makes some sense.) However, I do not find that this association with Moloch makes sense with the biblical narrative (see next point; Libertarianism works well with Moloch otherwise). If we are to go by merely cultural associations, then I ought to have made Leviathan a statist ideology, due to the well-known association made by Thomas Hobbes.
• The biblical theme of Yahweh giving freedom to the Hebrews is, of course, well-known.
• Yahweh replacing Baal and doing a better job defeating Leviathan is a common biblical theme, which makes sense in the context of the Ancient Near Eastern peoples surrounding the Hebrews, in which the story of Baal defeating the sea serpent Lotan was a common source (see the Ugaritic Baal Cycle) which was worked upon by the Yahweh tradition (Lotan became Leviathan).
• From a more properly biblical standpoint, in the Leviathan context, the weakest association here is actually Behemoth, not Yahweh.
• Behemoth is the only one here which is more properly only a "biblical demon" (use these words in quotes, they're his words), being unknown outside of the book of Job, whereas the rest of the figures have a role in the broader Near Eastern context. Nevertheless, Behemoth is pitted against Leviathan in the Bible, and the symbolic association worked well enough given the interpretation of Leviathan in the surrounding context.

Expand at length; make every point here, but more clearly.

Your point on the potential association of Libertarianism with Moloch is well-taken and noteworthy. Indeed, the cultural connection between Moloch and the unrestrained machinery of capital, a frequently-discussed aspect of Libertarianism, has been widely drawn in many circles. It's true that such a pairing, based solely on modern cultural metaphors, may initially seem fitting. However, I believe there are critical dimensions that prevent this alignment from being as accurate or insightful when examined within the greater biblical narrative.

In choosing metaphors, particularly ones as profound as biblical figures, it's crucial to respect not just their cultural connotations but also their original narrative contexts. For instance, if we were to rely on cultural associations alone, then Leviathan, per the interpretation of Thomas Hobbes, would symbolize a statist ideology - a stance that would greatly diverge from my representation of the beast as a symbol of Leftist Anarchism. While cultural interpretations are undoubtedly important, they sometimes risk distorting or overlooking the original meanings these figures possess within their original contexts.

The narrative of Yahweh granting freedom to the Hebrews in the Bible is a central and well-known theme. He serves as a liberator, setting free his chosen people from the constraints of slavery in Egypt and leading them towards the Promised Land. This gift of freedom, under the guidance of moral laws, closely aligns with the principles of Libertarianism, which emphasizes individual liberty within a system of law and order.

Furthermore, there is a prevalent biblical theme of Yahweh replacing Baal and triumphing over Leviathan, drawing upon a common narrative motif among the Ancient Near Eastern peoples. The Ugaritic Baal Cycle, a mythological epic that was familiar to the ancient cultures surrounding the Hebrews, narrates the story of Baal vanquishing the sea serpent Lotan. This tale influenced the biblical tradition, wherein Lotan morphed into Leviathan. Yahweh's superiority over both Baal and Leviathan carries important symbolic undertones and resonates strongly with the way Libertarianism seeks to replace Authoritarian tendencies while taming anarchic forces.

From a more strictly biblical standpoint, within the context of Leviathan, the most tenuous association in the metaphorical scheme proposed is actually Behemoth, not Yahweh. This "biblical demon," as you've put it, is found exclusively in the book of Job, devoid of any significant role in the broader Near Eastern context. This stands in contrast to the other figures - Leviathan, Baal, and Yahweh - all of whom have prominent roles in the wider mythologies of the region. Nevertheless, in the biblical narrative, Behemoth and Leviathan are often juxtaposed as immense beasts of the land and sea, respectively. This parallelism between the two creatures served as a useful symbolic association for contrasting Leftist Anarchism and Right-Wing Authoritarianism.

In conclusion, while your suggestion to associate Libertarianism with Moloch has its merits within a certain cultural interpretation, I believe that Yahweh, within the broader biblical narrative and its related ancient Near Eastern context, presents a more accurate and nuanced metaphor for Libertarianism.

Someone else replied to the original text:

"If your characterisation of Leviathan is right, it sounds like Hobbes forgot to read the Bible before titling his book."

Write an elaborate and clearly-written answer to this reply that expands and elaborates on the following points:

• (Thank you for acknowledging the plausibility of my metaphor.)
• I would not want to say that Hobbes did not read the Bible; I have read his "Leviathan", and it quotes the Bible extensively. (I respect Hobbes generally as a writer, despite not using his metaphor.)
• One possible reason is that Hobbes had to pick a powerful monster that was under the power of God, to symbolize the state. The possible choices are seemingly only Leviathan and Behemoth. Leviathan is simply much more emphasized throughout the Bible. Even in the book of Job, Behemoth is described in 10 verses, while Leviathan takes up 34 verses – the entire chapter 41.
• (Add other possible reasons; reiterate that I still side with the reasoning in my original metaphor, especially given Leviathan's role in contrast to Baal in the broader Near Eastern context, of which Hobbes was ignorant, since it is hard to notice without recent archaeology.)

Expand at length; make every point here, but more clearly.

Thank you for acknowledging the plausibility of my metaphor regarding Leviathan. Your comment about Thomas Hobbes' famous work "Leviathan" gives us an intriguing point to ponder.

I would not venture to say that Hobbes was unfamiliar with the Bible before crafting his masterwork. In fact, Hobbes' "Leviathan" draws extensively from biblical references and quotations, demonstrating his intimate familiarity with the scriptures. As a reader and admirer of Hobbes' erudition and eloquence, I hold a deep respect for his intellectual prowess and his ability to weave theological threads into his political philosophy.

The characterization of the state as Leviathan in Hobbes' work requires some contextual understanding. In his search for a fitting biblical symbol for the state, Hobbes would have needed to choose a powerful creature, one that was under the dominion of God, to depict the state's absolute authority yet divine subordination. His potential candidates from the biblical narrative would seemingly boil down to Leviathan or Behemoth.

The choice of Leviathan appears more fitting, given its prominence in the Bible compared to Behemoth. Indeed, in the Book of Job, where both creatures are introduced, Behemoth is described in merely 10 verses, while Leviathan takes up an entire chapter of 34 verses. The greater emphasis on Leviathan throughout the biblical text could have guided Hobbes towards selecting it as the more appropriate emblem for his vision of the state.

However, there are also aspects beyond the text of the Bible which may influence our interpretation of these figures. While Hobbes was no doubt well-read in the scriptures, he likely wasn't privy to the broader Near Eastern context surrounding Leviathan. This context, revealed more fully in the light of recent archaeological findings, paints Leviathan in a different light – one that stands in opposition to Baal, symbolizing rebellion and resistance against imposed order.

In light of this, while I respect Hobbes' choice of Leviathan as a symbol for the state, my metaphor draws upon a broader context, positioning Leviathan as the embodiment of Leftist Anarchism. This interpretation provides a more nuanced understanding of Leviathan, particularly when contrasted with the figures of Baal, Behemoth, and Yahweh, in their respective roles within the political ideological landscape.

In the end, our understanding of these figures, like our interpretation of political ideologies, evolves and deepens with the expansion of knowledge and context. It is the intricate dance between these various interpretations that contributes to the richness of our discourse, and I welcome your insights in continuing this fascinating exploration.