Chapter 25

Michelangelo, Milton, and Movies: Art, Literature, Life, and the Bible

In This Chapter

Examining the Bible’s influence on the arts and civilization

Exploring the arts’ impact on the living text of the Bible

Looking at some interesting Bible movies

A bout midway into the semester of an art history course, a student asked, “So who’s the lady with the baby we keep seeing?” The stunned instructor had assumed that everyone was familiar with the biblical characters of Jesus and Mary. But we all know what happens when you and I ass-u-me.

Actually, assumptions, the arts, and the Bible have long gone together. For example, Renaissance paintings of biblical stories often reveal more about the dress, manners, and values of European nobility than anything found in the Bible. Nevertheless, artists’ interpretations of the Bible, even when wrong, have done much to bring the Good Book to life, and in this way they have contributed to the Bible’s enduring appeal.

In this chapter you look at the Bible’s impact on the arts and, conversely, the impact of the arts on how you understand the Bible.

The Bible in Art

Some of the most influential works of art depicting scenes from the Bible were created in Renaissance Europe. The five discussed here are among the best known, and exemplify how artists not only bring the biblical narrative to life but also transform that narrative to reflect their own world.

Creation of Adam (Genesis 2)

The Bible’s influence on culture is perhaps best embodied in the Vatican’s Sistine Chapel, painted by Michelangelo Buonarroti in the sixteenth century. Of the over 3,000 figures depicting biblical events and persons on its walls and ceilings, the most famous is the one in the center of the ceiling: Creation of Adam (see Figure 25-1), seen by many to be the pinnacle of Renaissance art. Here Michelangelo, instead of painting God creating the universe with words as recorded in Genesis 1, depicts a very human (though admittedly buffed!) God, more like that encountered in Genesis 2 (see Chapter 3 of this book).

Figure 25-1: Michelan-gelo’s Creation of Adam in the Sistine Chapel.

©Bettmann/CORBIS

The moment captured in the painting isn’t the physical creation of Adam, as he already exists, but rather the moment at which God imparts His divine life or spirit into Adam, making Adam a “living” being. In the painting God is accompanied by a retinue of other creatures and persons. Most notably, God’s left arm is draped around a woman, who is Eve, and His left hand rests upon the Christ child, whose preexistence and presence with God at creation is a central Christian doctrine.

Thus, in this single image, Michelangelo captures the entire Christian story of humanity’s relationship to God. Adam is given a soul, while at the same time God foresees humanity’s failure and anticipates the redemption of Christ.

Moses with horns (Exodus 34)

After speaking at length with God on Mount Sinai, Moses descends carrying the Ten Commandments. The text then reports, “Moses did not know that the skin of his face was qaran.” The Hebrew word used here most often means “horns,” which is how the Latin Bible (Vulgate) that Michelangelo read translates it. Thus, Michelangelo’s statue of Moses, created around 1515 C.E., portrays him with horns (as shown in Figure 25-2). But qaran can also mean “rays of light” and “radiant,” which is how many modern translations of the Bible render this word. Whatever the exact meaning of this word, Moses’ appearance is enough to frighten the people, and they ask him to wear a veil.

Figure 25-2: Michelan-gelo’s Moses with horns.

©Gianni Dagli Orti/CORBIS

The issue of David’s tissue (1 Samuel 17)

When Republican Florence needed an image to symbolize their determination to keep the usurped Medicis at bay, they commissioned Michelangelo to carve this imposing statue of David in 1501 C.E. Although most artists carved David holding the severed head of Goliath, Michelangelo portrays the boy immediately before the battle (see Figure 25-3). David’s face, and especially his eyes, masterfully capture David’s determination and confidence — what Rocky calls the “eye of the tiger.”

But some things in the statue are noticeably wrong. For example, David is, well, exposed. David would certainly have worn clothes in his confrontation with Goliath (though nakedness could be an interesting battle strategy). Yet, more controversial is that Michelangelo seems to present the Israelite hero as uncircumcised. Of course, Michelangelo never met David; he used male models to carve the statue. These models, being Italian Christians in the fifteenth century, would not have been circumcised. Nevertheless, others have argued that Michelangelo’s David in the statue is, in fact, circumcised exactly as they did it in biblical times. In these early years, the operator (known as a Mohel) only cut off the preputial tissue that extends beyond the penis glans (sorry, no diagrams). This is known as a Bris Milah. Later, in the second century C.E., circumcision changed, as rabbis began to prescribe that all of the foreskin be removed. This practice arose because Jewish youths wanting to assimilate into Greek culture stretched their remaining foreskins to resemble uncircumcised penises. So in the end, does Michelangelo depict David as anatomically accurate? You’ll have to be the judge.

Figure 25-3: Michelan-gelo’s imposing statue of David.

©World Films Enterprise/CORBIS

What’s wrong with this picture? The birth of Jesus (Matthew 1–2, Luke 2)

Jesus was most likely born in the spring, a time when shepherds would have been outside at night watching their flocks (see Chapter 27 for the choice of December 25). And the only thing even remotely close to Christmas trees in the Bible are pagan shrines dedicated to the Canaanite fertility goddess Asherah, which the Bible says to cut down and demolish (not decorate).

Moreover, re-creations of Jesus’ birth, whether in children’s plays, nativity lawn ornaments, or even Hieronymous Bosch’s painting The Adoration of the Magi from the fifteenth century (see Figure 25-4), tend to get several things wrong. For example, nativity scenes routinely depict the wise men (or magi) at the manger simultaneously with the shepherds. Although the Bible affirms that the shepherds (pictured in Bosch’s painting as peeking into the house from the roof and through a hole in the wall) arrive soon after Jesus’ birth, the magi seem to visit Jesus as many as two years later (see Chapter 18). In addition, the text doesn’t specify the number of magi, only that they bring three types of gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Finally, the so-called manger, meaning “feeding trough,” in which Jesus is placed after his birth does not imply that he is born in a stable. Homes during Jesus’ day often were multileveled, with people sleeping on the upper floors and animals on the ground floor. Mary, seeking privacy, likely gives birth on the ground floor of such a house, perhaps even in the home of a relative (see Chapter 18).

Figure 25-4: Bosch’s The Adoration of the Magi.

©Erich Lessing/Art Resource, N.Y.

The Last Supper (Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and John 13)

The Last Supper, painted by Leonardo da Vinci (shown in Figure 25-5), was commissioned in the fifteenth century to decorate a monastery in Milan, Italy. It is justifiably the world’s most famous piece of art, but with this prestigious title comes some unfortunate baggage. Its fame has transferred to the more mundane: Today there are Last Supper clocks, wallpapers, mouse pads, paint-by-number sets, pens, and even replicas in wax museums.

Furthermore, much of the painting is historically inaccurate. The characters look and dress like fifteenth-century Italian nobility, and the utensils and dinnerware are identical to those used by the monks who ate in the monastery. Jesus’ disciples at this Passover meal would have been wearing less ornate garments, and eaten using their hands while reclining on the floor.

But two attributes elevate this painting to its artistic heights. First, its unprecedented use of perspective makes it actually seem to be part of the refectory — monks would seem to be eating with Jesus and the disciples. Second, the astonished expressions and chaos that follow Jesus’ announcement that one of his disciples would betray him is masterfully captured. (From left to right on the painting, the disciples are Bartholomew, Jacob, Andrew, Judas, Peter, John, Jesus, Thomas, Jacob or James the Elder, Philip, Matthew, and Thaddeus.) The only one not surprised by Jesus’ announcement is Judas, whose shadowed face symbolizes his dark purposes and guilt. Also, Peter holds a knife at Judas’s back, symbolizing not only Judas’s back-stabbing nature, but also Judas’s inevitable death. Additionally, the knife foreshadows Peter’s cutting off the ear of a soldier later that night.

©Bettmann/CORBIS

What color was Jesus’ skin?

Jesus’ skin color has been the subject of a lot of media attention and controversy. So we should say a word about it.

Although we have no descriptions or portraits of Jesus from the first century C.E., those artistic representations of Jesus portraying him with fair skin, light hair, and sometimes even blue eyes are certainly wrong, and reflect the cultural influences of European Christians. Moreover, people in antiquity didn’t really think in terms of race, but rather identified themselves with their cultural group. Thus, Jesus wouldn’t think of himself as black or white, but as a Jew living in Palestine. And because this area was a land bridge between Europe, Africa, and Asia, it created a population of amalgamated ethnic groups. Jesus’ complexion was neither that of a northern European nor a sub-Saharan African, but it would have been somewhere between these two ends of the spectrum, just as today in that part of the world people have a variety of skin colors.

The Bible in Literature

Like the masterpieces of the applied arts, writers have crafted countless poems and works of prose that directly and indirectly use the Bible for inspiration. Also, much of what people commonly believe to be biblical stems from such writings. In the following sections, we cover three examples.

What’s so funny about hell? Dante’s The Divine Comedy

Much of what people believe about heaven and hell comes from Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy, thus named not because it is funny, but rather because it has a happy ending. In this three-part epic, Dante at midlife finds himself spiritually and metaphorically lost. To regain his way, and reclaim his salvation, he must travel through hell and purgatory, guided by the poet Virgil. He then ascends through the layers of heaven, pictured as a rose, guided by a woman, Beatrice, whom Dante loved, but who had since died.

Dante includes many biblical characters in his story. Most memorable is Judas, who, along with the Romans Brutus and Cassius (who betrayed Julius Caesar), is forever chewed upon in one of Satan’s three mouths at the bottom of hell. Hell for Dante is the complete absence of good and warmth, and thus it is a frozen lake of ice (which gives hope to those of us who were told that we’ll be called “when hell freezes over”). Dante’s levels of hell, purgatory, and heaven are filled with biblical allusion, but you’ll search in vain in the Bible for these so-called “circles.” Also, the notion that Saint Peter guards the gates to heaven, though predating Dante, is popularized by him in The Divine Comedy, but is not in the Bible.

A tempting proposition: Milton’s Paradise Lost

John Milton’s Paradise Lost is a masterful retelling of the story of Adam and Eve, where Satan tempts Eve into eating the forbidden fruit, thereby introducing sin and death into the world. The poem begins:

Of Man’s first disobedience, and the fruit Of that forbidden tree whose mortal taste Brought death into the world, and all our woe, With loss of Eden, til one greater Man Restore us, and regain the blessed seat

Many people don’t read Milton anymore, partly because many find his views on women less than attractive. But Paradise Lost is well worth the read. Milton masterfully weaves the theological learning of his day into a poem that rivals the other great epic poems of history. Satan’s fall, his creation of Pandemonium (the home of the demons and meaning, literally, “all the demons”), and his “incarnation” as a serpent in order to tempt Eve (which purposefully parallels Jesus’ own incarnation as a man to redeem humankind) are powerfully and vividly portrayed by Milton. Commonly held ideas about Satan as a jealous angel kicked out of heaven before the creation of humans, as well as a fork-tailed serpent with legs, although being around long before Milton, were popularized because of the influence of his poem.

Pallid baleens and biblical Baals: Melville’s Moby Dick

As do many classics, Herman Melville’s Moby Dick relies heavily upon biblical allegory. The narrator is named Ishmael after Abraham and Hagar’s son, while the captain is named Ahab. Like the Bible’s King Ahab, Melville’s Ahab is a megalomaniac, worships and chases after false gods (King Ahab worships Baal, and Melville’s Ahab chases after, and in some ways worships, the white whale), and owns a connection to ivory (King Ahab adorns his palace with inlaid ivory, and Ahab the mariner walks on an ivory leg). Their obsessions with power and revenge cost not only their own lives, but many others’ as well.

Totally Epic!: Good and Bad Bible Movies

Most Bible movies are unwatchable, even for Bible scholars. Writers, directors, and actors seem restrained from being creative, and the result is hundreds of films with Moses and Jesus walking around like zombies. They’re trying to portray people as holy, but instead, they wind up making them something very forbidden in biblical law — ham. Also, in an effort not to offend anyone, these characters typically wind up caricatures with at most one dimension. But, once in a while, some real gems come along. What follows are seven (a good biblical number) films, some marvelously entertaining, others less so, but all having quite a bit to do with the Bible.

The Ten Commandments (Lasky, 1923)

This movie, though one of our favorites, is not for everyone. It is silent and the plot is pretty simple, though it actually tells two stories. Half the film involves the biblical Moses, a stern lawgiver who condemns dancing and any type of humor. The other tale, set in the 1920s, is thoroughly entertaining though not for the reasons Cecil B. de Mille intended.

At the heart of the story are two sons: one a carpenter named John, the other a manufacturer of large buildings named Dan. When their mom reads them the Ten Commandments, John listens intently, and Dan laughs, saying those laws died with Queen Victoria (can you guess where this is going?). Dan bribes a building inspector to look the other way when he uses lean cement in building a church, and in a scene about as subtle as the rock that fell Goliath, the mom is killed when the church collapses, and a copy of the tablets of the Ten Commandments strikes her on the head. Dan drowns on his way to Mexico in a boat called Defiance, while John reads the Bible to a girl who used to like dancing. As a further example of how the times in which you live affect your understanding of the Bible, the film even blames World War I on society’s violation of the Ten Commandments (certainly people were violating a few of the commandments during the War).

Cecil B. de Mille’s early films were considered pornography by standards in the 1920s. He showed the first bathroom in film, and even portrayed prehistoric people wearing animal skins, which critics felt set a bad example for children. Seeking to turn over a new leaf, de Mille ran a contest in the Los Angeles Times to find out what religious theme the public preferred. A manufacturer of lubricants wrote, “You cannot break the Ten Commandments — they will break you.” And with this pithy letter, film history (and television at Easter) was forever changed.

The Ten Commandments (Paramount, 1956)

This film has a blockbuster cast, state-of-the-art (for the 1950s) special effects, and one of the Bible’s greatest stories as a plot. Although certainly inspiring at parts, it also has its share of humorous and even corny moments. Amazingly, they spent three years writing this script. That means that such timeless lines as “Moses, Moses, you splendid, stubborn, adorable fool” took about three weeks to create, as did “Dance, you mud turtles.”

Charlton Heston as Moses is unforgettable, though at times laughable (especially his hairdo after seeing God on Mount Sinai). Moreover, John Derek as Joshua is so peppy and glassy eyed, that you wonder what they were serving for lunch on the set. Another peculiarity of this movie is that few of the actors really interact. The film is more a collection of monologues, most memorable by Edward G. Robinson’s gangster-like portrayal of Dathan, the leader of those seeking to undermine Moses’ authority in the wilderness.

This movie, like its silent predecessor, is truly a product of its time. Although the original Ten Commandments was about society’s moral decay during the Roaring ’20s, here the same biblical topic is about Civil Rights. In fact, Martin Luther King, Jr., watched this film the night before writing his famous speech “The Birth of a New Nation,” which is about Ghana’s attempts to end colonization. However, the Bible’s version of the exodus is not really about ending slavery — even some of the Israelites owned slaves. Yet, the story does touch on the themes of freedom and the tyranny of oppressive regimes.

The movie is famous for its special effects, but why? The burning bush was inspired by (and even resembles) an electric fireplace with a glowing pink log, and the parting of the Red Sea is simply shot backwards. Time magazine in 1956 said it best: “Something roughly equivalent to an 8-foot chorus girl — pretty well put together, but much too big and much too flashy.”

Charlton Heston was cast as Moses partially because the actor’s face resembled Michelangelo’s famous statue of Moses. Heston later portrayed Michelangelo himself in The Agony and the Ecstasy (1965).

The Green Pastures (Warner Bros., 1936)

This film is rarely seen, which is simultaneously fortunate and tragic. The film is based on a Pulitzer Prize-winning theatrical version of Roark Bradford’s book Ol’ Man Adam an’ his Chillun (1928). The story is a white author’s interpretation of black folk versions of God’s relationship to humanity in the Torah (try saying that ten times fast). It was controversial (and often banned) when it opened, because God and the angels are played by black actors. It is controversial today because of its stereotypical and offensive portrayal of southern rural blacks. But with these warnings, the movie is amazingly inventive and provides an entertaining and imaginative retelling of some famous Bible stories. It works partly because it isn’t wed to the biblical text and has great acting (especially Rex Reed as De Lawd). The singing by the Hall Johnson Choir is inspiring, to say the least.

Ben Hur (MGM, 1959)

This film is a remake by director William Wyler of a 1926 silent film, based on General Lew Wallace’s best-selling novel by the same name. Ben Hur is often called the best Bible movie of all time, which may have something to do with the fact that the engaging plot has little to do with the Bible. Instead of watching an actor portray the almost unplayable role of Jesus, the movie is set during the time of Jesus, beginning with Jesus’ birth and ending with his death. Yet, Jesus only makes brief cameos, and the camera never shows his face; only the faces of those looking at him (a technique that’s used very well). As a result, the movie is free to tell another story while displaying the suffering of Jews at the hands of the Romans. For example, when Ben Hur (Charlton Heston) comes face to face with Jesus, he realizes from Jesus’ expression and kindness that he is not there to violently overthrow the Romans but to bring love and healing to humanity. Here, unlike other Bible epics, there is action and drama worthy of the huge production. The most famous scene, the chariot race, is a neck-and-neck battle between two equals, and at times this spectacle dwarfs the massive set. (Despite a popular urban legend, nobody died in the filming of Ben Hur. However, a stunt man did die in the filming of the silent Ten Commandments racing scene.)

Jesus Christ Superstar (Universal, 1973)

You can discover more about the early 1970s by watching this movie than you can about the Bible. Nevertheless, this rock opera by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice is imaginative, and it’s the most memorable of all the films produced in the heyday of Jesus movies, including The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965) and Jesus of Nazareth (1977).

Jesus in Jesus Christ Superstar smiles and is happy, as opposed to other portrayals of a stern otherworldly Jesus. That is, the film emphasizes the human nature of Christ, much like other intriguing films including Jesus of Montreal (1989). In Jesus Christ Superstar, there is no dialogue; everything is sung. This lack of dialogue gives the actors freedom and leaves much to the audience’s imagination, not too unlike the Bible itself.

The film focuses on the conflict between Jesus and Judas, played by Carl Anderson, who gives the best performance of the film. However, it is hard not to notice that in this movie and nearly all works of art, Judas is portrayed as a black man, contrasted to Jesus’ milk-white skin. Nevertheless, the story is told from Judas’s perspective, and chronicles the last seven days in Jesus’ life. Judas is determined that Jesus is out of his mind and dangerous. Judas leads soldiers to Gethsemane, but he discovers he has been tricked by God to be an instrument in Jesus’ martyrdom.

Raiders of the Lost Ark (Paramount, 1981)

This is a great movie, though it’s based only loosely on the Bible. In the movie, Dr. Jones (Harrison Ford), a professor at the Oriental Institute in Chicago, is approached by the curator of the National Museum and two U.S. intelligence officers to prevent Hitler from obtaining the Bible’s version of the atomic bomb — the Ark of the Covenant. It turns out that the Ark is buried in “The City of Lost Souls” in Tanis, Egypt, which actually reflects one theory on the Ark’s whereabouts. (For more on what happened to the Ark, see Chapter 9.) The replica of the Ark is quite good, as is the high priestly garb worn by the Nazi scholar who opens the Ark. However, the destruction caused by the spirits released when the Ark is opened does not capture the essence of the biblical story where something similar occurs (see 1 Samuel 6:19–20). Of course, Harrison Ford makes an excellent Indy, a role that Tom Selleck declined in order to make the hit television series Magnum, P.I.

The Matrix (Warner Bros., 1999)

The Matrix is a big-budget, science-fiction, kung-fu-action, edge-of-your-seat, futuristic thriller in which startling revelations convince a computer hacker to save the world. It is one of the cleverest movies to come out of Hollywood in some time, though most fans are unaware of its heavy reliance on the Bible. The name of the movie’s hero, Thomas Anderson, connects him with two biblical figures. The name Thomas is an allusion to Doubting Thomas of John’s gospel, because, in the movie Keanu Reeves (who plays Anderson) doubts his role as savior. Anderson literally means “Son of Man,” a title that the Bible uses to describe God’s coming deliverer or Messiah, and a name applied to Jesus. Thomas Anderson’s other name, Neo, means “new,” and is an allusion to the New Testament. He dies, and is resurrected with love from a girl named Trinity, defeats the evil system, and then ascends into “heaven” in order to return and bring ultimate deliverance from the Matrix. Perhaps the most obvious reference to Anderson’s role as a Jesus figure occurs at the beginning of the movie, when someone says to him: “Hallelujah! You’re my savior, man. My own personal Jesus Christ.” If that isn’t enough, the movie was released Easter weekend!

Other aspects of the movie own biblical themes. The rebel base is known as Zion, which in the Bible refers to the mountain on which Jerusalem is built, and their ship is named Nebuchadnezzar, after the biblical king who exiled the Jews from their land. In addition, the film’s Judas character is named Cypher, in reference to the name LuCIPHER (another name for Satan; see Chapter 14). Finally, Morpheus represents John the Baptist, as the figure prophesying the coming of the savior.

And for the kids

There are other Bible movies worth watching, especially for children, including Dreamworks’s animated film The Prince of Egypt, with Val Kilmer as Moses, Jeff Goldblum as Moses’ brother, Aaron, and Sandra Bullock as Moses’ sister, Miriam (to name just a few of the stars). Less well known, but just as good, is Dreamworks’s “prequel” to The Prince of Egypt, called Joseph, King of Dreams, with Ben Affleck as Joseph. And if you haven’t watched the computer-animated VeggieTales series, where vegetables act out biblical stories, then you haven’t really lived.