General Direction

What are we doing? Where are we going?

In a very general sense, where is the human race headed?

These questions have been at the back of my mind for some time. They were brought to the fore today when watching a DVD of R.E.M. performing a live concert. The questions were provoked particularly by the euphoria of the crowd, and their involvement in the music being played to them, and how such a mental state was clearly so removed from the operations of everyday life and work.

Escapism I think, is something that has become a cornerstone of western society. Long has alchol played its part, George Bernard Shaw (1856 – 1950) observing “Alchol is the anethesia by which we endure the operation of life.” Yet, the outward display of escapism offered by binge drinkers on Friday and Saturday nights in Britain seems to hide some of the more subtle features of escapism that we incorporate into our lives.

Materialism and consumerism. Are these not forms of escapism offered by the very system that they support – the big, C, Capitalism and its never ending drive for profit and growth? Buddha revealed long ago where the path of material possessions ends and the inability of wordly goods to satisfy a deeper human desire – and yet this seems to be the most potent symbol of the general direction of our species – the never ending drive to amass wealth and belongings.

Briefly I turn to politicians. Politics is forever dominated by the shorterm and the mundane. Unemployment, the state of the welfare system, pensions, the cost of healthcare, the army and “defence”. Not that these things are unimportant. But where is the big picture? Where are we headed ultimately?

On 20 January 1961, John F. Kennedy offered a tantalizing snippet of a different kind of politics, one of inspiration and optimism. He said it in one sentence: “Let [us] seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce.” Within a decade, the US (spurred on by their ferocious competition with the USSR to champion capitalism over communism) sent a manned space craft to the moon.

“One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” Was it?

Where did this general direction get lost along the way? And why? Have we become so apathetic as consumers in our capitalist society, so disillusioned with politics, that we do not wish to engage, nor do we care, about the direction in which our species is headed?

Prohibited: Seeds, Clothing and Homosexuality

In Leviticus, a collection of laws strictly prohibits planting two kinds of seed in the same field and wearing garments made of two kinds of cloth (LEV 19.19).

I venture a seemingly absurd question. Where is the campaign by activists to enforce adherement to these laws? Where is the moral outrage at the fact that farmers and clothing companies get away so brazenly with with important breaches of Old Testament Law?

Such prohibitions are readily recognized by the 21st century reader as ‘the laws of an ancient culture that we are not bound to follow’ and the vast majority of us will ‘wear clothing made of blends without giving it a second though’. (Borg, Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, (2002), p. 24)

It is interesting therefore, that the ’single law in the Hebrew Bible prohibiting homosexual behaviour between men’ is embedded in the same collection of laws, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” The penalty for which – death – is found two chapters later. (LEV 18.22 and 20.13)

Borg posing the question ‘Why, then, should we single out some as “the laws of God”?’

Does the fact that the Ancient Hebrews assigned the death penalty to homosexual behaviour weigh into the consideration? Does this signify that this law has everlasting importance, where as other laws may comfortably be ignored?

Whoever curses father or mother “shall be put to death”, or so the law in Exodus 21:17 goes. Yet, there are few today who would consider cursing ones parents as such a serious offence today.

Why then homosexuality?

The FDR Solution

To aid economic recovery, Roosevelt stated:

‘…Our greatest primary task is to put people to work… It can be accomplished in part by direct recruiting by the Government itself… through this employment, accomplishing greatly needed projects to stimulate and reorganize the use of our great natural resources.’

Green Energy Revolution anybody?

Forgotten History?

Reading President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s inaugural adress, made on 4 March 1933 in the midst of the Great Depression, I can’t help but feel that the adage ‘those who forget the past, are cursed to repeat it’ (paraphrased) has remarkable resonance:

‘… in our progress toward a resumption of work we require… safeguards against a return of the evils of the old order; there must be a strict supervision of all banking and credits and investments; there must be an end to speculation with other people’s money…’

In the same speech, Roosevelt stated something not much associated with the McAmerica of today:

‘Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and the moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits…’

I wonder how people would react if this mantra was expounded by our politicians today? How inextricably linked are politics and the economy? Do we judge our politicians primarily based upon the girth of our wallets and the weight of our purses? Are we missing something greater?

Reading Exodus – A Difficult Passage (Exodus, 4.24-6)

Reading the Bible is often a challenge. Applying the principal of ‘charitable reading’ (as suggested by Karen Armstrong in her recent publication, The Bible: The Biography) and consciously taking a positive interpretation of a text alien to our own culture can help when confronted by a problematic passage. I would like to share one particular example of my own application of such ‘charitable reading’ to Exodus 4.24-6.

God has just instructed Moses to bring the Israelites out of Egypt (the burning bush vision). Moses agrees, somewhat hesitantly, to carry out God’s instructions. Then, rather spontaneously and without any introduction, we get the following passage:

On the way [to Egypt], at a place where they spent the night, the LORD met him and tried to kill him. But Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin, and touched Moses feet with it, and said, ‘Truly you are a bridegroom of blood to me!’ So he let him alone. It was then she said, ‘A bridegroom of blood by circumcision.’ (NRSV: Exodus, 4.24-6)

No further comment is passed, and the chapter continues from where it left off with God telling Aaron (Moses’ brother) to meet Moses and aid him in his undertaking, making the randomness of God’s alleged attempt to kill Moses (or his son – ‘him’ is unclear) all the more bizarre. That this incident receives so little attention by the chapter’s author maybe suggests that it is of little importance, although God’s ‘attempt’ to kill either Moses of clearly seems like it should be important.

The phrase ‘tried to kill’, is an interesting concept in itself since in English it sounds like God failed in the attempt. I very much doubt God ‘tries’ to do anything, therefore I think a charitable approach would be to read something along the lines of ‘God brought it to Moses attention that something was amiss…’ The notion that God tried to personally kill either Moses or his son cannot be read literally without suggesting a deeply disturbing side of God, both merciless and flippant – this would be an un-charitable interpretation and I reject it.

Perhaps the passage emphasises that even when you embark on a massive undertaking (as Moses does in Exodus), do not forget the smaller (more mundane) things in life – in this case, the circumcision of your son. In the context of Exodus however, perhaps circumcision is not a small thing, and the message is that when you confronted by a massive project, do not focus on one thing exclusively and at the expense of other things which, although perhaps smaller, are still important. This is my personal ‘charitable’ interpretation of this passage.

Reading the Bible for the First Time with Marcus Borg

The most thought-provoking book I have read recently, and one that has fundamentally altered my perception of Christianity is Marcus Borg’s Reading the Bible Again for the First Time (New York, 2001).

My previous post was (heavily) based on Borg’s discussion to ‘Ecclesiastes’ which I am glad to have been introduced to for its philosophical content and tone, such material I was hitherto unaware of existing in the Bible. I generally found Borg’s arguments and discussions well-judged and even-handed and often at conflict with my perceptions of Christian belief. I am aware that Borg is a member/contributor to the Jesus Seminar, I am therefore interested in knowing how Borg’s work sits with more mainstream Christians and what objections those a little more conservative might raise. Here, in a radically short summary, are some of the salient points I found interesting:

Arguing in favour of a ‘Historical-Metaphysical’ method of reading the Bible (which is explained in a fashion almost entirely free of academic jargon), Borg questions the validity of a recent trend in conservative Christian belief:

‘Christianity in the modern period became preoccupied with the dynamic of believing or not believing. For many people, believing “iffy” claims to be true became the central meaning of Christian faith. It is an odd notion – as if what God most wants from us is believing highly problematic statements to be factually true. And if one can’t believe them, then one doesn’t have faith and isn’t a Christian.’ (p. 16)

Furthermore, Borg asks: ‘Does it make sense that the creator of the whole universe would be known in only one religious tradition, which (fortunately) just happens to be our own?’ (p. 14)

Through an application of his method of approaching the Bible (one which seeks to place the message of the Bible within its historical framework as well as an understanding of its metaphorical nuances), Borg argues against thinking that equates to ‘salvation by syllables’:

‘The way of Jesus is a universal way, known to millions who have never heard of Jesus… The way of Jesus is thus not a set of beliefs about Jesus. That we ever thought it was is strange, when one thinks about it – as if one entered new life by believing certain things to be true, or as if the only people who can be saved are those who know the word “Jesus”… Thinking that way virtually amounts to salvation by syllables… Rather, the way of Jesus is the way of death and resurrection – the path of transition and transformation from an old way of being to a new way of being.’ (p. 216)

Additionally, for Borg, ‘preoccupation with the afterlife has profoundly distorted Christianity’, and rather ‘the Christian life is about becoming conscious of and entering more deeply into an already existing relationship with God as known in Jesus. It is not about meeting requirements for salvation later but about newness of life in the present.’ (p. 255)

I think this understanding of Christianity shares some common ground with my previous post ‘Jesus the Forgiver’. Also, I am increasingly seeing a dichotomy between mainstream (perhaps traditional??) Christian belief focused on salvation (and specifically how to be saved), and this other trend which is focused on the metaphorical death of an old way, and salvation in this life rather than (only) in the next.

Some Meditations on Life, How to Live It and the Spectre of Death: The Ancient Wisdom of Ecclesiastes, c. 300 – 250 BCE

Then I said to myself, ‘What happens to the fool will happen to me also; why then have I been so very wise?’ And I said to myself that this is also vanity. For there is no enduring remembrance of the wise or of fools, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. How can the wise die just like fools?’ (2.15-17)

In my vain life I have seen everything; there are righteous people who perish in their righteousness, and there are wicked people who prolong their life in their evildoing.  (7.15)

There is a vanity that takes place on earth, that there are righteous people who are treated according to the conduct of the wicked, and there are wicked people are treated according to the conduct of the righteous. (8.14)

Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favour to the skilful; but time and chance happen to them all. (9.11)

For the fate of humans and the fate of animals is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breathe, and humans have no advantage over animals; for all is vanity. All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. (3.19-21)

For no one can anticipate the time of disaster. Like fish taken in a cruel net, and like birds caught in a snare, so mortals are snared at a time of calamity, when it suddenly falls upon them. (9.12)

All this I laid to heart, examining it all, how the righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God; whether it is love or hate one does not know. Everything that confronts them is vanity, since the same fate comes to all, to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to those who sacrifice and those who not sacrifice. As are the good, so are the sinners, those who swear are like those who shun an oath. This is an evil in all that happens under the sun, that the same fate comes to everyone. (9.1-3)

What gain have the workers from their toil? I know that there is nothing better for them than to be happy and enjoy themselves as long as they live; moreover, it is God’s gift that all should eat and drink and take pleasure in all their toil. I know that whatever God does endures forever, nothing can be added to it, nor anything taken from it; God has done this, so that all should stand in awe before him. (3.9, 3.12-15)

Go, eat your bread with enjoyment, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has long ago approved what you do. Let your garments always be white; do not let the oil be lacking on your head. Enjoy life with the wife whom you love, all the days of your vain life that are given you under the sun, because that is your portion in life and in your toil at which you toil under the sun.

Whatever your hand finds to do, do with your might; for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going. (9.7-12)

For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:

a time to be born, and a time to die;

a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what has been planted;

a time to kill, and a time to heal;

a time to break down, and a time to build up;

a time to weep, and a time to laugh;

a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together;

a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

a time to seek, and a time to lose;

a time to keep, and a time to throw away;

a time to tear, and a time to sew;

a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

a time to love, and a time to hate;

a time for war, and a time for peace. (3.1-8)

For further discussion, see M.J. Borg, Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously but Not Literally (New York, 2001), pp.161-170.

Jesus the Forgiver and the Hope of Salvation

Then Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.’ (Luke 23.34)

It is understood that when Jesus died on the cross, he did so for our sins – in our place. Within Christian theology I believe this is perfectly correct. But my reading of the crucifixion leads me to believe that Jesus’s death meant more than this. When Jesus says ‘forgive them for they know not what they do’, he is asking forgiveness for those who put him to death and, of course, more widely the plea was for all humanity. Yet I believe that in the context, Jesus was not (only) asking for the forgiveness of sin, but for ignorance.

‘they do not know what they are doing.’

Jesus asks God to forgive those who are ignorant to his message. Jesus asks God to forgive those who are deaf to his teaching… those who do not know what they are doing. This leads me to reject the popular Christian idea that heaven is available only to those who accept God into their lives and who put their faith in the death of Jesus for the sins of humanity. I believe that when Jesus died on the cross, he died not only for our sins, but also for our (all inclusive) ignorance. He asked that God would forgive those who were incapable of hearing, understanding and accepting his message.

Through Jesus’s death on the cross, he made salvation accessible to everyone, that is Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, members of other religions, non-believers, and also murders, arsonists, and rapists et al… not just Christians. This is because he understood something that I feel has been forgotten by many Christians today, ‘they do not know what they are doing’.

In this way, God truly is Love. In this way, everyone is a Christian (whether they want to be or not) because Jesus died for humanity’s ignorance as well as our sin.

The Birth of Jesus

How do you reconcile the contradiction in the Gospel of Matthew regarding the birth of Jesus?

‘An account of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham.’ (Matthew 1: 1)
‘and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.’ (Matthew 1: 16)

Here we see Jesus born of the union between Joseph and Mary. This enables Matthew to trace Jesus’s genealogy back to Abraham.
Yet, in the same Chapter we find:

‘When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit.’ (Matthew 1: 18 ) Suddenly, we are introduced to the immaculate conception.

These accounts are mutually exclusive. If Jesus was born of a virgin Mary, then clearly his genealogy cannot be traced back to Abraham. Similarly, if Jesus truly is the ’son of David, the son of Abraham’, he cannot have been born of a virgin.

Well said Mr President

There was a lot in the inauguration speech of Barrack Hussein Obama that gives cause for hope in troubled times. But the following part of the speech I found particularly inspirational, it applies as much to the entire World as America:

‘For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus – and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.’
(Inauguration Speech of Barrack Hussein Obama, 44th President of the United States of America: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/obama_inauguration/7840646.stm)