Hidden & Revealed

This is a post which contemplates identity, self and personhood...

I think it relates to previous posts of mine such as: Remember, Censorship, Out on a Limb, and Anxiety & Irresponsibility among others
And also Silas post Stories Collide Pt.1
And Danielle's Shake it like you mean it!

we are mixtures of light and shadow 

the hidden and revealed

both to ourselves and to others

we are both exposed and concealed

I was struck tonight by the vast number of ways I identify myself. Some of these identities are in conflict or at least seem to be. Many of the nuances of reality are simplified for various reasons. For example I am both proud and ashamed to identify as Scottish, part of my family heritage for which I am named and have since tatooed onto my body forcing the issue into conversation more than I really intended. I am in reality much more dominantly Dutch. However, when I did not receive the tall genes of my father and opa this became a sore point more than a source of pride or identity. I am defined precisely in paradox. 

What makes up our identity? We are a blender of nature, nurture, context, culture, history, tradition, narrative, and genetics... We are simultaneously unique and deeply connected. The book Beauty of the Lillies by John Updike, which I just finished reading highlights the intergenerational quality of the story of our lives. We are born into a story, continue it and pass it on... I think the Bible also highlights this intergenerational narrative of our lives of faith. "I am the God of you forefathers: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" declares Yahweh... 

I try and situate myself in a intergenerational narrative: I am the fourth generation of film maker/photographer, following my father, opa and my opa's father. I am the fourth generation of my mother's family to worship God on the west coast of BC, following my mother, grandmother and great grandparents. It is this point that is interesting because it highlights the way we shape and mould our stories and identity. The way we edit. What we choose to reveal or hide, either by omission or intentional concealment. I rarely share my family's west coast history. This is at least in part because I am only minimally familiar with it and those who held this piece of my heritage died when I was young. My mother grew up in Sarnia and moved "home" to Victoria in her teens. My dad was born in Vancouver, but grew up all across America and in Holland, moving back to BC for University. British Columbia holds a gravity for my family that I tend to deny and have been trying to shake my whole life. I barely consider myself Canadian, identifying rather as European immigrant, having grown up on my Opa's stories of the Old Country, my Dad's stories of moped vacations in France, and my parents 6 month honeymoon of European travels. Stories held life and depth in contrast to the plastic and stick frame life of suburbia... My mother's father was born English and fought with the RAF in WWII. How I promote or demote these various facets of my life and many others deeply impact how I view myself and the story I find myself in. My dad's parents being still alive to participate and tell stories. This part of my history, therefore, has been in a bright spotlight for most of my life. This however, has cast into much deeper shadow, my mother's parents and family, shrouded in the silence of death. I find myself moving amongst the light and shadows of my own life desiring to explore and reveal parts and pasts hidden and to shade brighter spots. I am trying to both to understand and find my role in the intergenerational drama into which I have been born. Am I the heir to leap from amateur to professional in the photographic arts? I continue to try. Am I the exiled or prodigal son destined to return home to Europe? Or is escape to Europe merely another prodigal journey? Am I scholarly vindication of my frustrated grandfather, who didn't complete his Ph.D? With a family heritage of university education and teachers, education has been a value I was slow to embrace but now find that I love. Am I the white, educated, christian, suburban BC boy required to repent and and do penance for the sins of those before me responsible for residential schools and destruction of First Nations culture? Culture and history I share by direct family line and not only group association (I have at least one relative who taught in a school and my great grand father who worked for the government on reserves...)

I am unable to be seen completely by human eyes. Dark unknown spots and sins and shame merely shine brighter when revealed overpowering the rest. I experience my life as a frustrating puzzle with so many pieces I believe connect but I have lost the lid and cannot see the whole. I have moved more and more toward a desire for integration. All the jumbled pieces need to connect and as I search I find both connections and also more pieces... I feel like a tourist with amnesia searching through my suitcase trying to determine where I was supposed to go. 

i cannot hide but with revealing 

my revelation explicitly concealing

In my hiddenness I am most exposed

and in my nakedness remain unknown

Ok and now the theological question: How does God reveal himself in absence? Can God's presence be made known in absence? How? Why? etc.

Redemption of Solomon

Thinking about the blog today…manual labour provides the opportunity to let ones mind wander because it is mindless. However, rather than think about many different things I end up going over one thing many times. I think I am becoming more aware of my obsessive-compulsive side. Today I thought about the blog. I have not been posting much lately; life is busy when over 12 hours of my day are tied to getting to work, working and getting home. So contemplating this dilemma, I have decided to return to some of my previous work and share that with you.

The past two year I was a teaching assistant for a first year New Testament Survey course. For this, I created a series of devotionals to share. Over the next few weeks, I am going to share modified versions of those on this blog. These will be somewhat different from what I normally post, but hopefully they are informative and worthwhile to read. By “reusing” ideas for the next few weeks, I hope to be able to post more often even with my time restrictions. My second reason for sharing these is that they articulate some of my fundamental approaches to reading the text. Third, Duncan and I are working toward a mini series on Empire, a discussion initiated by the comments in the “Extremist Religion” blog. Some of my devotionals begin articulating and imaging empire, so are worth sharing as part of that bigger, ongoing, discussion.

Without further ado: Solomon

Begin by reflecting on the standards we (you and I) fail to live up to. It is probably not hard, your mind has probably jumped to some perceived standard. I don’t think it is a stretch for each of us to think of how we have failed to live up to standard set for us, as well as standards that we set up for ourselves.

We often fail. We know what it is to come up short. The feeling of disappointment, shame, guilt, are well known acquaintances if we are honest. This blog has been an outlet to perceived shortcomings in faith, employment, and social norms. Often I find myself wishing I better met the standards set for me. But this failure is our existence, so why am I bringing this up? Is this another guilt trip? Am I here to make you bring to mind things of the past? Is this a common Christianeese slap on the wrist? Maybe my purpose is to wallow a little while in the things that each of us wishes we would never need to return to or even think about again.

No. This is where we begin. This is a common convergence of our humanity. We begin here, often we return here. Failure to meet the standards is a place of existence. But, it is a place we do not wish to remain. Yet, even though I do not wish to remain with this feeling, I often feel stuck in this place.

Are you with me? Is the realization we do not meet the standards set before us a real experience? Is it true for you? For me it is.

Where does one go from here though? What are we to do with these feelings of failure, shame, guilt, and incompetence?

Solomon is where I find the possibility of solace. Turning to the person of Solomon to ponder together what it means to live after realizing our failure to reach the standards set before us.

The standard set before Solomon is presented in Deuteronomy 17:14-20.
The King
14 When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, “Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us,” 15 be sure to appoint over you a king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your fellow Israelites. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not an Israelite. 16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the LORD has told you, “You are not to go back that way again.” 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.
18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests. 19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees 20 and not consider himself better than his fellow Israelites and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel. (NIV)

Here we have the standard. The standard set to prevent Empire. But then we read of reality:
• Wives – 1 Kings 11:1-4
1 King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh’s daughter—Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians and Hittites. 2 They were from nations about which the LORD had told the Israelites, “You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods.” Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. 3 He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been.

• Large amounts of silver and gold – 1 Kings 10:14-17
14 The weight of the gold that Solomon received yearly was 666 talents,[e] 15 not including the revenues from merchants and traders and from all the Arabian kings and the governors of the territories.
16 King Solomon made two hundred large shields of hammered gold; six hundred shekels of gold went into each shield. 17 He also made three hundred small shields of hammered gold, with three minas of gold in each shield. The king put them in the Palace of the Forest of Lebanon.

• Horses – 1 Kings 10:26-29
26 Solomon accumulated chariots and horses; he had fourteen hundred chariots and twelve thousand horses, which he kept in the chariot cities and also with him in Jerusalem. 27 The king made silver as common in Jerusalem as stones, and cedar as plentiful as sycamore-fig trees in the foothills. 28 Solomon’s horses were imported from Egypt and from Kue—the royal merchants purchased them from Kue at the current price. 29 They imported a chariot from Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse for a hundred and fifty. They also exported them to all the kings of the Hittites and of the Arameans.

• Law – 1 Kings 11:4-6
4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been. 5 He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. 6 So Solomon did evil in the eyes of the LORD; he did not follow the LORD completely, as David his father had done.

If anyone did not meet the standards set out, it was Solomon. This is not how the majority of people think of Solomon, but Biblically he is not the role model of good behaviour. So here we are, the OT ends and the character of Solomon gets mixed reviews at best.

This, however, is not the end. The biblical narrative is not over. Jesus changes this, Luke 11:31 “The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the people of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom; and now something greater than Solomon is here.” – Jesus is the one greater than Solomon. Within the creativity of the biblical narrative, Jesus subverts the personhood of Solomon. From beyond time, past to future, future to past, redemption occurs for the character of Solomon. The character of Solomon has not been completed Biblically, he is not done, Solomon re-emerges and is completed in Christ. I love this part of Biblical study, somehow, beyond the life of the individual, literarily and beyond reason Christ alters the standards. From beyond time Christ comes and is sufficient for the standards.

Solomon, again, re-emerges in Acts. The tale is yet to be complete. In Acts the first great miracle is explained at Solomon’s colonnade (Acts 3:6-11). This action occurs at a location marked by the namesake of Israel’s empire. It is as if the kingdom that has arrived through Christ, which is a kingdom of healing, supersedes and replaces the abuse and harm done by Solomon. The Christ, and now Christ’s followers redeem the character of Solomon. The healing, signs, and wonders continue throughout Acts, and the people of the Kingdom continue to meet at Solomon’s colonnade (Acts 5:12).

So back to us. Do we really believe that? Is it a real possibility to live with an openness to being freed from the standards we fail to live up to? Do we truly live as though Christ is the one redeeming us? Do we actually believe that Christ is meeting and even exceeding the standards set before ourselves? Do we live in an openness to be redeemed from beyond time? Could we be redeemed by the actions of others many generations from now, just as the character of Solomon is redeemed by the early church? Because if we do, if we could live like this even a little it would undermine all the negative shame, guilt, and feelings of incompetence we experience when we do not meet standards.

CYOA: Genesis 1 - Dupes and Troglodytes

OK, I have held almost every view of Genesis 1 at one point or another. I was for a while during my youth a zealous young earth creationist. I have also been of the "it doesn't matter" perspective. And I currently hold that a literary approach to the Bible, and Genesis one in particular, is the best in determining meaning. One of the problems with Genesis 1 is that the question is rarely Genesis 1 but rather your view of scripture, and culture and science etc. This quote from Rick Watts of Regent College sums it up well:

"how one reads Genesis 1 has in some circles become a litmus test of Christian orthodoxy, whether conservative or liberal. Hold the "wrong" view and one is either a dupe of secular critical theory or a troglodyte literalist" - Rick Watts, Making Sense of Genesis 1

Having not held the literal view for sometime, I am always surprised at how difficult it is for most people to change positions from a literal perspective. In my first semester at CBC in Ken Esau's Old Testament survey a 30 minute lecture on the different Christian perspectives of Genesis 1 easily convinced me that my dogmatic literalism on the topic was foolish. I, for some reason, found it very easy to change positions at that time and in that context. Perhaps in my conversations with people on this topic I have done a bad job of explaining myself or for some other reason it has been the wrong time or context for them. In my Timothy and Titus class I presented dogmatic Genesis 1 literalism as a false teaching which I had been delivered from.

The most interesting suggestion I have heard recently via N.T. Wright, during his talk at Christian Life Assembly -Langley, that an Ancient Near Eastern person hearing Genesis 1 would immediately understand it as the building of a temple. Rick Watts, in his article linked above, also touches on this and much of my post will be a condensed and paraphrased version of his amazing scholarship. Therefore if you just want to skip the middle man you can go directly to "page 42" and read the full article, it's not really that long. Here's another tantalising quote:

the essential first step to knowledge, even and perhaps especially in that highest and holiest of all modern callings, science. All of us, Christians and scientists together, simply have to take a great deal on trust, to assume much, if we are ever to get started on the path to knowing. The saying is sure, without assuming something no one shall know anything. But having said that, it is important regularly to reassess those assumptions in the light of our growing knowledge and in doing so to recognize that truth in this kind of historical and literary endeavour is much more a matter of coherence than of certainty. - Rick Watts

A literary approach demands that we take the text very seriously and on its own terms, therefore the issue of genre becomes the opening question. Three things are significant to note: the large amount of repetition, the structure of forming and filling - following the description of the earth as formless and empty, and finally there is a progression from heaven to earth in the creative acts. So the problem is that within the Bible this particular style is utterly unique. It does not look or read like either Hebrew poetry or standard historical prose. I agree with Watts that the highly structured and stylized form indicates a "poetic character" to the text and we should be alert to the possibility of hyperbole, metaphor, and symbol rather than expecting literal concrete history.

When looking across various ancient cultural origin stories it is easy to realize that they all agree that a God brought order out of chaos what they disagree about is which God. Therefore Genesis 1 cannot and is not trying to answer the question "Is there a God?" (a very modern question) but rather "Which God ordered creation into existence out of chaos?"

Creation is an act of speech, highlighting Elohim's supreme kingly power. However, creation through speech is not unique. The Hopi say that Spider Woman sang the world into existence, Ethiopians believe God created both the world and himself by saying his own name, Australian Aboriginals also have an account of creation being sung into existence (Cameron, 43), and the Egyptian God Atum creates animal life by command (Watts). Watts highlights some of the very interesting similarities and differences between other origin stories and Genesis 1. I think that this is a much more profitable approach to determining the truth intended by the text. Context, Context, Context!

Ok, so why the days if we're not talking about literal days? In the Canaanite story of Baal's destruction of Yam (which may or may not be a creation story) after Baal's victory there is a 7 day building program that results in a house/temple for Baal. Similarly in the Bible Yahweh's temple as built by Solomon is built in 7 years (1 Kings 6:37-38). The Bible is filled with architectural imagery when describing creation (Ps 18:15; 82:5; 102:25; 104:5; Prov 8:29; Isa 51:13,16; 2 Sam 22:8,16; Zech 12:1; cf. 2 Sam 22:8).

"Heaven is my throne, and the earth my footstool" Isaiah 66:1 i.e. All of creation is God's palace/temple.

Furthermore, on day six when the temple/palace is nearly complete the final creative act is to place God's image (humanity) into the temple.

Finally, I would like to point out that Genesis 1 moves from dark, formless and empty to shalom (peace/rest). This is a salvation story because it promises God's ability to ultimately bring shalom, which becomes the primary plot of the Bible. The story culminates in Revelation with the New Jerusalem, a global temple/city, coming down to earth and the full unification of heaven and earth and Sabbath rest is enjoyed forever.

Genesis 1 does not answer the question "is there a God" or "how did God create" (in the scientific sense), Genesis 1 speaks to "who is God?" "why did God create?" "who are we?" and "why were we created?" These questions are of the utmost importance in defining identity and relationships: to God and creation and each other. The lack of science, or scientific interest in this account makes it's truth claims no less powerful nor does scientific discovery diminish it's importance in value.

To limit our definition of truth to the material and concrete is to diminish existence to such a degree as to make it into something else entirely.

Works Cited: Rick Watts, Making sense of Genesis 1 ; Julia Cameron, The Vein of Gold

CYOA - Look to the Snake

4 They traveled from Mount Hor along the route to the Red Sea, to go around Edom. But the people grew impatient on the way; 5 they spoke against God and against Moses, and said, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? There is no bread! There is no water! And we detest this miserable food!”

6 Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us.” So Moses prayed for the people.

8 The LORD said to Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.” 9 So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, they lived.

I was so excited to write on this passage because it is so bizarre! I mean the snakes are obviously no fun but then the bronze snake blows my mind!!!??? I mean why not have Moses' staff turn into a snake again and eat all the other snakes or maybe stick the ten commandments on a pole... or a bronze replica of the ten commandments... or a statue of Moses... But no, a bronze snake. Literally, looking to the snake was to receive God's salvation... Reflect on that statement for a moment. Does it creep anyone else out? That one looked to God by looking at the snake... Ok but maybe it makes sense because they are being attacked by snakes. So by having the symbol of salvation be a snake, no one will get confused and think God is a snake... they will remember Yahweh and the his deliverance from the snakes... Maybe? Nope: by 2 Kings 18:4, Israel is offering incense to the thing.

I did a word search on snake and serpent and it is a surprising common way of talking about something bad, being used mostly in a negative sense. However, the bronze snake is a weird kind of exception/non exception. There is also Gen 49:17 which is a prophecy about Dan in which snake imagery is kind of used as a positive negative and the staff into a snake trick in Exodus. In Matthew 10:16 we have Jesus command to be as shrewd as snakes. And you have Jesus' statement in John 3:14-15 directly referencing Numbers 21:

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.

And that is it.

Ok, now I want to give you the part that really freaks me out. Perhaps you have heard of Asclepius. The Greek God of medicine and healing.... Symbolized as a snake entwined on a staff... Still the common symbol for medicine/medical stuff...

So the Israelites are dying from snake bites and they need healing and they look to a bronze snake on a pole, i.e. Asclepius and they are healed. Except that Yahweh instructs this action and timeline-wise the connection must be from Israel to Greece and not the other way around if a real connection exists at all. To push this just a bit further, Asclepius is killed by Zeus for... raising people from the dead!!! Early church father Justin Martyr presented Asclepius as explicitly foreshadowing Jesus' ability to heal for the Greeks and is used as an example to show how Jesus' resurrection and ascension was not in any way unbelievable because this is already what Greeks believed about Asclepius!

OK. So we have the bronze serpent, to Asclepius, to Jesus. Furthermore, there is some scholarship and strong archaeological evidence to suggest that the Bathesda healing (John 5:1-15) was a confrontation with the pagan cult of Asclepius. So the question then... is this all part of God's glorious plan to save people in confusing ways that wind up getting people side tracked but eventually somehow lead to Jesus? Is the story of the snake which gives/offers life but ultimately leads people astray merely an extension of Eden? How do we reconcile the snake as both a symbol of judgement/punishment and salvation? Are we doomed to a story of redemptive violence? Are we supposed to not notice the phallic undertone in the descriptions of snakes and poles being lifted into the air?