Appropriate to laugh? and The Topic of Appropriateness

Today on Facebook my older brother posted a picture, one I had seen before, but one that is worth looking at again. I believe the sign was made for the occasion of John Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s rally in Washington: “The Rally To Restore Sanity” and “The March To Keep Fear Alive”. The question my brother wanted me to blog about was “whether it or not it’s appropriate to think that this is hilarious”.

My simple answer is yes. I think it is a great spot of wit. First off, because it makes fun of Republicans, which is just as funny as making fun of any other group one can make vast generalizations about. Second, because free healthcare is awesome. Third, it calls out the underlying racism driving much of the Obama-hate. (This is not to say that I am for Obama and Democrats. To be honest, I think there is little difference between the parties; either option is too limited). From a Biblical perspective, this sign finds its correspondence in making fun of Pharisees, who were disturbed by Jesus shaking up the social order, or any other proponent of the status quo.

I like the question my brother poses…What is appropriate? Beyond this entertaining picture, appropriateness has been on my mind of late. My simple answer is” freedom in Christ”, implying that one is free to find such humour hilarious. I know that this “freedom in Christ” thing has swung this way and that way throughout history. I, however, refuse to take a stream of logic that states “when in a grey area always hedge toward the conservative side”. I refuse such logic because history has not proven this to be the correct approach. Karen Armstrong, in A History of God, considers such swings, one of such she critiques this way, “In our own day, we have witnessed the permissive society of the 1960s giving way to the more puritan ethic of the 1980s, which has also coincided with the rise of Christian fundamentalism in the west.” All that to say, always defaulting to a more conservative ethic is not necessarily the best route. That is because following such logic leads to some undesirable outcomes, fundamentalism being the case and point.

I bring up freedom in Christ and the permissive nature of Christianity to speak to other whisperings surrounding this blog. What is appropriate to blog about? I thought we had dealt with this topic in a series of posts that all engaged the topic of censorship. Specifically, what is and is not appropriate to post on this blog. There have been some whisperings (yes it is amazing what all comes back to the sources even beyond cyberspace) that some of our posts have been “too far”, or “you are asking questions that should not be asked”. I am frustrated by this.

I am frustrated because there are people who have disagreed with posts and are too timid to comment their disagreements. We have a comment section for a reason. We by no means want to state that we are somehow authoritative on any of the topics we ponder. I believe I speak for Duncan and Danielle when I say that we would welcome a different opinions being posted in the comment section, we would probably be rather excited by such engagement. I am frustrated because this does not happen, but people continue to read, continue to be offended, and they gather their “evidence”, making their “case”. It finally comes to a head when they come out guns blazing, telling us to reconsider what we are doing, stating we are harming others. This I find frustrating because I also have people tell me how much they love the blog, it makes their day, or they wish we went further on some topics. Too be honest, I did not think we were pushing the limits as of late…some posts were downright hopeful! So what then am I to censor?

Rather than reiterate what has already been discussed in other posts about censorship, I want to state a little bit of my personal philosophy on why I do not always censor. I believe freedom in Christ ought to be embodied by those who claim to follow this rebel and social disturber. I believe this is relevant to one’s personal and social ethics, but beyond that I think freedom in Christ MUST relate to one’s academic and intellectual endeavours. It has been said before, but obviously it need to be repeated, “At the root of all fear is a lack of trust”. The limiting of academic and intellectual freedom, by “questions you should not ask”, I believe is rooted in a fear of where they might lead. I see the lack of trust directly relating to one’s perception of God. If your God is stagnant and dormant, then you will spend all you time defending that God. Whereas, if you believe in a living God, a God of personhood, who ought to be able to defend himself or herself, there is no fear to honestly question. Thus, to fear a question is to lack trust in the deity’s ability to deal with such questions. In my opinion, any deity who cannot handle a question is not a deity worth believing in or following.

I find appropriateness frustrating because the line of appropriateness is so hard to gage over the internet. There are many conversations I refuse to have when I am face-to-face with someone, because the other individual is not yet at a place to journey with me into a certain topic or way of thinking. On the other hand, if I do have the discussion I can precede slowly and appropriately, given the other person’s receptivity to an idea. On the internet, however, I have far less ability to perceive such things. There is some interaction in the comment sections, which is great. I also know many people who read the blog, but there are friends and acquaintances of Danielle and Duncan I do not know. Alternatively, even farther afield, other wonderful people who stumble upon the blog while upon their noble quests to read the entirety of the intertubes. How then am I to judge what might or might not be appropriate?

It is here I come to Paul’s concept of not doing everything that is permissible, but only doing what is beneficial. To this concept, I have no answer or rebuttal. My response is that you please engage us and the blog, rather than being hurt by it. If you disagree, comment. If you think something is too far and heretical, click the heretical button. If you are continually offended and are too timid to engage and be stretched in your perspective, please stop reading the blog. Please do what is beneficial for you. Govern your use of this public space and avoid the harm it is causing you. I am not about to be intellectually timid, because I see that as the most horrendous blasphemy and heresy. And with that, the ball is now in your court, your move.

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.