Blasphemy Day?

Apparently September 30th has been declared 'Blasphemy Day'. At first, I thought this was just a joke but I guess it is a serious event complete with a 'Blasphemy Contest' in which contestants compete with poems, literature, music, art, etc. to see who can be the most blasphemous or sacreligous. I had no idea such a day even existed. Apparently, this day was created in order to encourage people to declare their contempt for God as a way of promoting freedom of expression. I won't go in to much more detail, but I just thought this was interesting ... and a bit ridiculous.

While trying to read the Bible, I have been thinking a lot about the term lacunae, and there is no shortage of those in the Bible. The Bible is so full of these gaps and spaces I think it's no wonder there are so many questions when people actually get around to reading it. After taking a class based on rhetoric last semester, I studied the role of those 'gaps' in a text and how they make the text or argument weaker or stronger.

For the most part, these spaces allow the reader to fill up the pages with their own thoughts, ideas, opinions, and/or beliefs and interpret a text in a very specific way. When I'm reading a piece of literature and my thoughts are more focused on what the writer left out rather than the text at hand, I have found mixed results. Most often, I am able to understand the text at a deeper level because I am able to inject my own opinion in to the text. What do I think should happen here? Where do I think the text should go from here and what would make the most sense to me if it were inserted here? Other times, having those gaps in the text makes me feel incredibly lost and confused and find the questions in my mind to be too overwhelming. When this happens, I often put down the text.

I still have been having trouble getting in to the Bible, not because I feel like the stories are boring, but because I feel like they might be a bit repetitive and incredibly redundant. I have been doing some research on the story of Jacob and his family, and it is widely believed that God works through suffering and adversity to teach people how to depend on him. This seems to be a trend in the stories of the Bible...

The LGBT Rainbow

In class, Professor Sexson mentioned God produced a rainbow in the sky after the flood to assure Noah that he would never again develop something like that on earth. The rainbow in this part of the Bible is sort of God's 'peace offering'.

Coincidentally, the rainbow I am familar with is used as a symbol to unite the Gay, Bi, Lesbian, and Transgender community around the world - Hot pink for sexuality, Red for life, Orange for healing, Yellow for the sun, Green for nature, Blue for art, Indigo for harmony, and Violet for spirit.

God created the colors of the rainbow as a symbol of peace, and homosexuals everywhere have adopted these same colors to show their pride and independence and their desire to find a peaceful place in society with equal rights. I think it's ironic the words of the Bible condemn homosexuality and still the symbol the LGBT community has adopted universally is the rainbow, even though this symbol was supposedly created by a God whose violent opposition to that lifestyle and community is quite apparent.

Oh, Paulette

I decided to take a drive home a couple of weekends ago and found myself taking a long drive with my mom talking about her upbringing and what the Bible has meant to her over the years. Growing up, my mom and dad always gave us the option to go to sunday school or opt for staying home, and never gave us the Bible as a source of reading material, educational, recreational, or otherwise. I always found this quite surprising because my mother was raised by her very religious Irish Catholic parents. She was forced to attend every single church function and even had to take three weeks of Catechism every summer to learn about the Bible and become a true "Catholic".

One afternoon while driving in the Beartooths, I started asking Paulette (my wonderful mother) questions about her experience with reading the Bible, and she admitted she had little experience with it because there was one thing that always troubled her. She taught at a very early age that God was a most wrathful, vengeful, and powerful person and would be sure to come out of the heavens and strike her down if she misbehaved as a child, something she always had a problem with. She ended up giving up on organized religion and reading the Bible for any sort of reason because she just couldn't believe the stories told about the man who was supposed to be the Creator of all man kind. She always has been one hell of a practical person.

I found our conversation interesting because I was always under the impression that God was about forgiveness, love, and universal well-being, so I thought maybe the crazy Catholic's just had a different spin on things. So far, my reading of the Bible has shown me that God really is portrayed, more often than not, as an incredibly powerful, hot tempered, and wrathful individual, not one 'compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, [or] abounding in kindness or faithfulness' as it reads in Chapter 34 of Exodus.

God created man in his image, then God tried to teach man how to live a righteous life. So far, he doesn't seem like an incredibly patient teacher, but I guess we will see if he is portrayed differently later in the book.

Ignorance and Immortality

First, I am interested to see the seminar about the role of women in the Bible. I was bothered a bit my Plotz ‘writing them off’ in his account and am anxious to see another spin on women’s roles. Women have to do subtle, deceptive things in the Bible in order to accomplish anything as they are otherwise powerless, right? October 1^st will be interesting for sure…

I am more interested in the role of the serpent than I have ever been in various readings of the Bible. It is coming along slowly, I will admit. The Serpent assumes the role of temptation, desire, and is considered a bad thing in Genesis. Professor Sexson mentioned today in class that the snake was not always thought of as bad or evil…but where and when? This is the first mention of a serpent in the Bible as far as I am aware, and what exists before this reading? What exactly exists before the Bible as a piece of literature?

In Genesis, the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, nor shall you touch it, or you shall die’. Why, then, was this even considered by Adam or Eve? Were Adam and Eve aware of the concept of death or even frightened by it? I am trying to understand if knowledge and fear were instilled in Adam and Eve only after they took a bite from the forbidden fruit, and if this is the case, why would God feel as though Adam and Eve would be frightened of his “threats”. Did they even know how to feel threatened? They didn’t even know how to be shameful until they ate of the forbidden fruit.

If, in fact, Adam and Eve were aware of the threat to their lives on Earth, were they aware what death would bring to them? God should have kept his word and killed both of them. The story would be in complete and utter ruin, wouldn’t it? I am probably confusing the hell out of anyone reading this, but I really am trying to make a point. Why would God tell Adam and Eve they would die if they ate of the fruit, when really, they were not killed? The story would have to have been completely different had God killed Eve when he heard of her tasting the fruit. Where would the story of Bible be, then? I would be interested to see where human beings would end up in all of this if someone were to do a re-write. Would God just create another Eve? Would the new Eve be able to avoid temptation and stay away from the cunning serpent? If the Bible is supposed to be an account of life on Earth as we know it, I would hate to see what human beings would be like if the whole 'Garden of Eden' thing never happened, or happened differently. Oh, ignorance and immortality…

Joseph and his Brothers

POETRY KEEPS THE METAPHORICAL USE OF LANGUAGE ALIVE!
AMEN FOR POETRY!

I wanted to find a poem that had some beautiful metaphors about Joseph and his brothers, but I could only come up with this one. It's definitely not what I was looking for, but gets the point of the story across. If anyone has a better poetic interpretation of the story, you should let me know... I'm sure there's a much better one.

Joseph The Dreamer

by Jody Dickey

Joseph was a shepherd boy
who attended to his Father
sheep and goats
He was Jacob's pride and joy
he loved him more than his other sons.
For this Joseph's Brothers hated him
they wanted to commit an awful sin.
They thought Joseph was a weak lad
nothing more than a dreamer who
had his head in the clouds.
Their hatred for him grew
they wanted to kill him and that was wrong
He was never going to be strong
like they are for their Father
jealousy had blacken their souls.
Joseph was not envious or petty
for anything that his brothers had
he was grateful and loved everyone.
Jacob made Joseph a shepherd's coat
beautifully colored like a rainbow.
Joseph's Brothers taunted him miserably
"That is a robe fit for a King
not a poor shepherd boy attending to goats
with a head full of dreams"
One day when Joseph was in the field
attending to the sheep and goats,
his Brothers tied him up and sold him
to a camel driver to keep.
They took away his beautiful coat
and killed one of the sheep
then they drained the blood
on the coat staining the rainbow
They hurried to tell Jacob that Joseph
had been killed by a wild beast
that carried his body off in the woods.
While their Father mourned Joseph's death
they celebrated and feast
The camel driver needed money
so he sold Joseph to a man named Potiphar.
Many years had passed, but Jacob kept the coat
that was stained and never stop caring
Times were getting hard, the land became barren
the people and the animals were starving.
There was no food for Jacob family to eat
hearing there was grain in Egypt
He sent ten of his sons to buy the grain.
During these years Joseph became
the governor of the land.
Selling grain to the people was his duty
seeing his Brothers he pretended
he was a stranger, and in an angry voice.
He accused them of being spies,
They bowed down to him
Pleading "we are honest, we would not lie"
Then Joseph said, "I am your Brother
is Father still living"?
The Brother were so scared for surely
he would sentence them to death.
But Joseph gave each a hug told them
they were forgiven
Not to be angry with their selves
for what they had done.
It was God's will to send him ahead
so he could save their lives.
Joseph the dreamer sent them home
to bring back their father so they all
Could live in a better land.
He would teach his Brothers
how to be good sons
Joseph knew if he was forgiving and shared
he was the stronger better man.

Abstinence

The Bible has been shocking to read this semester in many ways, but most shocking have been the tales of sexual escapades in the Bible. Reading David Plotz has helped me wade through the abyss of the Bible's many intricacies and also urged me to stay good humored about it, but I sometimes I just don't want to go on reading. Sometimes the Bible ends up being exactly the opposite of everything I thought it would be.

Until Genesis 39...

In this chapter, Joseph is confronted by a slave mistress who asks him repeatedly to 'lie with her'. Any other character in the Bible thus far would have done just that, but Joseph repeatedly rejects the woman. Even when the woman threatens to frame Joseph for rape, he refuses. Joseph stands as an unmarried, young adult male, and still is able to resist the temptation of a slave woman. I can't say the same for other characters; even their blood relation to another person won't stop them from having 'relations'. Joseph has breathed new life into the Bible for me. Plotz' take on the whole thing is quite amusing:

'Josephs willpower, in other words, is rooted in his faith and God's love. So far Genesis has described straight rape, attempted gay rape, father-daughter incest, coitus interruptus with a dead brother's wife, sex with one's own wife, sex with the wrong wife, sex with a concubine, sex with dad's concubine, and sex with a prostitute who is also a daughter-in-law. In any situation in which sex is available, men seize it. What's remarkable about Joseph is that he is the first person to resist sexual temptation. He's the best - or perhaps only - biblical argument for abstinence-based sex education' (28).

Amen.

Repetative Parallelism

REPETATIVE PARALLELISM. The number 1 reason why I have always abhorred reading the Bible. Now I can finally give it a name that makes sense! Whenever I pick up the Bible, I find myself complaining outwardly, but most often inwardly, that 'the damn thing just repeats itself, over and over and over'. I have never had patience as far as this is concerned. NEVER. This is a more proper definition:

Repetative Parallelism - Commonly used in Hebrew poetry, a technique in which one term is balanced/repeated by another (typically in the next verse)

I'm glad I can finally put a definition to the idea.

I love you, David Plotz

I am becoming irritable with the postman; I should be reading Northrop Frye but it has not been delivered to my patiently waiting hands just yet. I have read up to the Book of Deuteronomy according to Plotz and am, quite frankly, relieved that we have this reading material to go along with the actual Bible I am supposed to read. I am trying to read it. Mostly I have been looking at the cover of my Harper Collins Study Bible and thinking, "Do I really want to start reading this again"? I must, I must, I must...

The biggest challenge for me is going to be separating the Bible from all the religious elements it is attached to. We are supposed to be reading the Bible as a piece of literature separate from the mark it has been given by those around the world who consider themselves 'of the faith'. Religion has always been an area of supreme aggravation for me, and where better to direct that aggravation than at the Bible? In the past, it has always been fun to bring up the Bible in a heated debate with someone 'of the faith' and then point out the many ways in which their religion contradicts the Bible and everything it stands for. After reading a bit of the Bible and some of what David Plotz has to say about it, I think I have been very wrong in my arguments.

I thought the Bible was filled with stories of the good and the kind, forgiveness and acceptance, etc., etc., etc. Boy, I think I just may have been wrong. This quotation from David Plotz stuck out in my mind:
'The Garden of Eden, David and Goliath, Noah's Ark, sure. But the founding fathers of Israel lying, breaching a contract, encouraging pagans to convert to Judaism only in order to cripple them for slaughter, massacring defenseless innocents, enslaving women and children, pillaging and profiteering, and then justifying it all with an appeal to their sister's defiled honor? Not on the syllabus'. (2)
Remind me again why the Bible as a piece of literature has been given the nickname 'The Good Book'? I am certain this does not make any sense right now...

Plotz gives a very specific introduction with helpful hints on how to read his book. To me, 'The Good Book' itself is a helpful hint to reading the Bible and maintaining a sense of humor along the way. I truly believe there will be days when the Bible will lay on my bookshelf, absolutely untouched; other days I will probably be throwing it at the wall. I am not very impressed with my 'oh-so-positive' attitude about the Bible. Like Professor Sexson said, that's my problem. I need an attitude adjustment.

I Have Tried This Before

I am excited to be participating in another Biblical Foundations of Literature class (kind of). Sadly, this is my second attempt at completing the course as the first was not so successful. I was enrolled in this class with Gretchen Minton and dropped the course out of sheer lack of interest. My professor at the time admitted she loved Biblical Literature almost as much as she loved Shakespeare (and that's quite a lot). I thought her enthusiasm for the class would give me enough encouragement to be excited about Biblical Literature and really open myself up to the experience. It didn't. Every time I would attempt to read the Bible, I would find myself bored to tears and literally falling asleep. I don't care who is selling whose goats to whom, a topic that took up much of my first reading of the Good Book.

My second attempt is looking a bit more promising. I know Michael Sexson does not exactly have high hopes of any of us reading the Bible in its entirety which gives me such a pleasant sense of relief. I know I will not be one of the students to read the entire thing by the end of the semester, but I am going to give it an honest effort. David Plotz looks like he may have given his spin with the Bible a little comic relief in Good Book, so I'm excited to use this as an aid for my actual reading of the real thing. I have started neither but intend to in the next couple of days. I guess we'll see!