Exodus for me was very entertaining but also very different from what I had learned from going to church all my life. Growing up I had heard all these great stories about Moses showing up the Egyptians and leading the Israelites victoriously out of Egypt. But in all reality Aaron did most of the work. I mean just imagine this, so God comes down and speaks to Moses, and tells him how to lead the Israelites out of Egypt. But Moses claims that he doesn't speak well and that nobody will believe him. So God instead of telling him to just man up and do it says, ok we'll just use your brother Aaron to say what needs to be said. Next Moses and Aaron proceed to tell Pharaoh to "let my people go". Here is where the problem comes in. Let's say that you are Pharaoh and this guy comes up to you and says, "Hi I'm Aaron. So my God, who isn't your God, told Moses here to tell me to tell you that you need to let our people go." If I were Pharaoh I wouldn't believe that either, I mean he thought he was just calling their bluff. Unfortunately for him it was the wrong choice. We all know that Moses and Aaron despite having little proof of what they claimed would be backed up by God. Thus the Egyptians were ravaged by the plagues.
The second half of Exodus (from 20-40) was just as interesting if not more so than the first half. The part that really intrigued me was the rules for the making of the Ark of the Covenant and the tabernacle. My question is why are there so many regulations as far as on how it should be made and what should be done? What are the purposes for making sure that the curtain is the exact right length? I know that this part was probably written by the Priestly author, but still, how do the priests of the time come up with such regulations? And why are they relevant?
Also it's been a while since I read Exodus so I don't really remember all the stuff I wanted to talk about, and that's why this post is so short. In the future maybe I'll start blogging right after I read these things.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
The Age of Men vs. The Age of Chaos
In Dr. Sexson's lecture today on the different ages of language and how it has been used in mythology and storytelling, he mentioned how we are in the Age of Men (demotic language). Where we are all scientific minded and we talk and think in the way in which we need proof of what we experience and see. He also eluded to the fact that we may be slipping into this new Age of Chaos which would break down language as we use it and start us back at the beginning which is the Age of Gods. Now whether Dr. Sexson intentionally or unintentionally meant to say that we are coming full circle and starting back at the beginning, I can't be entirely sure. I would like to point out however, that I don't think it can be entirely possible for us to come full circle in the way that Dr. Sexson eluded to in his lecture. I have two reasons for this belief. First is in the way in which we have been able to record our information ever since the invention of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg in 1440, which revolutionized the way in which the production of writings were distributed, whether or not it was before this Age of Men. Also in the last couple of centuries the advancements made in the speed in which information can be distributed through the various channels. The most influential and new channel being the internet, where anybody can look up almost anything they wanted within a matter of seconds. I believe that this availability of these writings to the masses allows for almost anybody with a sound mind to be able to become well versed in the jargon and scientific mindedness that has controlled how we use language ever since the Renaissance. For this reason, as long as people still know how to read and speak the language, I don't think we can leave the Age of Men unless our whole information system were destroyed, and anybody who knew how to set it up again were wiped out by some worldwide cataclysm (Apocalypse anybody?).
Secondly I don't think we can leave the Age of Men, because of the world of Academia that has been set up in most countries. The University system that many countries use to teach younger generations, is a way for the scientific, information, and skill minded people to transfer the knowledge of one area into another person's head. Then after that these people who now know the skills of a certain area can then start to ask questions and perform the scientific method in order to prove and advance their area of interest. With this set up I believe that the way we use language as an entire culture cannot completely slip into the Age of Chaos, without again some sort of God sent Apocalypse that brought the whole of civilization as we know it back to what we were and destroyed all the people who used language in the demotic style.
I don't disagree that much of the populous does use language in a way that has been broken down as if we were in this Age of Chaos, as was displayed very humorously by Dr. Sexson in class today. My point though is that the people who use this language are the people who don't seek out the higher levels of writing and use of language that puts us in the Age of Men. One example of this is in the slums or projects of many overpopulated cities, where peoples' lives consist of nothing that would make them understand the different uses of language as we know it, and where the English language has become degraded in a way that would put that populous in the Age of Chaos. Therefore, in my opinion, we seem to have this split of people who use language in different ways. On one side we have this academic and scientific world where everything is ordered, despite the subjectivity of language, and on another side where there is a sense of chaos in language that theoretically, through Dr. Sexson's presentation of Giambattista Vico's ideas of the progression of language, could eventually lead back to the Age of Gods. The question then becomes can this separation continue to exist, and can it continue to progress in Vico's circle of language and myth? Can the constant advancement of science destroy and bring down our poetic use of words, and destroy this progression which Dr. Sexson has brought to our knowledge?
I honestly don't know. And if the rest of the class is confused by my argument, don't worry, because I am too. All this is just what I began to think about after Dr. Sexson's lecture today. Also, if somebody thinks I left something out or would like to add or expound upon this, please reply. I realize that I may have left something out, and that I almost completely failed to relate this to the Bible. And if anybody thinks this is wrong please tell me, because I would love to find out where I went wrong, and I'm not entirely sure that I have completely grasped the subject that I'm talking about anyways. If you feel the need, please prove me wrong and point me in the right direction. Ok then, enough rambling. Bye now.
Secondly I don't think we can leave the Age of Men, because of the world of Academia that has been set up in most countries. The University system that many countries use to teach younger generations, is a way for the scientific, information, and skill minded people to transfer the knowledge of one area into another person's head. Then after that these people who now know the skills of a certain area can then start to ask questions and perform the scientific method in order to prove and advance their area of interest. With this set up I believe that the way we use language as an entire culture cannot completely slip into the Age of Chaos, without again some sort of God sent Apocalypse that brought the whole of civilization as we know it back to what we were and destroyed all the people who used language in the demotic style.
I don't disagree that much of the populous does use language in a way that has been broken down as if we were in this Age of Chaos, as was displayed very humorously by Dr. Sexson in class today. My point though is that the people who use this language are the people who don't seek out the higher levels of writing and use of language that puts us in the Age of Men. One example of this is in the slums or projects of many overpopulated cities, where peoples' lives consist of nothing that would make them understand the different uses of language as we know it, and where the English language has become degraded in a way that would put that populous in the Age of Chaos. Therefore, in my opinion, we seem to have this split of people who use language in different ways. On one side we have this academic and scientific world where everything is ordered, despite the subjectivity of language, and on another side where there is a sense of chaos in language that theoretically, through Dr. Sexson's presentation of Giambattista Vico's ideas of the progression of language, could eventually lead back to the Age of Gods. The question then becomes can this separation continue to exist, and can it continue to progress in Vico's circle of language and myth? Can the constant advancement of science destroy and bring down our poetic use of words, and destroy this progression which Dr. Sexson has brought to our knowledge?
I honestly don't know. And if the rest of the class is confused by my argument, don't worry, because I am too. All this is just what I began to think about after Dr. Sexson's lecture today. Also, if somebody thinks I left something out or would like to add or expound upon this, please reply. I realize that I may have left something out, and that I almost completely failed to relate this to the Bible. And if anybody thinks this is wrong please tell me, because I would love to find out where I went wrong, and I'm not entirely sure that I have completely grasped the subject that I'm talking about anyways. If you feel the need, please prove me wrong and point me in the right direction. Ok then, enough rambling. Bye now.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Been a Bit Lazy and My Thoughts on Genesis
So I haven't particularly been participating in this whole blogging thing lately (mainly because of the fact that I lost my internet connection at home), but at the same time I have been reading much of the bible (almost through with Exodus). Hopefully I can be a little more engaged in this part of the class for the rest of the semester. I know I'm a little late to it but this post is for my thoughts on Genesis.
As far as the whole P and J thing goes I can't really tell on my own which parts are which author, the only real way for me to be sure is in the description beneath the chapters in which it gives a running commentary on the parts that are believed to be either P, J, and occasionally the E author. Without that commentary I might be lost as far as P and J, besides the fact that it is kind of noticeable how some of the parts of Genesis has much more narrative and others have more genealogies.
After reading Genesis completely through (for the first time in my life) I found some of it to be surprisingly humorous. Many of the stories have a quality that just makes me want to laugh sometimes. The most humorous of all are the Jacob stories, because he often times plays the trickster (which is seen in many of the ancient religions throughout the world). Jacob steals Esau birhthright in 25:29 and then his blessing in 27 and all because God and his mother just want him to be the right person for the inheritance and continuance of the Israelites.
Now I know that much of Genesis is not humorous at all, but for me it is quite interesting how the writers (whoever they are) were able to set up this inheritance for the people who were probably worshiping this God in a way that told a narrative story and gave lessons at the same time. While it may not be recognizable to us because we're reading it in the English language and not the Hebrew, many of the things that go on in Genesis have this teaching of a lesson quality and many times word play (only in the Hebrew) that allows for a narrative to be told and lessons given. One example of the Hebrew having more context is in 38:1-11, it immediately starts out with Judah, one of Joseph's brother, taking a Canaanite woman as a wife, and then them preceding to have two sons, Er and Onan, who were killed because they were "wicked in the sight of the Lord." This to me was absolutely apalling, and totally unjust, but then after reading the description beneath it became clear that Er was killed because his name means "wicked"(or something like it) in Hebrew and Onan was killed because he wouldn't perform his duties as a husband. While this still doesn't explain the justness in their deaths, it does explain that in Hebrew Er meant "wicked", which while reading an English translation that part would never have come through without the commentary below in our study Bibles. Er being killed was totally unexplainable until it was found out that his name meant "wicked". This whole play on words in the Hebrew language just isn't noticeable in the English language, and much of Genesis has these things which add to the story and explanation of why things happened the way they did. While these aren't necessarily the most important part to the narrative of Genesis I found it fascinating how the authors (in Hebrew) played with some of the words in order to make points or just make something more relevant.
All in all, Genesis was a fun read and I look forward to eventually getting around to reading everybody else's blogs on Genesis.
As far as the whole P and J thing goes I can't really tell on my own which parts are which author, the only real way for me to be sure is in the description beneath the chapters in which it gives a running commentary on the parts that are believed to be either P, J, and occasionally the E author. Without that commentary I might be lost as far as P and J, besides the fact that it is kind of noticeable how some of the parts of Genesis has much more narrative and others have more genealogies.
After reading Genesis completely through (for the first time in my life) I found some of it to be surprisingly humorous. Many of the stories have a quality that just makes me want to laugh sometimes. The most humorous of all are the Jacob stories, because he often times plays the trickster (which is seen in many of the ancient religions throughout the world). Jacob steals Esau birhthright in 25:29 and then his blessing in 27 and all because God and his mother just want him to be the right person for the inheritance and continuance of the Israelites.
Now I know that much of Genesis is not humorous at all, but for me it is quite interesting how the writers (whoever they are) were able to set up this inheritance for the people who were probably worshiping this God in a way that told a narrative story and gave lessons at the same time. While it may not be recognizable to us because we're reading it in the English language and not the Hebrew, many of the things that go on in Genesis have this teaching of a lesson quality and many times word play (only in the Hebrew) that allows for a narrative to be told and lessons given. One example of the Hebrew having more context is in 38:1-11, it immediately starts out with Judah, one of Joseph's brother, taking a Canaanite woman as a wife, and then them preceding to have two sons, Er and Onan, who were killed because they were "wicked in the sight of the Lord." This to me was absolutely apalling, and totally unjust, but then after reading the description beneath it became clear that Er was killed because his name means "wicked"(or something like it) in Hebrew and Onan was killed because he wouldn't perform his duties as a husband. While this still doesn't explain the justness in their deaths, it does explain that in Hebrew Er meant "wicked", which while reading an English translation that part would never have come through without the commentary below in our study Bibles. Er being killed was totally unexplainable until it was found out that his name meant "wicked". This whole play on words in the Hebrew language just isn't noticeable in the English language, and much of Genesis has these things which add to the story and explanation of why things happened the way they did. While these aren't necessarily the most important part to the narrative of Genesis I found it fascinating how the authors (in Hebrew) played with some of the words in order to make points or just make something more relevant.
All in all, Genesis was a fun read and I look forward to eventually getting around to reading everybody else's blogs on Genesis.
Friday, September 4, 2009
In Memorium to my Great Uncle, Father Robert West
Before I begin putting my thoughts about the Bible down (because I'm actually almost all the way through Genesis), I would like to first put into perspective and pay my respects to a man who inspired me who recently passed away. My great uncle Robert West was the first born child of eight other boys and one girl in the family. He was born in the early 1910's on a homestead outside of Outlook Mt. This was a time and place of hardship for many, and yet even through that hardship he found a way to want to become a priest of the Roman Catholic faith, and is one of the reasons I still go back to that church today. While I do not know his entire story or how he came to be the person that I knew, I do know what he represented, and how he affected my life.
Throughout my great 20 years of life there were 2 Father Robert's that I knew and understood. The first was what I had heard through the stories of my other family members, and the second was the one that I knew in his later years after he developed Alzheimer's. To begin with I will start with my family's account of Father Robert. Apparently back in the day my extended family (of which there is a lot of), despite their living very far apart would manage to have a family reunion every summer. The extended family of which I would later become a part of would all flock back to the tiny town of Outlook Montana to spend time telling stories, singing songs, and generally reveling in the comfort of family, many times around a campfire. Now often times when you think of Roman Catholic priests you think of men stuck at the church praying all the time and not really active members of the community. While that generalization is maybe an over-exaggeration of what most people really think of pastors and priests, it does display some truth of what many people think. If anything though, Father Robert was almost the exact opposite of that very generalization. He was, for lack of better words, the life of the party. Father Robert was the one who would tell the best stories or sing the loudest Irish drinking songs. I have one memory of him from when I was very young and I was sitting on his lap. This was a similar family gathering, and all I can remember is that stories were being told, and everybody just seemed to be happy. Now I know that that sounds very mushy gushy familyish stuff, but in reality it's one of those moments that just stuck with me and truly inspires me to not only keep my sense of family about me but also to attempt to spread that sense of family to the people I surround myself with.
The second Father Robert that I knew was the one deep into the disease of Alzheimer's. Many people when they get Alzheimer's become scared and withdrawn. They forget who they are and what used to be important to them. They truly become a different person. About five years ago me, my dad, sister and grandma all took a trip to Richardton North Dakota, where Father Robert was living at the Abbey there. We made the trip because we knew that he was getting worse and worse every year and that we wouldn't have him for much longer. This was the point where I truly came to admire my great uncle, because before I had just kind of thought of him as another part of my very large family. When we went to see him I kind of expected to see an old man who was scared and confused because of his Alzheimer's, but instead we saw a lively old man who was delighted to see us and absolutely loved the fact that we were there. Even though he couldn't remember me and my sister's names, he still smiled at us and had huge hugs for us. Because it wasn't about knowing who we were or that we were family, it was about the fact that we were young and still had a lot to look forward to. In some way I believe that despite his Alzheimer's he was still able to take from a lifetime of teaching and representing happiness, and recognizing something wonderful such as two young teenagers, and be able have happiness in the fact that he could still get to observe and influence such young life. If you saw a picture of him, there was no way to know that he was the type of man who's good mood and happiness in life was absolutely infectious. All it would take though was a few minute's of his time for him to truly rub off a lifetime of happiness.
Now whether or not Father Robert drew this type of attitude from the fact that he was a part of the priesthood or not, I do not know. But what I do know is that in some way the Bible had to be some sort of contributor. Whether it was directly or indirectly doesn't matter for through him and others I learned a way of life that is happiness, and what more can you ask for.
On a side note, I would like to say that I know this story represents to a certain extent, my beliefs about religion and the Bible, and I would like to apologize to Dr. Sexson who explicitly asked us to keep this class and this blog academic. This blog post was more for me to remember my great uncle, whose funeral I was not able to make it to.
Throughout my great 20 years of life there were 2 Father Robert's that I knew and understood. The first was what I had heard through the stories of my other family members, and the second was the one that I knew in his later years after he developed Alzheimer's. To begin with I will start with my family's account of Father Robert. Apparently back in the day my extended family (of which there is a lot of), despite their living very far apart would manage to have a family reunion every summer. The extended family of which I would later become a part of would all flock back to the tiny town of Outlook Montana to spend time telling stories, singing songs, and generally reveling in the comfort of family, many times around a campfire. Now often times when you think of Roman Catholic priests you think of men stuck at the church praying all the time and not really active members of the community. While that generalization is maybe an over-exaggeration of what most people really think of pastors and priests, it does display some truth of what many people think. If anything though, Father Robert was almost the exact opposite of that very generalization. He was, for lack of better words, the life of the party. Father Robert was the one who would tell the best stories or sing the loudest Irish drinking songs. I have one memory of him from when I was very young and I was sitting on his lap. This was a similar family gathering, and all I can remember is that stories were being told, and everybody just seemed to be happy. Now I know that that sounds very mushy gushy familyish stuff, but in reality it's one of those moments that just stuck with me and truly inspires me to not only keep my sense of family about me but also to attempt to spread that sense of family to the people I surround myself with.
The second Father Robert that I knew was the one deep into the disease of Alzheimer's. Many people when they get Alzheimer's become scared and withdrawn. They forget who they are and what used to be important to them. They truly become a different person. About five years ago me, my dad, sister and grandma all took a trip to Richardton North Dakota, where Father Robert was living at the Abbey there. We made the trip because we knew that he was getting worse and worse every year and that we wouldn't have him for much longer. This was the point where I truly came to admire my great uncle, because before I had just kind of thought of him as another part of my very large family. When we went to see him I kind of expected to see an old man who was scared and confused because of his Alzheimer's, but instead we saw a lively old man who was delighted to see us and absolutely loved the fact that we were there. Even though he couldn't remember me and my sister's names, he still smiled at us and had huge hugs for us. Because it wasn't about knowing who we were or that we were family, it was about the fact that we were young and still had a lot to look forward to. In some way I believe that despite his Alzheimer's he was still able to take from a lifetime of teaching and representing happiness, and recognizing something wonderful such as two young teenagers, and be able have happiness in the fact that he could still get to observe and influence such young life. If you saw a picture of him, there was no way to know that he was the type of man who's good mood and happiness in life was absolutely infectious. All it would take though was a few minute's of his time for him to truly rub off a lifetime of happiness.
Now whether or not Father Robert drew this type of attitude from the fact that he was a part of the priesthood or not, I do not know. But what I do know is that in some way the Bible had to be some sort of contributor. Whether it was directly or indirectly doesn't matter for through him and others I learned a way of life that is happiness, and what more can you ask for.
On a side note, I would like to say that I know this story represents to a certain extent, my beliefs about religion and the Bible, and I would like to apologize to Dr. Sexson who explicitly asked us to keep this class and this blog academic. This blog post was more for me to remember my great uncle, whose funeral I was not able to make it to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
