An all knowing God, lover of concord
When it comes to family values, you'll have to excuse me if I get a bit confused when reading Genesis:
Abram makes his wife lie for him, by telling the Egyptians that she is his sister. But at least it was half-true, since she was his half-sister. Such incestuous marriages are condemned elsewhere in the Bible, but God makes an exception for Abram and Sarai. (See Gen.17:15-16 where God blesses their marriage.) 12:13I honestly am not trying to rubbish anything, I am just sometimes genuinely confused when I read the Bible. Have you read the book of Job? May God forgive me for questioning but I'm glad to say that I'm not the only person, man or woman, to feel this way.
Sarai is the first of a long line of barren women who were desperate for children. (In the Bible, it is the women who are barren, never the men.) She sends Abram into her handmaid, Hagar, so that she can "obtain children by her." Abram gladly complies. 16:1-4
Hagar conceives, making Sarai jealous. Abram tells Sarai to do to Hagar whatever she wants. "And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled." 16:6
Lot refuses to give up his angels to the perverted mob, offering his two "virgin daughters" instead. He tells the bunch of angel rapers to "do unto them [his daughters] as is good in your eyes." This is the same man that is called "just" and "righteous" in 2 Peter 2:7-8. 19:8
God kills everyone (men, women, children, infants, newborns) in Sodom and Gomorrah by raining "fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven." Well, almost everyone -- he spares the "just and righteous" Lot and his family.19:24
Lot's nameless wife looks back, and God turns her into a pillar of salt. 19:26
Lot and his daughters camp out in a cave for a while. The daughters get their "just and righteous" father drunk, and have sexual intercourse with him, and each conceives and bears a son (wouldn't you know it!). Just another wholesome family values Bible story. 19:30-38
Honest Abe does the same "she's my sister" routine again, for the same cowardly reason. And once again, the king just couldn't resist Sarah -- even though by now she is over 90 years old. (See Gen.12:13-20 for the first, nearly identical, episode.) 20:2
God gets angry with king Abimelech, though the king hasn't even touched Sarah. He says to the king, "Behold, thou art but a dead man," and threatens to kill him and all of his people. To compensate for the crime he never committed, Abimelech gives Abraham sheep, oxen, slaves, silver, and land. Finally, after Abraham "prayed unto God," God lifts his punishment to Abimelech, "for the Lord had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah." 20:3-18
God "closed all the wombs" because Abimelech believed Abe's lie. 20:18
Abraham married his sister, and God blessed their marriage (17:15-16). 20:12
Sarah, after giving birth to Isaac, gets angry again at Hagar (Gen.16:5-6) and tells Abraham to 'cast out this bondwoman and her son." God commands Abraham to "hearken unto her voice." So Abraham abandons Hagar and Ishmael, casting them out into the wilderness to die. 21:10-14
God orders Abraham to kill Isaac as a burnt offering. Abraham shows his love for God by his willingness to murder his son. But finally, just before Isaac's throat is slit, God provides a goat to kill instead. 22:2-13
Abraham shows his willingness to kill his son for God. Only an evil God would ask a father to do that; only a bad father would be willing to do it. 22:10
Abraham had several concubines. 25:6
Isaac loved Esau because Esau was a hunter and Isaac loved venison. Rebekah loved Jacob, but God hated Esau (see Rom.9:13). No reason is given for why one son is loved while the other is hated. But since God chose to act this way, it must have been as an example for parents to follow. Have you decided which of your children to hate? 25:28
posted by Philipa at 7:54 AM
3 Comments:
Though not directly related to family values, my favourite biblical horror story is at the end of 2 Kings 2. One of my role-models, now a liberal (his sort are often called "post-evangelicals"), described reading it as the moment he knew the bible wasn't divinely inspired or literally true.
"[Elisha] went up from there to Bethel; and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, 'go away, baldhead! Go away, baldhead!' When he turned round and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. From there he went on to Mount Carmel, and then returned to Samaria." - 2 Kings 2:23-25 (NRSV)
When seeking family values passages, I always find myself reading about Soloman, who of course had over 1000 wives, 700 of them royal and 300 of them concubines. Of course it was Jesus who said "For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household." - Matthew 10:34-36
Muhammed (PBUH) of course had 4 wives, one of whom was his 6 year old niece (though they are reputed not to have consumated the marriage until she was 9).
To be honest, I don't think religion is generally the best place to get 'good' family values... One must also not forget that 'adultery' is something only women can do. Men can't commit adultery, it's just not a crime for them. Women on the other hand are stoned for it (at least in the OT and Islam, Jesus did the whole "let he who is without sin throw the first stone" thing, although it was probably added later).
But your example of Abraham and Sarah is a good one. Also good in Genesis is Jacob and the twelve tribes of Israel, all 12 of whom come from Jacob and four women. First he accidentally marries and sleeps with the wrong woman (Leah), so he makes up for it by marrying the right one (Rachel) as well. But when he has many sons by Leah (while still married to Rachel of course), Rachel decides to give him her maid, Bilhah. He has a couple of sons with her, but then Leah gets jealous, and so gives him her maid, Zilpah. After all this, Rachel wants some Mandrakes, so allows Leah to sleep with Jacob again for some Mandrakes. Leah has another couple of sons for Jacob, at which point God remembers Rachel and 'opens her womb'. So the Rachel also gives him a son.
"Men can't commit adultery, it's just not a crime for them. Women on the other hand are stoned for it" - like I commented in another thread, this stuff explains a lot about our culture and inherited attitudes.
I think it helps to regard the Bible as a collection of parables. Holy or inspired ones if you like, but still parables.
I mean, from a purely secular standpoint we're talking about 2,000-year-old-plus Aramaic folktales, expounded, expanded, bent to particular political purposes (and much easier that was when the population was illiterate!) and finally written down as a collection probably about 500 AD (or CE, or whichever).
Then it got translated repeatedly until King James got tired of everyone having different versions and added his own.
Even assuming the best intentions on the part of the translators, we could assume a few errors to have crept in. Look around and see what the passage "Suffer not a witch to live" may originally have meant (you won't get any agreement on the web. The Wicca folks say one thing, the Fundies another, though you might appreciate this: http://etext.virginia.edu/journals/EH/EH36/slattery1.html).
From the divinely-inspired point of view, especially if you're naive enough to believe that every single word came through every single translation intact, you either have to believe that interpretation is not merely a good idea but required by God as part of His purpose (what's all that about "hearts of understanding" and all?), or you must resign yourself to a holy scripture that doesn't merely make no sense (Dianetics is more entertaining if that's what you're after) but actually contradicts itself--even if you accept that an unchanging God did an about-face on his "believe in me or die" attitude between choosing the Jews as his people and deciding that in fact a schism needed to be created and sending his son to acheive it.
Fundamentalists are fond of claiming authority from "a whole Bible, not a Bible full of holes"--a way of saying "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts". From the very beginning, anyone who says he or she believes literally and follows the Bible exactly is at best misguided, merely in the contradictions between the Old and New Testaments.
Interpretationalists have an easier time. Of course you also risk a watering-down of faith over time, since people who interpret must also be able and open to question their sacred scrolls. One of the ironic reasons why so many righteous people are drawn so a-hem fundamentally into these all-or-nothing churches is the comfort of blind certainty, the need to stop using your brain and relax.
But you aren't the only confused soul. The Bible specifically says (though I can't find the quote) that it shouldn't be too easy to read.
Faith requires belief. Honest belief requires inquiry and scholarship. You have the impetus for both. In such flames is true faith forged.
For my part, I must rush home and tell my wife that I cannot be held guilty for adultery. That'll make her day!
Humour here for literal interpretationalists:http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/archives/001337.html
Post a Comment
<< Home