The Final Post

For my last blog post, I figured I would address the question that has plagued me and will continue to plague me for, in all likelihood, the rest of my life.

Why do the good, the pure, and the innocent suffer? Why do, in the words of Gandalf the Grey, do "many live that deserve death, and some die that deserve life"?

The conclusion that I am forced to draw, is that of the book of Ecclesiastes. We are dust, and what we do is meaningless--we have only the illusion of free will; in truth, we are at the mercy of an absurd and arbitrary universe (or God). Good people have terrible things happen to them, things that they have no control over--whether or not they deserve it or not.

I am confronted with this horror, these horrors.

The horror that my mother has been struck with a mental disease since she was a teenager.

The horror of the bright young man I knew, who felt the need to take his own life.

The horror of thousands of slaughtered children, of good women and men who are taken to the brink of depraved madness for nothing but the whims of power-hungry and hateful fools.

The suffering of humanity, and the ones we love is enough to break the back of Hercules--and yet, I am happy. Why?

Because I choose to suffer, and bear my sufferings. I do not ask for others to appreciate or bear my suffering, nor do I ask for theirs. It is our task, I believe, to shoulder the world we are given, to struggle, to fight back against the darkness, to, as Dylan Thomas penned "rage, rage, against the dying of the light". We must leave the world better than we found it, even if it all falls into meaninglessness. We cannot suffer the machinations of evil humans, the precious time we have cannot be wasted idly allowing the things we do have control over go unquestioned.

I recently read Brave New World again for the 20,000th time. The world of the novel, full of happy, blissfully unaware infant-humans, seems to be one that it is difficult to argue against. Why reject a world without suffering, without pain, disease and unhappiness?

There is one simple thing. Choice. And I'm not talking about the silly "freedom" that is so commonly lauded about in action movies. "Freedom" can be taken away. The only freedom that is truly unalienable, truly untouchable, is the freedom of the human mind to choose how to face given circumstances. Viktor Frankl speaks about this in his book Man's Search For Meaning. He describes Jews in concentration camps that were deprived of everything--except the attitude that they could approach their death. Brave New World offers a world in which that choice has been taken away--the power to make the choice to ignore a preconditioned response is lost.

But back to suffering. Choice is the one weapon we have against the absurdity and evident cruelty of the universe, and it is saddening how often people forget it.

With that, some closure from Mr. Anderson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YC7TMi0l68

Notes for 12/8/09

• Rian talked about her personal experience with the Bible. She grew up in a small town, and has three big encounters where others tried to tell her about the Bible. She is more open to the book now.
• Amanda Leichtnam spoke about sexual content in the Bible. She didn't finish the whole thing, but became very interested and surprised at how prevalent sexuality is in the book as metaphor, and for the sake of a good story.
• Lisette's favorite Psalm, 23, caused her to write a paper about how Dr. Sexson is the shepard, and we are the sheep. She also mentioned the camp she worked at over the summer.
• Fletcher discussed the parallels between the Biblical Jacob and the Jacob of The Slave.
• Chris revised the idea of the U-shaped curve, and made it more of a tangent function, and related the character of Jacob in The Slave to this.
• Rachel talked about how The Slave is a retelling of Joseph Campbell's monomyth. The call to adventure, etc. Dr. Sexson once again told us to read The Hero With a Thousand Faces.
• Tai addressed the question of where mythology lurks in our everyday lives. He spoke about In Cold Blood, and mentioned New Journalism.
• Amanda Jones talked about suffering in the Bible, suffering in The Slave, and suffering in the blogs, particularly Natalie's and Lisette's. Suffering is unavoidable, but there can be no doubt in our faith, no giving up, or we are lost.
• Eric Hjelvik had some questions about what he could ask God. Is Jacob a slave? Yes. Am I a slave? Yes, but he is willingly a slave, by his own choosing. How is Jacob able to handle this? Through faith.
• Dr. Sexson mentioned Soren Kierkegaard and his book Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing.
• Tristan talked about how originally he was going to talk about the Rastafarian religion, but changed his mind, and chose to talk about how the Bible relates to us through song and story.
• Derek found himself similar to William Blake in that he was fascinated with Job. The book is the first time the reader see "Satan", and Job is one of the first characters to have done nothing wrong.
• Rio wrote a novella, because he hates lists, about his journey and need to go out and explore the Bible.
• Jaime talked about The Slave and the Bible, and introduced the concept of soul recycling, how we go from blind faith, to questioning faith, to teaching faith.
• Alicia talked about the story of Esther, and compared the character to Atticus Finch (in To Kill a Mockingbird), Randle McMurphy (in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest), Esmerelda (in The Hunchback of Notre Dame), and Sarah (in The Slave).
• Jessi spoke about Biblical "heroes" and "villains". Her preacher talked about selective salvation, God chooses those he likes, and the other is automatically the villain.
  

Notes for 12/3/09

Sorry about being a little late with the notes. Here we go (I didn't want to take someone out of context, so my descriptions might be a little short):

• Karen spoke about the Slave, and how Jacob was a "slave" to God
• Ashley compared the Bible to Firefly, and how faith isn't supposed to make sense.
• Thomas talked about how the Bible changed the way he understood stories.
• Jenna talked about how actually reading the Bible has clarified many things for her (she'd spent a long time avoiding it) and how it's a good idea to read it.
• Chris discussed the characters of Jacob and Wanda, and how he didn't like Wanda's forced transformation into Sarah.
• Craig was very much intrigued with the lines in Ecclesiastes "vanity of vanities, all is vanity", and wrote an entire paper about the self.
• Alex was very interested in how the Bible has created a "metaphorical identity" for many cultures.
• Shelby used excellent illustrations to talk about the mental apocalypse, and the varying interpretations of the Bible.
• Melissa talked about the role of women in the Bible, as movers and pushers, and more than just Plotz's "prostitutes".
• Craig talked about the inspirational Book of Revelation, and used Patton Oswalt.
• Katie spoke about interpreting the Bible for use in our lives, and a little bit of extra biblical stuff too.
• Kathryn was struggling with the idea of the wrathful God, and trying to work out (theodicy) why he does the things he does.

My Term Paper

Here is my term paper, for your reading pleasure (or displeasure):

The Bible: An Attack on Expectation, and Position

Narrative. Chronicle. Tale. Account. These words are synonymous with a word—a concept—that has been around for a very long time, and is of much interest—story. Understanding of this word, and the implications and power that it has, is the fundamental goal of many who study the history of the written word and its intricacies. Some commit their entire lives to the interpretation and contextualizing of literature within themselves, and the much larger human experience.

Northrop Frye states in The Great Code that, “I was attracted to the Bible, not because I thought it reinforced any “position” of mine, but because it suggested a way of getting past some of the limitations inherent in all positions.” (xvi) I believed I had a pretty good “position” in the understanding and use of stories. I would mouth the tired lines that stories are glimpses into history, they are personal connections, they are journeys, movements—attempts to grasp the ungraspable. And yet, I was a hypocrite. I found it ridiculous that anyone would live his or her life according to a text that was as convoluted and confusing as the Bible. But as I read, I realized that that is what I do. I connect myself, my beliefs with stories that I have read—how was the Bible any different or worse than other explanations for why the world is the way it is? So, embarking on a journey to “understand” the bible, I made a discovery about my own perceptions, and about stories as a whole—stories are not, as any dictionary would tell you, “an account of real or fictional events”. They are events, they are beliefs—stories make us, stories are people. In essence, the Bible changed my “position” on storytelling, and continues to do so.

The Bible is a whole, and not a whole—a series of parts that create a mythos, but at the same time creating (perhaps unintentionally) a skeptical framework that calls into question that same created mythos. Cain and Abel, Ecclesiastes, Job, Lazarus—these, like many others in the massive tome that is the Bible, leave me with more questions than answers, which, I think, is exactly the reason the Bible is so powerful, and is of great importance.

“I do not know; am I my brother’s keeper?” (The Harper Collins Study Bible, Gen. 4.9) This line, from the book of Genesis, is an excellent parable and insight into the violent early nature of man, and raises many interesting questions about the relationship that humans have with their “brothers”, if any at all. As with many tales in the bible, there are many gaps in the text (lacuna) that beg for interpretation. If Cain has committed such a great sin, why does God allow him to live, rather then smiting him like all the other evildoers throughout the book? Are we all not descendents of Cain, do we not all share in his sin? This is what interests me about the story of Cain and Abel, and I believe it to be a challenge of expectation. If further reading of the bible is to be any indicator, Cain should die. But he doesn’t—perhaps because this story is meant to be a warning, a challenge. This is the heart of darkness that lies at the center of man, and the consequences are there to challenge expectation: perhaps there is no eternal punishment for murder—Cain continues to live. John Steinbeck captures the essence of the story of Cain and Abel in his novel East of Eden:

I believe that there is one story in the world, and only one, that has frightened and inspired us, so that we live in a Pearl White serial of thought and wonder. Humans are caught—in their lives, in their thoughts, in their hungers and ambitions, in their avarice and cruelty, and in their kindness and generosity too—in a net of good and evil. I think this is the only story we have and that it occurs on all levels of feeling and intelligence… There is no other story. (747)

Ecclesiastes provides another type of narrative—the narrative of skepticism. Unlike many other passages in Psalms, etc., Ecclesiastes provides no comfort, no warm-fuzzies for the reader to cover themselves with like a warm soft blanket. “For the fate of humans and the fate of animals is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and humans have no advantage over the animals; for all is vanity” (Eccles. 3.19). Keeping in tone with the bible being a amalgamation of texts, a mythology, it seems only right that there are places where the reader is not soothed, is reminded of the dangers of, for lack of a better word, vanity. Ecclesiastes is an enigma, advising the reader about wisdom, but also reminding that wisdom is yet another concept that in the end, fades away, as the veil is slowly pulled over.

The book of Job is an attempt to rationalize why God would let bad things happen to good people (theodicy). Job is accompanied throughout the story by his friends Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. Each of the three attempts to comfort Job with his own interpretation of theodicy. Eliphaz states, “As I have seen, those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same” (Job 4.8). Eliphaz sees the world as a perfect system of retributive justice, where only those who do wrong are punished. Bildad offers a similar form, asking, “Does God pervert justice?” (Job 8.3) He reminds Job that God is perfect, and he wouldn’t punish someone for no reason. Finally, to deliver the knockout punch, with a speech reminiscent of Glenn Beck, “Know that God exacts of you less than your guilt deserves” (Job 11.6). Job’s “friends” seek to make him cease his questioning, make him retreat to the small comforts of unquestioning prudential wisdom, but Job will have none of it, giving one of the better speeches in the Bible: “But where shall wisdom be found? And where is the place of understanding? Mortals do no know the way to it, and it is not found in the land of the living” (Job 28.12). Job raises the sticky questions, and finds no answers for them—he is the thinking individual, the teacher who continues to question. Even when God shows up, to put Job in his place, He provides no satisfactory answers, asking “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38.4) God proceeds to lecture Job, reminding him that God, not Job, made all of creation, and what right does Job have to question his almighty wisdom? At the end of the story, Job is humbled, asking no more tough questions. But the reader is unsatisfied with God’s answers, and continues their questioning journey, which is the true gift of the book of Job.

Finally, the two stories of Lazarus in the Bible are both very interesting. One, a parable, and arguably the simpler of the two, is a short chapter in which a rich man is punished for failing to ease the agony of Lazarus, a poor man who lives outside his home and is so disparate that “even the dogs would come and lick his sores” (Luke 16.21). This parable defies expectation, because we expect the rich man to learn through his suffering in Hades, and mercy to be shone on him, but in reality, it is a harsh reminder that there is no forgiveness for sin in life, and the punishment is dire.

But it is in the second story that Lazarus both interests and disappoints me, as it is one of the few stories in the Bible that I am completely unsatisfied with. The idea of resurrection in the Bible is an interesting topic, it happens rarely, and is never subjected to skepticism. Like many other concepts in the Bible, there are gaps in the text, a lack of explanation—and while the text provides information about “life after death”, it doesn’t stack up from a skeptical viewpoint. The idea of paradise seems to be, like many other areas in the book, tacked on by a redactor attempting to further an agenda. And what is resurrection? Jesus’s resurrection is a corporeal one, which is clarified in Luke 24.39, saying “Touch me and see; for a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” Lazarus also seems to be corporeal, as he interacts with the world in a corporeal way. But the reader begs an explanation—if paradise is so wonderful, isn’t it wrong of Jesus to rip him back into the normal plane of existence? How does Lazarus feel, what does he do, being back from the dead. It is a frustratingly missing piece, but once again, maybe it was intended that way, maybe resurrection stories in the Bible aren’t meant to comfort.

The Bible is a work that contains the viewpoints of innumerable authors, each of them lending their own questions, their own viewpoints—some skeptical, some prudential, some just a good story. But the end result is, as with any good work, a change in the paradigm of thought in the reader’s mind—never answering, always questioning.

Works Cited

The Harper Collins Study Bible. New Revised Standard Ed. Harold W. Attridge. USA: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006. Print.

Steinbeck, John. Novels 1942-1952. New York: Penguin Putnam Inc., 2001. Print.

Group Presentation

Here's the script we used for our group presentation, on the Book of Esther:

      THE BOOK OF ESTHER

                    JIMMY and SALLY are sitting on the floor, GRANDPA
                    is sitting in a chair.

                    Throughout the play, unless otherwise stated, the
                    actors will act out what Grandpa says.

          JIMMY
               Grandpa? Would you tell us a story?

          GRANDPA
                         (considers for a moment)
               No.

          JIMMY
               But Grandpa, it's Purim.

          GRANDPA
               Ugh. Every year, you kids ask for a story, and every
               year I tell you the same one. I'm 88 years old and my
               body is falling apart, can't you just leave me to die
               in peace?

          JIMMY
                         (Chanting)
               Purim story!

          SALLY
                         (Chanting)
               Purim story!

          GRANDPA
               All right, all right already! I tell you a story.
                         (mumbles in Yiddish.)
               [CHANGE SLIDE/PALACE]
               Well, many years ago, in the Kingdom of Persia...

                    As he begins the tale, the two children turn, and
                    become MORDECAI and ESTHER. GRANDPA continues to
                    narrate.

          GRANDPA
               There was a Jewish man named Mordecai. He was a wise,
               and honorable man.

                    MORDECAI/JIMMY flaunts about, looking very
                    honorable and wise. [CHANGE SLIDE/FIREPLACE] He
                    then stops, and addresses Grandpa.

          JIMMY
               Mordecai has a laser gun, right? And his name is
               Mordecai von Destructionburger, right?

          GRANDPA
               No.

          JIMMY
               This story sucks.

                    MORDECAI/JIMMY becomes MORDECAI one again. [CHANGE
                    SLIDE/PALACE]

          GRANDPA
               He had a niece, who went by the name Esther. Esther was
               very wise and beautiful. She was also Jewish.

                    ESTHER/SALLY also flaunts, looking very wise and
                    beautiful.

          GRANDPA
               The king of the land had recently misplaced his wife,
               so he was currently looking for a new one.

                    Enter KING, looking for a wife.

          GRANDPA
               So, he had all the beautiful women of the land brought
               before him, and he chose Esther to be his wife, because
               she was the most virginal.

                    ESTHER and MORDECAI break character, and become
                    the children again. [CHANGE SLIDE/FIREPLACE]

          SALLY
               What does virginal mean?

          JIMMY
               Yeah, what does that mean?

          GRANDPA
               I'll tell you when you're older. Anyway, Esther didn't
               reveal to the king that she was Jewish.

          SALLY
               This society seems to be rather misogynistic. And
               intolerant.

          GRANDPA
               Hush, you.

                    The two children once again become ESTHER and
                    MORDECAI. [CHANGE SLIDE/PALACE]

          GRANDPA
               They were happily married, but soon, Mordecai
               discovered a plot by two eunuchs (no, I'm not going to
               tell you what that means) to kill the King. He tells
               Esther, and Esther tells the king, and the king is very
               happy with her. Everything is great.
                         (To himself)
               My life is a massive disappointment.

                    Enter HAMMON.

          GRANDPA
               Now, soon, a man rose in the ranks of the king's
               advisors. His name was Ham--

                    JIMMY once again breaks character. [CHANGE
                    SLIDE/FIREPLACE]

          JIMMY
               Do him and Mordecai have a swordfight?

                    HAMMON and MORDECAI/JIMMY brandish swords/sticks
                    at one another.

          GRANDPA
               No.

                    They lower the sticks dejectedly.

          JIMMY
               Is there a car chase? With lasers?

          GRANDPA
               No.

          JIMMY
               Does Hammon have a lair?

          GRANDPA
               NO! Hammon was just an advisor to the king who happened
               to hate Mordecai!

          JIMMY
               Did Mordecai kill his father?

          GRANDPA
               NO! Mordecai refused to bow to Hammon, so he decided to
               kill Mordecai and all the Jews!

                    SALLY breaks character now too.

          SALLY
               Sounds like he has quite the inferiority complex.

          GRANDPA
               Do you kids want me to tell this story or not?

          SALLY
               Yes.

          JIMMY
               Yes.

          GRANDPA
               Then keep quiet. This isn't one of your TV shows or
               video games. You kids might not realize this, but
               stories used to be interesting without explosions, gun
               fights, the internoodle--

          JIMMY
               You mean the internet?

          GRANDPA
               Never mind!

                    The kids return to their characters. [CHANGE
                    SLIDE/PALACE]

          GRANDPA
               Where was I? Oh, right, Hammon decides to kill
               Mordecai. Well, the king is pretty happy with Esther,
               and she, being Jewish, hatches a plan to save her
               people. She asks the king to throw a big feast, and
               honor Mordecai.

                    SALLY breaks character. [CHANGE SLIDE/FIREPLACE]

          SALLY
               This king's not too smart, is he?

                    SALLY returns to character. [CHANGE SLIDE/PALACE]

          GRANDPA
               Hush. The king summons Hammon, asking him what he would
               do to honor someone who had done well. Hammon advises
               him, thinking that the king is talking about him.

          JIMMY
               [CHANGE SLIDE/FIREPLACE] But he's not.

          GRANDPA
               Thank you, you're really an astute child. Hammon then
               goes out and builds a gallows, to hang Mordecai on.
               [CHANGE SLIDE/PALACE]

          SALLY
               Gross.

          GRANDPA
               The banquet comes around, and there's much food and
               revelry.

                    Hand out treats.

          GRANDPA
               And not a surprise to us, the king honors Mordecai. Of
               course, Hammon is angry, but when he's about to leave
               and plot revenge, Esther asks for another favor. She
               knew of Hammon's plot, and she tells the king. The king
               then hangs Hammon on his own gallows.

                    Both children stand, mouths agape.

          GRANDPA
               And then Esther helps the Jews kill 75,000 people. The
               End.

                    They still stand there, lips quivering.  [CHANGE
                    SLIDE/FIREPLACE]

          GRANDPA
               Now leave me alone, I want to take a nap.

                    He promptly falls asleep. The two children plop
                    down on the floor, scratching their heads.

The Slave

Twilight? Puh-leeze.

The Slave. Now that's a love story. It's wonderful, we have a man who cannot fall in love with a gentile, but does, and it creates an internal struggle in which he must decide between God, and what he feels. He falls prey to the pit of rationalization, but through that, he begins to explore his faith, and make discoveries about what he believes. Throughout all of this, terrible things happen, and continue to happen to him, leaving him alone with nothing but his shattered faith.

This is very similar to discussions we've had in class about theodicy. How can the good and just be punished for having done nothing wrong? The Slave was very interesting to me in the way that it allows the reader to experience their own catharsis, without being strictly told what to do, or what to think and believe.

I loved it.

(Kind of a crappy post, but I'm super busy.)

TEST!

• Frye: 54, 81-2 (type/anti-type), 107, 116, 120, 123, 128, 130 (metanoia: "enlarged dimensions"), 137-8
• The Slave: 238, 259-62, 278-9

Plotz

• 1st Kings:17
• Who is an early Christ figure?
• Elijah
• 2nd Kings
• Who was associated with early cosmetics?
• Jezebel
• Isaiah
  
• Which pairing doesn't belong?
• The Lion and the Lamb
• Who does Plotz compare God to?
• Jack Nicholson, Santa
• Jeremiah
• Why wouldn't you share a beach house with Jeremiah?
• Morbidity
• Ezekiel:4
• The ingredients and things you need to eat.
• He compares Israel to his adulterous wife.
• Minor Prophets
• Jonah, why does he get on a boat?
• To run from God. (There is no whale)
• Psalms
• Which characters does Plotz talk about most?
• David
• Common theme?
• "Woe is me"
• Daniel
• What other biblical story is Daniel closest to?
• Joseph and his dreams
• Ezra/Nehemiah
• Why does Ezra pull out his hair?
• Intermarriage between Jews and gentiles.
• Chronicles
• One sentence sums it up.
• It retells the stories you've heard already.
•  Should we read the bible?
• Yes, the less you believe, the more you should read.

MORE QUESTIONS

• What does Ecclesia mean?
• Gathering
• What is Eschatology?
• The study of the end times.
• Logos?
• The word.
• Jesus and Socrates, how are they similar?
• Both were "crucified".
• Why is the Bible a comedy?
• It has a happy ending.
• Where are we at in the "U"?
• The bottom.
• What type of wisdom would your grandparents give you?
• Prudential 
• What does Jacob put on his head?
• A fez, he believed in a false prophet for a while.
• The three great tragedies?
• The Brothers Karamazov
• Job
• King Lear
• Why is God patriarchal? 
• It rationalizes the ethos!
• What is an epiphany?
• Sudden manifestation of a supernatural or divine being.
• What is retributive justice, and an example of it?
• Nothing bad happens unless we deserve it. Job's three "friends".
• Prudential wisdom?
• Polonius
• Skeptical wisdom?
• Hamlet
• Best example of narrative/image?
• Job/Revelation
• Metenoia?
• repentence
• What does Jacob do to make up for the absence of the Torah?
• He scratches on a rock.
• Theodicy
• The question of innocent suffering.
• What is a parable?
• an attack on expectations.
• Apocalypse?
• A lifting of the veil. (realized eschatology)
  

Good stuff.

Once again, I've decided to grace you all with one of my sporadic blog posts (that isn't notes). Today in class we were talking about the Nina Simone song "Sinner Man", and I made a connection in my head with another song by Talib Kweli ("Get By"): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WEqr1zDq5s

Did you hear it? Now, this is a hip-hop song, which I hope that no one has a bias against, because, like any other medium, there is good stuff, and there's Britney Spears. You can stop here if you like, and go on a hip-hop/enlightened rap journey (try Jurassic 5, The Roots, Blue Scholars, Brother Ali.)

But that's enough about hip-hop. The reason for this little blog post is to provide a preview for my term paper, in which I will be talking about what I've learned from the bible, and the difference that makes.

So, I'm going to talk a little about Time Bandits. Yup, that's right. You probably have never heard of this film (shame on you), but it was directed by Terry Gilliam (some films you may have seen by him: Brazil, 12 Monkeys, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and Heath Ledger's last film, The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus)

The film follows the adventures of a little boy who is captured by time traveling dwarves that go around robbing famous people from throughout history (Napoleon, Robin Hood, Agamemnon, etc.). They are on the run from the Supreme Being (wink wink, nudge nudge), from whom they've stolen a map that allows them to find holes in time, facilitating their burglary. Evil (I.E. Satan) is trying to get his hands on the map, so he can overthrow the Supreme Being. The film culminates in a "final battle" that has, guess who, good beating evil. Sound familiar?

And this is what I've been growing to understand (still got a long way to go) throughout my learning journey through the bible, and the humanities in general. Literature--movies--these things are intertextual references to one another, and our lives, providing us with a personal connection, for each of us a different one (for me, Time Bandits).

The trick is recognizing them.

Class Summary for 11/10/09

• The Slave: pg 238, 269, 259-262, 278-279.
• Mention on your blog what you're going to write about.
• Mules and Men - Zora Neale Hurston
• John in Revelation is not the Gospel of John John.
• Revelation
• 1:12
• 3:15
• 10,12,13,14
• 16:12
• 16:16
• The Seventh Seal
• The Day of the Locust - Nathanael West
• Invisible Man - Ralph Ellison
• "John the Revelator"
• Blind Willie Johnson
• "Sinner Man"
• Nina Simone
• Ronald Wilson Reagan (666)
• Ch 5 of Frye for test!
• Anamnesis
• Mark 13 
  

Class Summary for 11/5/09

• The religions of the Book - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
• Protestant Reformation. WOO intolerence!
• Ecclesiastes - Gathering of people.
• Book of John
• 20:11, Mary recognizes Jesus
• 21:15
• Death of Socrates?
• Hemlock
• Kingdom of God, (second coming)
• Jim Jones
• Literal Eschatology
• Realized Eschatology - we are always living at the end of times.
• Karamazov - Father Zosima "terminal happiness" 
• Grapes
• Revelation 14:19
• Isaiah 63, Frye 217
  

Class Summary for 11/3/09

• Bach's Solo Cello Suite 1 in G Major
• We should be reading the Gospel of John
• Blogs: Shelby, Amanda, Ashley
• According to Northrop Frye, the bible, taken as a whole is a comedy.
• A story that has a happy ending.
• Apocalypse doesn't mean the violent end of the world.
• Apo - Take away
• Calypse - The veil
• Seeing the world as it really is--beyond the forms we perceive it now.
• Christians use the Old Testament to validate the New.
• Origins of Christianity
• Essene - Authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, withdrawn from a corrupt world.
• The 1st three gospels are the synoptic gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke
• Parataxis
• Baptism is a symbolic death/resurrection.
• Parable - an attack on the structure of expectations. (The Good Samaritan)
  

Class Summary for 10/29/09

• "hebel" translates as "breath".
• There are two types of wisdom.
• Hamlet - Skeptical wisdom ("to be, or not to be") deep, dark stuff.
• The pain of the discovery of life's temporality.
• Polonius - Practical wisdom, prudential ("neither a borrower or a lender be")
• Blogs to read: Kathryn's.
• Job 42: 2-5
• Islam - Literally translates to "submit/submission"
• Job realizes that he can/must question God
• Psalm 23
• Job 32, an evil redactor at work.
• The Daughters of Job.
• Frye 191-197 (for the test)
• Rime of the Ancient Mariner
• Disconnect between crime and sufering.

YAR!

So, I've been slacking in my blogging, just been doing the notes. I have a really hard time doing the whole blogging thing, perhaps because I'm just not that interesting. So, instead, I wrote a poem.

A Thousand Job(s)

I hear the cries of a thousand Jobs.
If you will excuse the odd plurality

I hear the children crying for mothers
The men and women who've lost brothers
The Musicians who've been struck deaf
unable to hear the tiniest, most sublime clef
Loving, caring people, lost without a reason
Swept away, like the passing of a season

What to do? Where to go?
Everywhere is the black crow
Waiting to strike without warning or cause
Truth be told, there is no saving clause

Is there?

Maybe.
Maybe within yourself.
Maybe within the human seated next to you.
Maybe we can find it.
Maybe.

Or maybe it is all vanity.
Vanity of vanities, if you will.

Class Summary for 10/27/09

Assignment: TERM PAPER

1. Way in which the Bible relates to The Slave
2.  What I know now that I didn't know before, and the difference that makes. (There needs to be at least two Great Code references)
3. Whatever you would like to write on that Dr. Sexson has approved.

CLASS

• Natalie's Blog, Alex's Blog, Eric's Blog, Jessi's Blog
• The Year of Living Biblically
• We are all thieves, stealing from someone who stole.
• Joni Mitchell, "The Sire of Sorrow"
• A Serious Man, the Coen Brothers
• The best part of Job?
• The middle.
• The prologue is: there's a man named Job, he's a good guy, but he suffers.
• The epilogue: he's patient, and he is rewarded.
• The middle is the best (Job 3).
• You get the frienimies, and all the false hope, the idea of retributive justice is presented, and Job curses the day he was born.
• Job is very similar to a Greek tragedy. (Prometheus Bound)
• People come and talk to him.
• My Dinner with Andre
• According to Job, the first best thing is to have never been born, and the next best is to die.
• Job 4:7
• Retributive Justice -- God only punishes the wicked, rewards the wise and good.
• WRONG!

 

Class Summary for 10/20/09 and 10/22/09

TUESDAY

• Writing lets everyone know what to do--the repetitive oral tradition.
• pg. 50 Frye
• The blacks feel a connection with the enslaved Jews.
• There are probably three factual words in the New Testament.
• Weltgeschichte - world history, factual
• Heilgechichte - holy history
• Israelites figured out that you don't have to keep God in centralized place.
• William Faulkner, Absulon is killed.
• Ernest Hemingway, The Son Also Rises
• Nova's The Bible's Buried Secrets.
• The Book of Joshua is a military book. (the hill of foreskins)
• Wisdom of Solomon
• Dead Sea Scrolls
• Job 
• The nature of suffering: theodicy.
• He is blameless and upright, greatest of all people (if greatness is determined by wealth)
• Patience of Job?
• He's not that patient...

THURSDAY

• History is His-story
• The stories are what save the Jews, not history.
• First king of Israel--Saul
• Saul isn't that great, he's replaced by David.
• For next test, we need to know Ch. 5 from Frye.
• Proverbs 19:18
• Spare the rod, spoil the child.
• Prudential vs. Skeptical
• Skeptical Wisdom - there's gotta be a reason, the ticket story from Karamatzov
  
• William Blake's Job art and poem.
• Wisdom isn't necessarily knowledge.
• Frye's V-shaped narrative.
  

Class Summary for 10/15/09

• Deuterotomy is a book of law. (2nd Law, to be exact)
• D 6:4, "The Lord our God is one Lord.
• Moses's mythical authorial power.
• Law has a story element, it's a subset of literature.
• Michelangelo's sculpture of Moses has horns. (Likely from seeing God's backside)
• Because the bible says it, it obviously must be true.
• There are three versions of the Ten Commandments.
• http://www.stallman.org/dr-laura.html
• The Year of Living Biblically
• Lev 18:22, (The hot button issue, gay marriage)
• Deuteronomy 23
• New assignment--be less boring.
• Epiphany - a manifestation of a divine or supernatural being.
• You cannot remarry, the woman is defiled.
• Theodicy - The vindication of divine goodness and providence in view of the existence of evil.
• This is what Job is all about.
  

Peter Quince at the Clavier

To make a complete analysis of Wallace Stevens's poem, I think you might have to be much smarter than I am; but, I found the parts relating to the elders very interesting, considering the book of Susannah as a referent.

The elders in the story are very lustful (as is typical with men who aren't heroes, and are faced with a beautiful woman), and because they are rebuked by the noble Susannah, they become vengeful, and try to destroy her. But, the Lord helps Susannah, and all is well. While this story is an interesting, and a very fun read, it doesn't reach the intellectual and emotional level that Stevens's poem achieves.

Take, for instance, these lines:

 

Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings

Of those white elders; but, escaping,

Left only Death's ironic scraping.

 

This poem strikes a chord with me, conjuring an image of youth and beauty, and its finiteness. The poem doesn't seem to be judging the lustful elders, so much as reminding us all of what beauty is, and, in the lines of the poem:

The body dies; the body's beauty lives

Class Summary for 10/13/09

Assignments: Read the Book of Susannah (1637), read the poem on Rio's blog.

• Dialectic arguments combined with tradition.
• The old stories are the best stories.
• Plotz's problem?
• He applies a modern sensibility to a book of stories.
• Moses
• Superman? Superman comes from a destroyed people (Jews) and leads humanity.
• Moses is an archetype, he's paradigmatic.
• His name means to be "drawn from the waters".
  
• Lord Raglan 
• The 22 points of the typical hero story.
• Joseph Campbell, The Hero With a Thousand Faces
• Once again, stories are important.
• The Israelites were just as cruel to their slaves as anyone else.
• They also didn't intermarry.
• "Go Down Moses"
• Louis Armstrong
• Paul Robeson 
• Ralph Stanley, "Take Your Shoes off Moses"
• Iconoclasm - rejection of religious icons as heretical.
• "God cannot be made into an image!"
• Passage where Moses sees God's backside: Exodus 33:23
  

Test!

FOR THE TEST

• Genesis
• Classroom Discussions
• Frye, Ch. 1 & 2
• Women In the Bible Lecture
• Plotz - Genesis

QUESTIONS
1. Who are the two writers of the creation story?
P and J. (Remember JEDPR)
2. What are the first five books of the bible?
Pentateuch, the Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy)
3. TNK?
Torah (Law) Nevi'im (Prophets) Ketuvim (Writings)
4. Who are the three patriarchs?
Abraham, Issac, Jacob
5. How many sons did Jacob have?
12, Rachel had Joseph and Benjamin.
6. What did Linda think of women in the bible, compared to David Plotz?
Linda: "Plotz is an idiot, women are a metaphor."
7. What does Hosea's marriage represent?
Israel, and the country's straying from God.
8. Linda's view of Lot's daughters?
They did the right thing, continued the bloodline of their father.
9. What are the 7 most important parts of the bible?
Creation, Exodus, Law, Wisdom, Prophecy, Gospel, Apocalypse.
10. Vico's 3 phases? 
Gods/Heroes/Men
11. Frye's 3 phases?
Metaphorical/Metonymical/Descriptive
12. What is Mythos?
Story, myth, etc.
13. What kills education?
Answers
14. What is repetitive parallelism?
"Joseph is handsome and good-looking."
15. What is the biblical meaning of circumcision?
It is a physical reminder of the covenant between God and man.
16. What is the difference between Homer and the Bible?
Homer has no lacuna!
17. What is kerygma?
Revalation
18. What is logos?
Fact, truth, history, etc., for a while it was the same as mythos.
19. What is the psyche?
Before it came to its modern definition, it meant "soul".
20. What is an example of etiology?
"How did the leopard get his spots?" "Why do snakes crawl on their bellies?"
21. What is an archetype?
A "model narrative", Carl Jung - Cain (archetype of the fugitive)
22. What is Gnosticism?
Places salvation in knowledge/individual (The Man Who Fell to Earth)
23. Critical approach vs. Traditional?
Literary approach vs. a faith based approach.
24. What is hubris?
Excessive pride, wishing to be like the gods.
25. What is the documentary hypothesis?
The Bible was written by multiple authors.
26. What blogs should we study?
Jason's (Occam's Razor)
27. What were the writing prophets concerned with?
Cultic purity and Social Justice.
28. Eve and Mary are both archetypes.

A good moment...

There are times, upon reading this massive text, that I am taken aback by the profoundness of certain passages. This particular one is in Numbers 6:22:


The Lord bless you and keep you;
the Lord make his face to shine upon
you, and be gracious to you;
The Lord lift up his countenance upon 
you, and give you peace.

I don't know exactly what it is about this passage that makes me calm, maybe that last part, about the countenance lifting--but I find myself reading this passage over and over again, and I love it!

Class Summary for 10/1/09

Guest Lecture!

 "Women in the Bible"

• Women are a metaphor in the Bible
• humans that are designated female by culture; no biology.
• There is a difference between social and literary conditions.
• Eve is a metaphor.
• Menstruation in the Bible is a social condition.
• Patriarchy, Chauvinism
• Gender asymmetry
• Male metaphors are on top. Women are deceptive.
• The culture was worried about controlling the women.
• The Patriarchs: Abraham, Issac, and Jacob.
• "Man and Wife". Wife is the appendage of man.
• Women are ambivalent in a patriarchy.
• Teraphim (household gods)
• Lev 15:19 - Why menstruation is "unclean".
• "Test"ament - this is where vows are made in a patriarchy, circumcision is a vow.
• Judges 11:29: Jephthah's daughter dies to preserve the vow.
• Prophets
• Hosea 1:2
• Marries a woman with a social stigma.
• Women are metaphors for Israel, trying to worship Canaanite and Mesopotamian gods.
  

Class Summary for 09/29/09

1st Exam, 8th of October
Read to Chapter 3 in Northrop Frye.

• Cheat Sheet for Odysseus Scar.
• Hermeneutics
• "Cities of the Plain" (Sodom and Gomorrah, Gen 19)
• Marcel Proust, Cormac McCarthy
• Kierkegard - Fear and Trembling
• NEVER SAY "JUST"
• Abraham talks down God!
• Lot's Wife!
• Orpheus, Actaeon
• Literalism in the bible?
• Issac isn't really that exciting (Gen 24).
• James Joyce: "Bland old Issac."
• Jacob gets the "bed trick" pulled on him.
• Gen 32.22
• Joseph is kinda of a dork; he is one of the round characters (complex)
• Joseph and Potiphars wife (Gen 39)

Little tired, hopefully will get a good blog post in soon.

Class Summary for 09/24/09

• Read Odysseus' Scar here.
• The question was raised, why does God do things the way he does, if He is all-knowing and all-seeing?
• God loves mythos!
• Stories need conflict.
• Dr. Sexson says that we are all required to have a terrible day, and a perfect day.
• What is the lesson we learn from Joseph's brothers?
• Is there a "lesson"?
• Why does God always hurt the good people? 
• Because it makes a good story!
• Northrop Frye, and many other good teachers forever ask questions. They never give answers.
• pg. VX, "To answer is to consolidate the mental level"
• TNK
• Torah
• Nevi'im
• Ketuvim
• We break from myth and enter history in Genesis 12.
• Hubris - the greek "soulmate"; the Tower of Babel.
• Women in the bible: Woman and the snake are always found together.
• What's the deal with circumcision? 
• Covenant?
• The Alphabet of Ben-Sira
• Assignment for next class: write in the lacuna for Abraham and Issac.
  

Deconstructing the Bible

Hopefully I can make some sense here:

As I navigate the wide world of literature, I find myself delving deeper and deeper into the critical method, and what implications that may hold for my enjoyment of the literary world.

For example, recently, I have been taking a course on critical literary theory and criticism (LIT 300), and have been studying Jacques Derrida and his work in Deconstruction. You can read an outline of the theory here, but in essence, the theory sends the reader spiraling into an abyss of questions that always end the same: there is no universal meaning, and we are all trapped in an abyss of nothingness.

I am of course, being dramatic, and simplifying the theory a substantial amount, but the situation I find myself in is that the farther and farther I make my way into the critical world, the more I begin to question whether or not literature should hold the effect it has over me.

Many of my favorite works (East of Eden, Harry Potter, and a couple billion others) have affected me on a deep emotional level, which, as Northrop Frye describes in his work The Archetypes of Literature, “Casual value-judgments belong not to criticism but to the history of taste, and reflect, at best, only the social and psychological compulsions which prompted their utterance.” (Norton Ant. of Crit. Theory 1447)

I do not (yet) analyze literature on a fully critical level, while I can make an argument for or against something based on a given theory, when I place literary value on something, I am in a large part governed by how that book speaks to me, how it affects me on an emotional level, how it makes me laugh, and how it makes me cry.


So, we come to the bible, which, in the simplest terms, is a critical nightmare. I mean, come on, Derrida would look at one page, turn his nose up in the air while extinguishing his cigarette with the other and pronounce: “this work is the epitome of meaninglessness”.

I have been enjoying the bible immensely on the other hand, and partially it is because of the rather casual, visceral enjoyment I get from a mythological work. Is this correct? I don’t know. Maybe the gut feeling, the moral feeling that I get from reading the good book is the only intent or interpretation I should take.

I like to think that the most important thing I can get from literary study is a continual thirst for learning, and the devouring of great works.

Derrida be damned.

Class Summary for 09/21/09

• The three patriarchs of the Torah: Abraham, Issac, and Joseph.
• Remember, the boring parts of the bible are important too.
• Jeanne Dielmann (a movie about boring things)
• Mythology once again, we follow it because we always have; tradition.
• The Serpent
• The serpent has not always been associated with evil.
• The Epic of Gilgamesh (Sumerian)
• Gilgamesh goes after a plant that will make him immortal, he gets it, then decides to rest before eating it. A snake comes along, and eats it up, shedding its skin.
• The snake has the knowledge of good and evil.
• WISDOM!
• Gnosticism 
• Lilith, Adam's first, extrabibilical wife. 
• Lacuna
• Cain and Abel!
• Cain brought Yahweh fruits and vegetables, Abel brought firstling sheep. God likes Abel better.
• JEALOUSY!
• Cain is marked for killing his brother, becoming a "fugitive and a wanderer" (Gen 4.14)
• Other fugitives: Jean Valjean, Harrison Ford in The Fugitive.
• The story of Joseph is the first great novella.
• Thomas Mann, Joseph and His Brothers
• The Great Code: Every text is a commentary on a previous text.
• Catholics are into Angelology.

Change: Oct 1st, guest speaker, "Women in the Bible"

Class Summary for 09/17/09

• CHANGE: The final exam will be on Friday, December 18th, from 2pm-2:45pm in our normal meeting place.
• Logos, once again: the power of words to create, i.e. fact, truth, reality.
• Mythos: Myth, story, fanciful.
• One of these is "false", the other is "true".
• Mythology joins the two together, as wikipedia says, "the academic use of the term generally does not refer to truth or falsity."
• Dr. Sexson: "In effect, mythology is true stories."
• The Great Code Cracked!
• Chapter 1 focuses on language.
• Translation
• "langage" (the parts of language that are actually translatable.)
• 3 Stages (Vico)
• Age of Gods - Metaphoric/Hieroglyphic/a god/Heraclitus
• Hieroglyphic age is poetic.
• Little emphasis on separating subject and objects.
• Warrior "boasts" (Genesis 4:23)
• Vow (Judges 11:35)
• All words are concrete, intensely physical.
• Homer: soul, mind, time, courage are embodied.
• Kairos, a crucial moment in time; the "notch in an arrow" (Frye pg. 7)
• Age of Heroes - Metonymic/Hieractic/God/Plato
• Language becomes individualized, words become outward expression of thoughts. Intellect and emotion split.
• Plato is a 2nd phase thinker.
• Words are put for thought, thought is superior to nature.
• Concepts, allegories, commentary.
• Age of "Man" - Ironic Distance between subject and object/Demotic/No God/Locke, Bacon, Hume
• Began in 16th century.
• Fact gathering, language as description of an objective order.
• Extreme 3rd phase thinker dismiss all religious questions; words are words; Deconstruction. (WOO Lit 300)
• Distrusts figurative language consciousness modulates from soul to mind.
• Science takes precedence over faith.
• Kerygma
• The linguistic idiom of the bible does not coincide. (p. 29)
• Poetry keeps the metaphorical use of language alive.
•  Remember, Carl Eats Little Whiny Puppies with Gravy and Asparagus. (Creation, Exodus, Law, Wisdom, Prophecy, Gospel, and Apocalypse)
  
• Thomas Moore's Care of the Soul
•  "True itself is fact," "The truth itself is made" (Vico).
• Finally, a drawing by my 4-year-old-alter-ego, Tommy, representing the ages of language.

P.S., you can view all the class notes if you go to the sidebar, and click categories. All the notes (so far) can be found there.

Class Summary For 9/15/09

Sorry it took me a day to get these up!

• Sources of the Pentateuch (The Torah, the first 5 books)
• J - (Yahwist) - Storyteller
• Has a vivid, concrete style, anthropomorphic view of the deity. Wrote the story about Mt. Sinai.
• E - (Elohist) - "Elohim" for God.
• Located somewhere (in terms of writing style) between P and J. Uses Elohim (divine powers) for God. Begins with the story of Abraham.
  
• D - (Deuteronomist) - Wrote Deuteronomy. 
• Reflects the literary style and religious attitudes of Josiah's reform (621 BCE); insists that only one central sanctuary acceptable to Yahweh.
  
• P - (Priestly) - The statistics, rules, and ritual guy.
• R - (Redactor) - Came in and changed stuff.
  
• Once again, the documentary hypothesis rears its ugly head.
• Harold Bloom's points in the Book of J:
• Essientially a comic writer. (25)
• An "ironist" (disassembler). (25)
• King James version is "one of the handful of truly sublime styles in English".  (27)
• Her stories are not holy tales. (31)
• No heroes. Only heroines. (32)
• Talking animals, lustful Elohim, deceitful patriarchs, murder, drinking, etc. The stuff shrugged off by rabbis. (35)
• When script becomes scripture, reading is numbed by taboo and inhibition. (35)
• WTF? God's attempt to kill Moses in Exodus?
• J has no explaination.
• Etiology: Why things happen! The investigation of why things happen, from a mythological or religious standpoint.
• Mythos: "story", a net of experience.
  

The God Whisperer

So, I've been chugging along in the ol' King James for a little while now, and just the other night, I finally finished the book of Exodus. Before sinking my teeth into the statistic-driven Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, I figured I'd talk a little bit about my favorite moment in the good book so far.

It occurs in Exodus 32.7, and it is one of the most surprising moments I've experienced in the bible so far. To paraphrase: God is pissed, because the stupid Israelites cast a golden calf and are worshiping it. He says this line:


"Now let me alone, so that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them; and of you I will make a great nation." (Ex 32.10)

This isn't the most remarkable part of the story, but if we can ignore the fact that God is behaving like an angsty 12-year-old, and that somehow God is going to make a great nation out of Moses (I guess he can divide asexually or something).

But here is where this becomes the most awesome moment so far:

"But Moses implored the Lord his God, and said, 'O Lord, why does your wrath burn hot against your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand?'" (Ex 32.11)

And what does God do? Well. The God who wiped out the entire earth with a flood, the God who smites arbitrarily, the God of Sodom and Gomorrah--he changes his mind. Quote once again:


"And the Lord changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people."

This is the most important story I've seen so far in the book, the most important parable. God, the mighty, the incredible, the creator, is wrong. He sees that what he plans to do might be a little much. He is fallible, and through others, he has seen the right (whatever that is). This is the essence of the mythology: the lesson.

Incredibly compelling stuff.

Forget the part where Moses goes down and orders his people to kill each other.

P.S. I will try to have the notes for today up later tonight.

Class Summary for 09/10/09

Well, here we go, today's class in a nutshell.


Class Discussion

• Repetitive Parallelism - Commonly used in Hebrew poetry, a technique in which one term is balanced/repeated by another (typically in the next verse)
• Vico, an Italian secular philosopher, who hypothesized the "stages of language" as
1. Metaphorical (pictures, images)
2. Metonymy (one thing stands for something else)
3. Demotic (vulgar, descriptive, ironic language)
• Vico also organized the 3 "ages" of civilization: the divine, the heroic, and the human.
• You can read more about it here (it starts in about the second paragraph)
• We talked about the Critical approach to the bible (A more scholarly, studious approach, obviously, Moses didn't write the first five books).
• And we also talked about the Traditional approach to the bible, which isn't interested in critique, more of a literal application.
• Dr. Sexson actually brought up an excellent point that there is a difference between taking the bible literally, and using it as a metaphorical tool to help us with problems in our lives, and with things that we can't explain. Awesome stuff. I believe he said, "We must relativise our traditions to furnish in a larger context."
  
• The Documentary Hypothesis:  The bible wasn't written by one person, rather a series of redactors.
• Ovid and Claude Lévi-Strauss were mentioned.
• Logos=words.

Additional Stuff

• Rio shared a link to an online King James bible: bartleby.com/108
• Here is a YouTube link to the Miserere, by The Kings College Choir. (The song is the right one, I don't know if the video is actually Roy Goodman) You can buy it off iTunes as well as an individual song (.99 for this beautiful music!).

I hope I've done well.

Psalm 51

In lieu of a longer post that I'm working on, I thought I'd share some quick impressions of Psalm 51.

To begin, I love this verse:

"Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, / and cleanse me from my sin" (Psalms 51.2)

I just love the idea of this verse. David is basically asking the Lord to cleanse him of all of him that he believes to be abhorrent in himself. I love it when a character admits that he has flaws and wishes to change.

Moving into another line I liked:

"Indeed, I was born guilty," (Psalms 51.5)''

I have a feeling this is going to come into play later, but I love me some religious guilt.

But then it kind of devolves at the end into a bunch of gobbledygook about burnt offerings. Oh well.

Genesis. Whoa.

All right. Genesis. Let's do this.

So, I'm going to focus on the stories that I found the most interesting/weird/awesome. Keep in mind, I'm not quite finished with Genesis yet, so this is just as far as I've gotten.
 

But first, some of my favorite quotes off the top of my head:
 

"God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good." (Gen. 1.31)
I should hope so.
"And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed." (Gen. 2.25)
Awesome.

Anywho, the first story that I find incredibly interesting is of course, the story of Cain and Abel (Gen. 4)

Why? Because it is so simple, and barebones in its explanation. Why does God choose Abel over Cain.  While it is alluded to that Abel gives the firstlings, and Cain only the fruit, that seems like not that big of a deal. I mean, the least God could have done is given Cain a smaller pat on the head. But where this story interests me the most is the murder. Not to be morbid, but this is the first instance of murder in the good book, so I feel that it is significant. Why? perhaps because it is an escalation of the sin of mankind, which I find very compelling. And then there's that awesome line, where Cain leaves, and settles "east of Eden" (Gen. 4-16), which just so happens to be one of my favorite books by Mr. John Steinbeck.

Second story,

Sodom and Gomorrah. An incredibly relevant text, considering the political minefield we enter every time someone decides to speak about homosexuality. But jumping around, I found the text to be rather anti-feminine (this is the bible of course), when Lot cries, "Look, I have two daughters, sodomize them instead of my guests, please. They're even virgins!" Wow, not a whole lot of sentiment there.

I also liked the part where Lot's wife is turned into a pillar of salt. God's not a big fan of the whole mercy thing.

I have read a bit farther, and will blab more later, but for now this is what was currently in my head.

First Day

WOO! First day!

Really really excited for this class, having never read the bible before. I'm really into mythology, and the bible's a big one. Should be fun! Hope I'm doing the blog thing right.