What he got right and what I'm not sure about

I just finished a book called The Prophetic Imagination, by Walter Brueggemann. One thing I liked about reading the book was that I didn't agree with a lot of what was written in it. I've found that when I read books I tend to agree with the author more often than not. Sometimes the thought crosses my mind that I'm not giving conflicting views enough of a chance because reading a book gives an author a monopoly on your time and thoughts and certain biases might go unrecognized. However, every now and then I read something that I really don't like and at the very least it reminds me that I still know how to think for myself. Since I just finished the book I wanted to write a few things about what I thought Brueggemann got right and what I'm not so sure about.

One reason I didn't enjoy this book is because I think his writing style could have used a little help. The book might have been a little easier if he communicated in a way that was a little more down to earth. It was a book about prophecy and I imagined reading it, not knowing much about religion, and being thoroughly freaked out. It was a little over the top for me.

One thing that I did take away from it is that change in a society will not occur if people don't take the time to imagine how it could be different and think about the steps needed to get there. This, to me, is a simple idea though and doesn't need high and mighty language about prophecy, royal consciousnesses and alternative consciousnesses. "Do not be overrighteous, neither be over wise, why destroy yourself? Do not be overwicked and do not be a fool, why die before your time? It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other, the man who fears God will avoid all extremes." Ecc 7:16-18. I think Brueggemann could benefit from taking this advice.

Another thing I disagreed with was a general undertone that prophecy was a goal to reach. I don't think it is wise for a person to concern themselves with this. Even when John the Baptists disciples asked Jesus who he was he only replied to tell John that the blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured... and the good news is preached to the poor. To me this says, "Who cares what you call it, the proof's in the pudding." It seems to me that people who get too caught up in semantics and labels forget what is really important. The goal should be to defend the cause of the poor and the needy and to visit orphans and widows in their distress, whatever you want to call the people who do this is irrelevant. Claiming to be a prophet and using all that other religious jargon is only going to freak people out and make a person prideful. And that is what I think is so dangerous about this book.

Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

This youtube video is hilarious. If you've got a few minutes watch it and then read the rest of my post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk

This makes me laugh but it also makes me ask a lot of serious questions.

If everything is so amazing why isn't anyone happy?

Our culture spends an enormous amount of time pursuing money and material items which this video describes as so amazing. The more successful we have become, the more unhappy we seem to be. If our unhappiness is a result of our pursuit of the wrong goals, what are the right goals?

Have we inadvertently traded community for self-sufficiency through financial avenues? Is our unhappiness the result of a lack of community?

Is there any way to retain community while still pursuing self-sufficiency? Would that even be a solution?

For some reason, I think there is a very strong correlation between the unhappiness that our culture is experiencing and the breakdown and loss of healthy relationships. We have become so financially self-sufficient that needs no longer bring us together. The need for one person to cook for many and have a communal meal because not everyone has the time to prepare their own food was replaced by restaurants, frozen food, microwaves and higher paying jobs. The need to call your family and friends to help you move was replaced by the company Two Men and a Truck and the ability to pay them. The need to get together with your friends for coffee or beer is being replaced by tv shows like Friends and sites like Facebook. And the list goes on. We are getting more of everything with less authenticity (especially when you think of food and Facebook) and I think what has been lost in the process is contributing to our unhappiness.

I'm not sure I know what the solution is to these problems but I do know that a culture full of unhappy people is a danger to itself. Unhappiness breeds unhappiness. Discontentment breeds envy and jealousy. Crime goes up when people want what others have. Whatever the answer is, I think it's in all of our best interest to start thinking about it and looking for it.

Facebook status update

I'm in a bit of a good mood right now because of something a little selfish. There have been a couple quotes I wanted to put up on Facebook for a while but never did. Anyway, yesterday I posted them and it ended up being my most "liked" status update ever. A bunch of my friends copied and posted it on their pages and it was even copied by a large group named People Against Jan Brewer. This was the status update:

‎"We cannot continue to sustain all of this stuff because you don't run a state, you don't run a country with your heart," - Jan Brewer

"A hard heart is no infallable remedy to a soft head." - C.S. Lewis


The C.S. Lewis quote is a line from a book he wrote titled, "The Abolition of Man." Ever since I read it I've been looking for clever way to use it in response to a right winger who blows off a good argument by calling it emotional. I tend to get that argument a lot from a certain individual but I wouldn't tell him this quote because I like him and wouldn't want to be a dick. Jan Brewer, however, does not have the luxury of being liked by me. So this morning, as selfish as it may be, I'm a little proud of how well my cleverness was received. I read through the comments on the pages of other people who copied my post and there were a few people who had some nice things to say. A couple of the more flattering comments were as follows:

Tanicia Hood Haha, who ever posted this, of the People against jan Brewer crew was ingenious to follow with that quote. Take a bow if you would.


Joy Wilcox brilliant.


So anyway, I'm in a bit of a good mood after being called brilliant and ingenious by strangers.

The DREAM ACT

The DREAM ACT passed a vote in the house today and will be voted on again tomorrow in the senate. I was really happy to hear that it did well but I still have my doubts about the senate vote. I really hope it passes but I was thinking about it and I'm pretty sure everything will be okay if it doesn't.

I have a lot of undocumented friends and acquaintances and most of them are actually really happy people. A thought crossed my mind that they are a lot better off than the people who oppose them. While I was reading today I came across an article about why Jan Brewer opposes the DA. She was going off on her usual "You can't run a state or a country with your heart" nonsense. I was reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis that I read a while back in The Abolition of Man. He says, "A hard heart is no infallible remedy for a soft head." Jan Brewer definitely has one of those. So do a lot of people who oppress the powerless. She has no idea that it's in her best interest and the best interest of our country to provide people, who we've already given a public education, the opportunity to work legally and pay taxes instead of working under the table or turning to the black market for income. Who, of my undocumented friends, would trade lives with some of the most prominent anti-immigration figures? Who would want to go to bed at night and be Russell Pearce, Jan Brewer, or Kris Kobach? I'm absolutely 100% positive that every single one of them are better off being an undocumented immigrant in the U.S. than to be one of those pitiful souls. That makes me feel very good inside.

I can't think of one undocumented friend of mine who is hungry. I can't think of any who do not have clothes. They are forced to live a life that is very resourceful. They are hard working. Most of them have a closer community and better friendships than mainstream Americans. There are many aspects of living an undocumented life that should be envied by the rest of us but we never look at it that way. Maybe if the DA doesn't pass the senate tomorrow they will be better off for it. I still hope for a passing vote but at the end of the day, many of them are good happy people and I hope they don't lose that if they get there papers and enter the ugly world of American affluency.

The Gifts of the Jews - Book Report

I just finished reading the "The Gifts of the Jews" by Thomas Cahill. That was a great book. I think it really changed the way I view the Bible, God and faith in general. It was a historical analysis of the origins of the Jewish faith and how the Jews revolutionized modern thought and brought about western civilization. This might be somewhat controversial but it convinced me that a lot of the old testament was inaccurate, having been passed down orally for about a thousand years before being put into written form. This is actually very liberating and refreshing to me as I've always found it very difficult to believe that God would do some of the things the old testament says he did (I just filed these things away as something I didn't have an answer for). It's nice to know that some of those accounts were probably embellished but that the general events are very historical and although it might not be perfect, there is no reason that belief in God should be scrapped just because the Bible may not be without error.

What is religion?

I was talking to a couple friends last night and one of them brought up some religious topics. He made an argument that religion was relative and anyone could be the answer or have the answer. It was all just whatever people decided to follow. I didn't really argue with him but I did say that if you make that argument you'd have some pretty tough questions to answer but that no matter what argument you make there are tough questions to answer. It was my nice way of saying I didn't agree with him but that I don't have some kind of "knowledge" that is better than everyone else. What did get me thinking, however, was how he reached his conclusion.

He said that he saw a magnet on a refrigerator that said something about how life isn't about who you are but it's about who you choose to be. He also read a fictional book about a mechanic in North Carolina who was the messiah but decided he didn't want to be and went up on a mountain and told God that he quit. He then chose to become a pilot and lived a happy life - like the refrigerator magnet, choosing who you want to be instead of just being the person he was born. This was apparently enough to convince him that anyone can be the "messiah" and he is confident enough about it to tell people that there is no messiah because anyone could be it.

I had a thought though that what he just did was create a mini religion. He read a book, believed the message that there is no true religion and was telling people that the absence of religion is what is true. I'm pretty sure that's what the majority of religions do. Most have a book, a message and try to recruit followers. I don't think that's a bad thing because I don't think truth is relative. If there is truth out there why would it be bad to search for it? I just think that if you are going to tell people, in a definitive way like my friend did, that things are a certain way you should probably have more than a refrigerator magnet and a fictional book. My friend happens to be a really nice guy and I think people would listen to him but I think the only reason anyone would listen to him is because he's a nice guy and it's easy to say "truth doesn't exist" and go on and live however you choose. But if what he's doing is spreading a mini religion, why aren't people offended? It's a little offensive to tell a group of people the Jesus is the only way to heaven or that not breaking Islamic law will get you there. So why is it in American culture that someone can get inspiration from a refrigerator magnet, tell people religions aren't true and it not be offensive but if you get inspiration from the Bible or the Quran all of a sudden you're religious and shouldn't be forcing it on anyone. Isn't that what everyone does who claims to have knowledge? So what is religion, if that's not?