Does Uriah Know?

Last week, I was giving a lecture on Desire (Covetousness and Lust) as part of my internship. We were talking about the story of David and Bathsheba as the worst (best?) example of the danger of lust. I was suggesting that the tenth commandment, “do not covet,” is strategically placed as the last commandment because it encompasses so many of the other sins listed in the 10 commandments, and it is the opposite of the first commandment:the first commandment tells us about properly ordered desire, while the last tells us about disordered desire. I had the class list all the other sins that flowed from David’s coveting of Bathsheba, and we concluded that he broke practically all of the commandments. Somehow I ended up down a rabbit trail (which is really easy to do when I’m in 1 or 2 Samuel) and asked this question of the class: Does Uriah Know? That is, does Uriah know what David has done and does it make David’s sin(s) all the more heinous given that he’s not fooling anyone?

In this post, I am going to attempt to unrabbit trail my thoughts.

English: Uriah the Hittite

English: Uriah the Hittite (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While the narrator does not specifically tell us one way or the other, there are several hints that suggest that Uriah does in fact know what David has done. Though the king as ordered Uriah to go home and have relations with his wife, Uriah does not, and instead sleeps in the courtyard. To disobey the king is to invite death. But Uriah does not fear David. This could be because he is in a position of power knowing exactly what David has done. David would not dare murder Uriah for disobedience, for people would know that David had murdered him to cover something up.

Uriah, in responding to David’s inquiry about why he has not obeyed, says that he cannot go home and enjoy the pleasures of a homecoming when his comrades are in the battlefield, unable to also enjoy rest. He swears a double oath, on both the life and soul of David, he will not do “this thing.” Of course “this thing” is ambiguous, but I would suggest that if Uriah knows, then he is saying that he will not participate in the David’s cover-up, and ultimately in David’s sin.

If it is read in this way, then Uriah is the foil for David. Uriah, the convert to Judaism (the narrative repeatedly refers to Uriah as “Uriah the Hittite”), cares more for theology than David. This is especially ironic if we read David as a hologram of Israel. An outsider understands the honour of being chosen (a man or nation after God’s own heart) then Israel (David), who forgets.

If Uriah does know, then what David is about to do next is even more perplexing. David is so concerned with himself and with his image that he is willing to have an innocent man put to death; a man who knows David’s sin, and chooses to allow David to kill him. The honour and nobility of this soldier and friend stands in stark contrast to the self-righteous king who does not even go out to battle when it is the season for kings to go out. When Uriah disobeys the king, David must realize that Uriah has the upper hand. That he orders Joab to have Uriah murdered in such a public and obvious way shows that David is so self-centred and so desperate that it is Joab who has to rewrite the orders to protect David’s position as king.

Though not stated in the text, one has to wonder if there may not have been a prior relationship (or flirting) between David and Bathsheba, of which Uriah may have been aware. Uriah, being one of David’s top men, and being the grandson-in-law of David’s top minister, would have had many opportunities to socialize with the king. It may have been that David had previously “scoped out” Bathsheba, and Uriah should be aware of the many wives and concubines that David acquires in his role as king. Uriah, then, may not surprised that David, being a ladies’ man and being home alone while the troops are at war, would find a way to enjoy the presence of Bathsheba.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Winter That Wouldn’t Die; Community; and God’s Amazing Blessings

It was a simple enough plan. I had an appointment in Moose Jaw (the city closest to us, about 15 minutes down the highway) and Chuck had to go to Regina (about an hour further). We got a babysitter for the girls, and the plan was to go to my appointment, and then continue on with Chuck to Regina. While he did his thing, I would do errands, shopping, and have a little bit of “me” time.

We set out at 2:30. As soon as we got on the highway, we knew it was going to be bad. The wind was blowing; the highway was snow-covered and there was zero-visibility. I sat in the passenger seat clenching the arm rest, and praying that we didn’t run into a semi, or slide off the road. We made it to Moose Jaw, and decided that Chuck would just drop me off at my appointment and keep going to Regina, in the hopes of outdriving the weather. For him to sit in MJ for an hour waiting for me, would mean that the roads would probably be worse by the time we were ready to set off for Regina. We agreed that I would either find a ride back to Caronport, or just hang in MJ until 10:30-11 when Chuck would be on his way home. Hopefully, the weather will have cleared by then, we said to ourselves.

I finished my appointment and walked up to the McDonalds. When I arrived there were several messages from Chuck. He was 1 km outside of Regina and in the ditch. The tow company said it would be hours until they could come and get him.

Thank goodness for free wifi. With my iphone and facebook I jumped into action. I posted a message on facebook and on the community email seeing if anyone knew anyone in Regina who could go rescue him. A flurry of messages and conversations ensued. Within an hour, a seminary student in Regina (who I don’t think I’ve actually met) offered to go get Chuck and take him to his appointment. Not only that, the student then offered Chuck a place to crash overnight, as it was obvious that the roads weren’t going to be getting better anytime soon. With Chuck taken care of, I took a deep breath.

 

Now how was I going to get home? I checked the road report. The highway between Caronport and MJ was closed. That’s how bad the weather had become. Crud. A flurry of conversations on Facebook ensued, and a friend called our pastor in Moose Jaw and asked if I could hang out at their house. Within half an  hour, the pastor had picked me up and had set up the guest bed for me.

 

In the meantime, I was talking with the babysitter. Don’t worry, she said, I’ll just crash on your couch. The kids were taken care of.

The kids were at home. I was spending the night in MJ, and Chuck was spending the night in Regina. Definitely not the plan, but we were safe.

The next morning I got a ride back to Caronport with someone who was headed to campus. The road report said the roads were driveable. We quickly learned that they were only technically driveable. They were ice-covered. We didn’t drive faster than 40 km/h, and at several points it was safer to drive on the rumble strip on the edge of the road, than stay on the ice. But we made it.

Chuck got a ride back out to the highway to where he had left the car. It was gone. The RCMP had towed it in the night, but a snow drift was building beside it and spilling into the right lane of traffic. Off to the tow company to retrieve the car. Once there, the tow company put it on a flat-bed and had it towed to a garage recommended by the seminary student who had come to Chuck’s rescue.

It was getting close to 11. And now there was nothing Chuck could do but wait for word on the car. And he waited. And waited. And waited.

Finally, at 4:30 word came down. The car was beyond repair. It would have been over $4,000 to fix the 21 year old car. There was no point, and even the mechanic was honest enough to say as much.

(The timing couldn’t have been worse. We were only 7 weeks from getting a new car. My mom is coming out at the end of April and selling us her nearly new mini-van.)

Chuck just needed to come home. He had been gone 24 hours, still in the clothes he had worn the day before. He was tired and stressed. We decided the easiest thing to do would be to rent a car for a week. Enough for him to come home and give us some breathing room for a few days to figure out what to do next.

Off he went to find a car rental office. He then went back to the garage, and emptied out the 92 Lincoln. Car seats. Winter gear. Paperwork from the glovebox. All the random stuff that inevitably accumulates in a car. Good-bye Lincoln. The garage offered to have it sent to the scrap yard. Taking pity on Chuck, they also didn’t charge for their services.

Thankfully, the roads were completely clear when he made his way home. He came home and collapsed. We talked about our options.

We couldn’t afford to rent the van all the way through April. But if we could find someone willing to lend us a car on Monday and Thursday nights so he could go to Regina, we could survive. It would mean not going to our church in MJ for a month or so, but it wouldn’t be a problem to walk to one of the two churches here in Caronport. And Chuck could even do the grocery shopping on Monday nights on his way home. We could make this work.

And then we looked at the weather report. More snow was on its way from Thursday through Sunday. All we could do was laugh.

Even though it was a stressful couple of days, and it will probably be a stressful couple of weeks, both of us could recognize God’s blessings in the situation. From amazing friends who pitched in to help us, to the fact that it could have been so much worse (Chuck could have been stranded in the middle of nowhere, I could have been with him and had no way to get back to the girls on Tuesday morning, etc), God provided for us.

And even today, as it threatens to dump another 10-15cm later tonight, I am amazed at the glimmers of God’s goodness. The three-year-old has declared today to be a summer day and is spending the day dancing around in her bathing suit. Chuck is prepared, and has packed an overnight bag just in case he can’t get home tonight. We have groceries in the house in case we can’t get out all weekend.

I’m teaching my last class related to my internship today. Our opening Psalm, that was chosen weeks ago, is going to be Psalm 136. The repeated response that runs through each verse has been looping through my head for two days: “His love endures forever.” Whatever else happens, whatever stressful situations crop up, none of that negates the fact that God’s lovingkindness endures forever. God is good. And I am thankful.

Sunday Meditation

At first the word ‘hospitality’ might evoke the image of soft sweet kindness, tea parties, bland conversations and a general atmosphere of coziness. Probably this has its good reasons since in our culture the concept of hospitality has lost much of its power and is often used in circles where we are more prone to expect a watered-down piety than a serious search for an authentic Christian spirituality. But still, if there is any concept worth restoring to its original depth and evocative potential, it is the concept of hospitality. It is one of the richest biblical terms that can deepen and broaden our insight in our relationships to our fellow human beings…

Hospitality means primarily the creation of a free space where the stranger can enter and become a friend instead of an enemy. Hospitality is not to change people, but to offer them space where change can take place…

Just as we cannot force a plant to grow but can take away the weeds and stones which prevent its development; so we cannot force anyone to such a personal and intimate change of heart, but we can offer the space where such a change can take place.

~Henri Nouwen, Reaching Out: The Three Movements of the Spiritual Life, pg. 46-54.

 

Seminary as a Cemetery

One of the nicknames college students have for the seminary is “cemetery.”

“It’s always so quiet in the seminary wing.”

“Seminary is where passion and fire for Jesus get extinguished.”

cemetery

I’ve come to realize that these college students are right: seminary is a cemetery, just not in the way they think it is.

Seminary is a cemetery because it is a place where pride goes to die and be buried. Attitudes of “I’m going to change the church single-handily” quickly disappear as the student learns that pastoral ministry is hard work that very often has little earthly payoff. The reality is that the pastor-celebrity who has podcasts, books, and 10,000 followers is the exception and not the norm.

Seminary is a cemetery because it is where we learn to die to ourselves. This calling, this mission, this following-Jesus is hard work. It requires sacrifice of time and money and desire. Even just being in seminary for two or three years often means taking a pay-cut and living lean while attending school. For some it means moving hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away from family and friends.

Seminary is a cemetery because it is a place of stillness and quiet. Away from the traffic and business of “regular life”, of “ministry obligations”, of “the rat race”, pastors come and whether it’s only for a week-long mod, a semester or a couple of years, they find rest and quiet and stillness.

Seminary is a cemetery because it is marked with the gravestones and memorials of those who have gone before. It is where we sit and listen to those now long dead and gone. We read deeply of the heroes and martyrs, of saints and sinners. Their lives are testimonies to the awesome power of the risen Saviour. Their books, their letters and their lives are the grave markers, row upon row, that stretch upon the horizon. Some of the tombstones are shiny and new. Some are so old that they are crumbling and the inscriptions can barely be read. Some are in English. Most are in other languages. And some have no markings other than a crudely etched cross or fish.

Seminary is a cemetery because it is a place that points to the future. Death is not the end. Those who are laid to rest will not stay in the ground. One day there will be resurrection. One day Christians who are living and those who have died will be gathered together before the great throne of the Lamb. Everything we do at seminary, whether it’s writing papers, labouring through Greek Exegesis, doing a counseling practicum, or learning about pastoral care, points to and contains glimpses of the future, perfect, white-robed reality of the New Jerusalem.

Theology Round-Up February

Barth, Barth and more Barth:

Travis McMaken reflects on his experience of teaching Karl Barth to undergrads.

Rick Wadholm looks at Barth’s take on pistis Christou.

The schedule for the 2013 Karl Barth Conference has been announced. The theme is Karl Barth in Dialogue: Encounters with Major Figures. Presenters include: Cherith Fee Nordling, George Hunsinger, Paul Molnar, and more!

 

Announcements:

Check out the Manfred Lautenschlaeger Award for Theological Promise which will be awarded to 10 young theologians from around the world.

Marc Cortez has announced that he is leaving Western Seminary and accepting a position at Wheaton College.

Women in Theology is looking for a few more contributors.

The Sententias journal has an open call for papers for topics related to theology, philosophy and science.

The Christian Theology and the Bible section at SBL is looking for a few more proposals.

 

Reviews:

Nijay Gupta looks at Constantine Campbell’s Paul and Union with Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study.

Travis McMacken lists all the books he read in 2012.

Brian LePort reviews David Wenham’s Did St Paul Get Jesus Right? and Stephen Holmes’ The Quest for the Trinity.

Stephanie Lowery looks at the Handbook of Women Biblical Interpreters.

 

Gender, Sex, and Women in Ministry:

Ken Schenck takes a look at 1 Cor 14:34 and the issue of women in ministry.

The end of the month saw controversy over gender roles when Owen Strachan suggested that boys should not be told that it is ok to play with dolls. Check out a few responses to the original post, including — Hermeneutics , Matt Emerson, and Jason Morehead.

 

Church History:

Phillip Jenkins looks at the parallels between today and the “Dark Ages” in relation to church growth.

Rod ponders John Millbank’s use of Patristic theology.

Aidan Kimel looks at Gregory’s Oration on the deity of the Holy Spirit.

Thomas Kidd looks at the influence of George Whitefield on Protestantism (and evangelicalism).

 

Scripture, Hermeneutics, Methodology:

Eleanor Pettus looks at Protestant reactions to the NAB (a Catholic translation of Scripture).

Michael Bird explores what is wrong with Queer Theology.

Mike Wittmer talks about Divine Mystery as Theological Method.

Kevin Vanhoozer on the Inerrancy of Scripture.

 

Life of a Student; Life of an Academic:

John Mark Reynolds’ offers advice on what Christians should look for in a college.

Should students and pre-tenure profs blog?

 

Miscellaneous:

Brian LePort tells us about Candida Moss’ lecture on Resurrection.

Monica Coleman answers questions over at RHE’s Ask a Liberation Theologian.

Collin Hansen looks at the issue of infant baptism.

Suzanne McCarthy considers a theology of disability.

What is the greatest of all Protestant heresies?

There’s a new online collection of some of the great Christian theologians of the 20th century.

Peter Enns offers 5 reasons from the OT to reconsider the doctrine of original sin.

We are all theologians whether we like it or not.

Ben Myers gave a lecture on theology in the public square.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why I Blog

Brian LePort has been taking a look at the pros and cons of blogging as a student. In his latest post, he explores the idea that blogging can actually hinder the possibility of getting into PhD programs, or, in the case of professors, of getting tenure. Anything we do online is open to scrutiny, whether it be from potential employers or schools.

I think part of comes down to the motivation behind the blog. Do you blog as a means of self-promotion? Do you blog as a way to gripe and complain about your program? Do you blog because you are opinionated and have to comment on absolutely everything? Or is the blog a way to build community, practice writing and enter into a wider discussion?

I started blogging when I moved to Caronport as a way to connect with other people. We moved here in the middle of winter when everybody hibernates and it was really hard making friends, especially as an introvert. Blogging became a way to dialogue with people who shared similar interests related to theology, Christianity, and geek culture.

I continued to blog because it also helped improve my writing. I (slowly) learned how to get to the “point” in less than 500 words. I learned to come at an issue or idea from a variety of angles, and I learned how to nuance my thoughts so that I was not reacting out of emotion in an attempt to be the first to comment (which is a very real danger in the blogosphere). All of this has improved my writing “offline.”

And I have made some very interesting friends and contacts. It was because of the blog that I was able to meet people at last fall’s ETS conference instead of wandering from session to session without interacting with anyone. Blogging has also helped my “real life” friendships, as blogging has introduced my “real life” friends to sides of me that they may not see otherwise (again due in part to my introversion) and several of my posts have sparked interesting discussions between fellow students.

Should I have done it all anonymously? I don’t know. I did briefly blog anonymously as part of the great blog experiment, but I find that blogging openly holds me accountable. I have to own my words and be willing to stand behind them, or apologize for them if I get it wrong.

I also know that I have greatly benefited from the blogs of other seminary students. Being able to see their journeys, their struggles and their passions have been a great encouragement. And it has been amazing to see tenured professors come alongside these young students and mentor them, be it with a brief word in the comment section or in highlighting the student’s reflection on their blog.

 

 

 

Putting Barth in His Place

A friend asked me on Facebook how Barth and I are making out. For the record, the only one I make out with is my husband.  :)

That being said, my full thesis proposal is being submitted this week. Once it gets approved my life will be consumed by Barth, John 1:14, and more Barth.

Shame, Guilt, and an Evangelical Sexual Ethic

Is there a difference between shame and guilt? Are both bad? How do we talk about sin and the consequences of sin in a way that is both preventative and grace-filled?

These are some of the questions I’ve been pondering in light of all the discussions about sexual purity and the evangelical culture.

To put it simply, shame is bad; guilt is good. (I’m working with June Price Tangney’s research here, which I highly recommend).

Shame is about loss of status; guilt is awareness that one has behaved badly.

Shame is inherently egocentric because the focus is not on the harm a person has done against another (or God) but about harm against their own personal self-concept or self-worth.

Thus, shame says “I am something bad;” guilt says “I did something bad.”

Shame leads to aggression, avoidance and even procrastination. On the other hand, guilt leads to acceptance of individual responsibility, a decrease in aggression, and a better ability to empathize.

The problem with much of the discussion that has been taking place is that there has been a conflation of shame and guilt, and the result is that the discussions about the shame/guilt that has been felt or inflicted have fed the egocentrism. In some cases the comments arising from the original posts spend little time on the consequences of sin but instead become nothing more than grandstanding: “woe is me, look at me, please stroke my ego and affirm me as a person.”

I would suggest that the collapse of shame and guilt into one concept, wherein both are equally bad and the person is told that they are worthless, broken or irredeemable, is the result of an insufficient theology and practice of confession.

Confession and absolution

By having space and time for regular confession and the verbal reassurance that God not only invites sinners to his table but also extends forgiveness, the church provides a way to deal with the guilt of sin, and creates space to talk about the very real fallout from the sin without embracing a “your life is over”, apocalyptic, over-exaggeration that leads to nothing more than fear-mongering and shaming.

But there also needs to be followup, a space to talk frankly and realistically about consequences. To embrace confession (and absolution) but exclude later discussion about the effects of sin leads to a cheap grace that downplays the seriousness of sin.

An example of this cheap grace is the attempts to mitigate the guilt by pointing to statistics that show that lots of Christians are committing the same sin. Commonality/regularity of sin does not lessen the gravity of sin, but simply demonstrates that this is obviously an area that needs to be dealt with in the broader Christian culture.

Calls for a new sexual ethic are premature. Instead, the problem is that evangelicalism has abandoned theology for pragmatism. That is, it has retained the “don’t do this” without retaining the “why.” The theological “why” gives nuance, depth, and grace, things that are lost in a straight-forward practical approach.

Re-opening or rediscovering the discussion around evangelical sexual ethics should be encouraged. In fact the discussion should never be closed or settled, but should be instead part of a renewed discussion of Christian anthropology and ecclesiology.

Resources:

Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A. M., & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). “Guilt: An interpersonal approach.” Psychological Bulletin, 115, 243-267.

Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. Shame and guilt. New York: The Guilford Press.

Hackney, C.H. “Sanctification as a Source of Theological Guidance in the Construction of a Christian Positive Psychology.” Journal of Psychology and Christianity 2010, Vol. 29, 195-207.

 

Thinking about MOOCs

In his essay on Christian practices and education, Paul Griffiths talks about how liturgical practices incorporate lament and stammer. In the same way, he argues, Christian education can and should do the same thing.

Lament and stammer are not popular in our culture because they are messy and represent weakness and imperfection. We try to do everything in our power to scrub them from our church services, and from our culture. Think about the overly scripted mega church services. There is no room for hiccups, or mistakes. We even take the “real” pastor out of the equation and replace him with a slick video presentation of his sermon, one that can be reshot, edited, and molded to remove all glitches and slipups.

In education, “lament at one’s own incapacity for study and one’s failures as a student [and I would as a teacher and scholar as well] is intrinsic to learning.” (p. 120).

 

A mook: slang term for the hordes of standard-issue, disposable bad guys whom the hero mows down with impunity. Mooks/MOOCs is there a connection?

A mook: slang term for the hordes of standard-issue, disposable bad guys whom the hero mows down with impunity. Mooks/MOOCs is there a connection?

This has got me thinking about the shift in distance education to MOOCs. These massive open online courses are supposedly going to revolutionize higher education. They will be low-cost or even free. They won’t require an abundance of professors, but rather, the top scholar in the field will have their lectures recorded, and then graders will mark the students’ assignments.

I would suggest that MOOC’s will eliminate the practice of lament and stammer.

Students learn from lectures that go badly. Sometimes the professor fails to communicate concepts and ideas and yet in that learning takes place. It gives opportunity for students to ask questions, and it gives opportunity for the professor to try to clarify and reframe the discussion in a way that the student will grasp the concept. With a MOOC, the student is left to interact with a grader or TA, and that interaction is removed from the “now” of the lecture.

Students learn from professor’s struggles. One of the most profound teaching moments is hearing a professor admit “I don’t know” when it comes to a topic. By only hearing the “top scholar” the student may learn that “I don’t know” is a bad thing in academia.

Students also learn that studying and research is labour, a labour of love, but a labour nonetheless. If all they see is the “top scholar” who gets up and give a lecture on his area of expertise, a lecture that is edited and molded to be “relevant,” then the student may get the impression that research and teaching is easy. What they do not necessarily see is the years of rough drafts, rejection letters, and failed lectures that the scholar probably went through in the ascent to being top in their field. (How many people have seen actors on television and thought, “that’s so easy, I could do that” and don’t realize that for every successful actor there are hundreds more doing nothing more than working at Starbucks?)

Ultimately, what it comes down to is an understanding of the purpose of education. Is it merely about communicating information, or is it about formation of the student and the teacher? I’ve written before about the embrace of online education by Christian schools, and I think the caution I concluded with there, also applies in general to the development of MOOCs:

…online Christian education should not simply be an adoption of generic, secular online education models which are then just “baptized” as Christian.

Though MOOCs appear to the “wave of the future” I would caution that MOOCs might in fact be nothing more than a fad. Before blindly jumping on the bandwagon, we should prayerfully, thoughtfully consider the why and how MOOCs might be embraced in a way that the lament and stammer that can be retained, and encouraged.

Motivational Monday

Dad Diving

Epic_Facepalm_by_RJTH[1]Focus Poster