I came about this in Psalms (137):
"O Babylon, you will be destroyed. Happy is the one who pays you back for what you have done to us. Happy is the one who takes your babies and smashes them against the rocks!"
This? In the Bible. Not some new Quentin Taratino vision but that old good book itself! Good book? Totem of a religion that claims to herald virtues such as tolerance yet intolerance reeks from its every breath? Schadenfreude, vindication, lovelessness. And don’t they tell you to love thy enemy?
Now before I obliviously unnecessarily offend any believers let me state here that I have never studied the Bible, I have rarely ever gone to church and the times that I have visited were mostly out of obligation to wedding parties and folks in need of confirmation. Incidentally, I come from a line of pastors and staunch believers. My grandfather preaching this, his brother preaching that, one uncle preaching the other, one uncle bringing the good book and “holy” music when he visits lest our secular lifestyle should tempt him out of the queue to salvation.
Now when it comes to God, I am a great believer. And I appreciate that everyone has their own interpretation and way of conversating with and appreciating God. Who am I to claim one way is better? Who am I to claim that in this world of billions, each person with different likes, dislikes, mannerisms, lifestyles, mentalities, cultures, identities, opinions…that there is ONE RIGHT WAY to reach salvation (that’s the common goal isn’t it?). Why should I be so concerned about my neighbours’ activities anyway, when my own aren’t necessarily in check?
And this concept called forgiveness? Should I only practice it when some ulterior motive nags me to (e.g.. when I want to justify my own latent shortcomings by accepting them in others)? Should I just claim that I practice it, for claiming’s sake when really I’m harbouring graphic schemes of how, after I have led under false pretences the offender into a sense of security and warmth, I shall blast them out of that naiveté with one deft blow of quid pro quo! (See aforementioned Psalm)
I am here now led to understand that, I should revel in vengeance. That were I to take it into my own hands, I should feel myself overcome with joy. That the sight of blood and baby bits splattered over rocks should bring me satisfaction and a sense of having gotten the job done.
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
As above....Christ did away with Mosaic law and all its fire and brimstone stuff. In effect, what you are pointing to is a Jewish rather than a Christian text. The Bible could actually be aptly named "a tale of two cities". It's actually one book that offers two different (if related) philosophies.
That is why plucking a single verse(from the old testament no less)to explain entire Christian philosophy is viewed as a rookie mistake ;-)
Interesting that you should mention your preacher relatives. In my experience, African preachers have rarely understood this aspect. Maybe it's because their white teachers felt that the best way to get them on side was to frighten and alarm the poor natives....
Thanks for pointing me in the direction towards better understanding guys. I shall indeed be looking further into the "tale of two Cities" and Kui, after I read that article I shall 'report back'.
As for Rookie Mistakes, well, that's the gateway to Seasoned Successes so, unashamedly I shall "stay hungry, stay foolish" (I'm about to wear that quote out!)
Incidentally, I came across the psalms in question on the inlay of Padre Engo's CD.
On the "white teachers" and the "poor natives": that deserves a posting of its own. Soon enough…
Post a Comment