To anyone who is reading this who doesn't know me personally, I have a disclaimer. I'm technically 30 years old, but I'm 76% sure that I'm still 17.
That said, I have a challenge for you.
First, look at this picture:
Now try to read the following verses without imagining them being said by the above politician from the great state of Massachusetts:
6 Now Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. 7 But Er, Judah's firstborn, was evil in the sight of the LORD, so the LORD took his life.
Hilarious, right? I know!
Anyway, moving right along...
Chapter 38 provides another example of how hard it must be to see the Bible as a static communique from a stagnant God, completely separated from cultural implications or influences. This is not to say that there haven't been many of these moments so far, because there definitely have been, but this bit seems to have an abundance of things that would pose distinct...challenges... if trying to use the Bible as a unilateral guide to ethics in the 21st century.
Judah goes off from the rest of his family, marries a local gal (so far, a pretty frowned-upon thing) and starts his own family. Three boys. The oldest marries and then dies (well, is specifically killed by God. Throughout the OT, there's a certain amount of ambiguity when it comes to things being attributed to acts of God by the text, but this is what it says, and to try and dodge/fudge it wouldn't be "dancing with the text" to quote an absolute favourite expression of an Old Testament professor of mine at Wycliffe), the second son is ordered, in line with cultural practice, to "take over" where his big brother left off and make sure that the widow is cared for and, preferably, given children, but he shirks his duties, so God kills him, too.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard this particular passage being invoked as proof-positive of the abhorrent immorality of masturbation, but I can tell you how many times I've heard this passage invoked as proof-positive of the dangers and immorality of shirking your kinsmen-redeemer responsibilities to ensure that the heir-raising potential that was cut off by the death of a family's first-born is realized, even if it means bringing in a pinch-hitter. The latter count would stand at exactly none.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that the text itself does not actually say why specifically God was displeased with the actions of Onan, so if you were to take this part of the story out of context (an absolute favourite activity for a distressingly large segment of the Christian population), there's as much chance that it's just the "base sexual immorality" of the event that displeased the Lord and earned Onan his death sentence as there is that it was Onan's selfishness and his disregard for his family's well being.
But, if you look at it in context, I find it hard to argue that the episode described in 38:8-10 is simply a sexual morality tale. Unless, of course, you're willing to insist that masturbation is a significantly worse act than wandering down a road, seeing a lady that you assume is a prostitute based on her clothing, saying a quick "yes, please!" to yourself and toddling off to get yourself some, all for the low, low price of a goat from your substantial herds. Because that's what Judah does. It also turns out that he does this with his own daughter-in-law, who he then, three months later, orders to be taken out and burned for being pregnant "by harlotry."
Now, I realized that the noisy minority of out-of-context Christian fundamentalist Republicans down south are having a bit of a heyday, with multi-hundred-millionaires bemoaning the fate of their "fellow" middle-classers and serial-cheating, chronically-ill-wife-dumping leches raving about the importance of maintaining the sanctity of marriage, but to single Onan out in Genesis 38 as the sole perpetrator of the most significant act of sexual immorality in the entire story seems to be beyond the pale... And yet, it seems to be the go-to interpretation for many, many people.
That seems weird to me. Doubly so, because even in his moral-of-the-story epilogue, Judah's big "I was wrong" revelation has nothing to do with sex, but instead goes right back to his obligations to Tamar in terms of familial continuity and the kinsman-redeemer tradition. Just saying. It's not all about sex, necessarily.
And then we leave Judah and get caught up with Joseph, whose entire life seems to be one extended emotional roller coaster. His mom's dead, his brothers have sold him into slavery, and he's been shipped to a foreign land. Then he proves to everyone that God loves him, is essentially put in charge of a large estate and is generally well taken care of. Then he's accused of sexual assault because he refused to sleep with his boss's wife and is thrown into prison, stripped of his responsibilities and any sort of reputation he'd built for himself. Then, in prison, he's awesome enough that people see that God is on his side, he's put in charge of the rest of the prisoners (that can happen?) and has about as much reputation, sway and influence as it's possible to have whilst still imprisoned for the attempted rape of the wife of a powerful and influential government enforcer in ancient Egypt. He interprets two weird dreams, completely correctly, and the guy who survived his dream's foreshadowed outcome forgets all about the guy who somehow knew that in less than three days he'd be back serving wine to the Pharaoh who just imprisoned him. Doesn't seem like something that'd be likely to slip your mind, eh?
Crazy. This Joesph guy, though... I think he's gonna be alright.
No comments:
Post a Comment