Last weekend I went to a friend's church, Temple Bible Church. The sermon series they're in the middle of is a series on David's life and this message was on II Samuel 12-18. These are the chapters covering the aftermath of the incident with Bathsheba, Amnon and Tamar, Absalom and Amnon, Absalom's conspiracy, and Absalom's death. Now, that's quite a bit of material to cover in one sermon, so the pastor, Stephen Cheung (pretty amazing speaker), concentrated mainly on Absalom's death. I enjoyed this sermon. It was very thought-provoking and kept my focused attention even though I was exhausted. Here are my thoughts on the message.
David's sin against Uriah and Bathsheba made ripples that spread through his whole life, reaching far into the future. God, when David confessed and repented, told David this through Nathan: "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.... Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity upon you." (II Samuel 12:10-11, NIV) This calamity began with David and Bathsheba's first child, who lived only seven days after birth. But it didn't stop there. Some time later--the NIV isn't clear how much time--David's son Amnon fell in lust with Tamar and raped her. In the Bible, Tamar is described as "the beautiful sister of Absalom son of David". Perhaps Absalom and Tamar were full siblings and not half; I don't really have the motivation to study this in THAT much detail. In any case, Absalom and Tamar were close. Absalom comforted her and thereafter she lived in his house. Absalom was very, very angry at Amnon. "Absalom never said a word to Amnon, either good or bad; he hated Amnon because he had disgraced his sister Tamar." (13:22)
Chapter 13 verse 21 says that David was furious when he heard the story of Amnon and Tamar, but he didn't discipline Amnon. He couldn't bring himself to punish his son, whom he loved, even as his king. Because of this, I think, Absalom started to hate David. First he was angry with Amnon, and then he was angry with David for not doing anything. Two years after the rape, Absalom killed Amnon and fled the kingdom. His anger with David turned into bitterness, and then hatred. Meanwhile, David still loved Absalom, even though he'd killed Amnon. "The spirit of the king longed to go to Absalom." (13:39) Joab, sneaky little thing, David's right hand man, saw that David still loved Absalom. So he devised a plan to bring Absalom back to Jerusalem. The plan worked, and Absalom had his chance. He returned to Jerusalem and saw his opportunity to build up a following so he could overthrow David. I'm not sure exactly how much time passed--it was years at the very least--but eventually Absalom did attempt to overthrow David and the country was thrown into a civil war.
During this time, Joab (the same sneaky little man) was the commander of David's army. They went out to war and David gave the men this instruction: "Be gentle with the young man Absalom for my sake." (18:5) As it was with Amnon, David still loved his son. Even though Absalom was trying to kill him and take his throne, even though Absalom had nothing but hatred for David, David still loved him, and tried to protect him. So, with that instruction, the men ride off and do battle in the forest of Ephraim.
Absalom had a huge head of hair, which I imagine was a pain sometimes. While he was riding through the forest on a mule, his hair got caught on the branch of an oak tree and he stayed there, while that dumb mule kept going. Now this begs the question: why on earth couldn't Absalom get himself undone? His hands were free, weren't they? So why couldn't he reach up and untangle himself? And where were his men? Why didn't they do anything? After they were done laughing, of course.
Pastor Cheung noted in his sermon that in Hebrew, the word used to describe Absalom as he was caught in the tree was not the Hebrew equivalent of the word "midair." It was a bit more poetic than that: "suspended between heaven and earth." Is this suspension more than purely physical? He was suspended between heaven and earth. Between life and death. Between separation from his father and reunion. Might he have repented? How would life have turned out for him if he had lived? He didn't. This hair-catching incident was the last time he would ever be frustrated with his hair. David's men found him hanging in the tree and ran back to Joab, their commander, not sure what to do. "Joab! Joab! We found Absalom hanging in a tree, of all places, not even doing anything, not trying to free himself, just hanging there. This is a perfect time to kill him and end this war, but the king said to deal gently with him. I don't think killing him is 'dealing gently with him.' So what should we do, Joab?"
Well, Joab had only one motivation in this war: loyalty to King David's throne. He said, and I quote from II Samuel 18:11: "What! You saw him? Why didn't you strike him to the ground right there? Ten I would have given you ten shekels of silver and a warrior's belt." He then killed Absalom, because his men just didn't feel right about killing someone with whom the king said to deal gently.
The war was over. The usurper was dead and David was king once again. However, when David found out about it, he didn't rejoice. He didn't say, "Oh sweet! I get my kingdom back and that ungrateful little brat will never try to kill me again!" Absalom was still his son, and he mourned deeply for him. Because the king was in mourning, the entire kingdom had to be in mourning, even though they had no such emotional ties to the man who tried to overthrow their king. When Joab came back, he was absolutely disgusted with David's behavior. Chapter 19 begins with Joab rebuking David.
“Today you have humiliated all your men, who have just saved your life and the lives of your sons and daughters and the lives of your wives and concubines. You love those who hate you and hate those who love you. You have made it clear today that the commanders and their men mean nothing to you. I see that you would be pleased if Absalom were alive today and all of us were dead. Now go out and encourage your men. I swear by the LORD that if you don’t go out, not a man will be left with you by nightfall. This will be worse for you than all the calamities that have come on you from your youth till now.”
And David listened to Joab. He got up, he washed his face, and went out to celebrate and encourage his men.
This passage confuses me. As a matter of fact, Joab in general confuses me. He certainly wasn't very respectful to David, ever. Remember, he tricked David into summoning Absalom a couple years ago, so this isn't the first time he's manipulated the king. What gives him the freedom to act this way? Why does David put up with it? I just don't know.
But that's a side note.
Remember, all this happened because of David's sin with Bathsheba. Why? He repented, didn't he? So that should make it all better, right?
No. Not necessarily. You can't stop the ripples in a pond from spreading by reaching in and retrieving the rock you threw. It doesn't work like that. You have to deal with the consequences of your actions, good and bad. That isn't to say that it was pointless for David to repent. He should have, and it's good that he did. But these bad things still happened as a result of the sin.
His life didn't come back together after he repented for sinning with Bathsheba and sending her husband out to die. All those loose ends weren't tied up in a pretty bow just because he said "I'm sorry" and wrote a couple Psalms and was forgiven. There wasn't a "fix" for his mess because that's not the point. The point of repentance is not to make everything better. Our personal healing should not be the ultimate goal of our walk with God. We still have to suffer and hurt and be broken. The point is not to be a perfect person with a perfect life. The point is to be with God. The point is to be saved from our depravity and to tell others how they too can be saved.
I'm oversimplifying, and I can't express myself exactly as I'd like, but that's the general gist of my thoughts on the message last Sunday. I have more thoughts, but I won't share them in this post because it's already a monster post. I may follow up with a part two, or I may not. It depends on whether I'm motivated. And now I have to go do the dishes, so farewell. Much love.
ZB
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Monday, March 7, 2011
Hepzibah
This morning (in an hour and a half, woohoo!!) I wrote a paper for my American Literature class doing a character analysis on one of the characters of The House of the Seven Gables and telling why I identified with that character. I chose Hepzibah Pyncheon, because I like her the best, and I thought I might as well post the essay. (Keep in mind that this is a very informal class and the last two paragraphs are in a perfectly acceptable style for the assignment.)
Hepzibah
Hepzibah
First, Hepzibah has a very melancholy personality. She's regretful as she opens the shop, even melodramatic. On the day that she opens the shop, she spends longer than usual on her devotions and on her personal duties, trying to put off the task as long as possible. When she has arranged the shop as needed, she lingers for a moment at the door, hesitating. She opens the door. Then "she fled into the inner parlor, threw herself into the ancestral elbowchair, and wept." (page 42) To her melancholy personality, the opening of the shop represents not prudence, involvement with the world, and a new activity to master, but the debasement of her aristocratic family and of herself.
She's also quite a loner. The only human contact she has before Phoebe comes into the house is with Mr. Holgrave and her brother, Clifford. The people in her community have seen her as bad-tempered, scowling, and reclusive, and she has come to believe them. As a result, she removes herself from the world, choosing not to interact with other people. She does this out of fear that the people she meets will treat her badly, as if she were bad-tempered, scowling, and reclusive. She also does it out of pride. The Pyncheon family is part of the landed gentry of old. They must not mix with the commoners.
Consistent with her melancholy, lonely personality, Hepzibah is very hesitant. She finds comfort and security in routine, and doesn't wish to disturb it. When Phoebe comes to the house, Hepzibah welcomes her warmly, as a cousin should. She offers Phoebe her hospitality and does everything in her power to help her. However, she hesitates to allow Phoebe to stay in her house indefinitely. This hesitancy mainly comes from practical reasons, but she is also afraid of the change that Phoebe's presence would bring. Another instance demonstrating many facets of Hepzibah's personality is her flight upon finding Jaffrey dead. Instead of calling for help and bringing other people to help her, she takes her brother Clifford and simply leaves. She's afraid of what will be said about her, afraid that justice will not prevail, and she is also afraid simply of the task of interacting with other people.
Hepzibah's shyness makes her difficult to understand, but she has many good traits if one cares enough to see them. She is good-hearted, and has nothing but goodwill for the customers of her cent-shop, though she is afraid of them and they are afraid of her. She has a perpetual scowl on her face, not from any ill temper, but from the unfortunate circumstance of being near-sighted. Page 36 says this about her heart, though she is always frowning: "But her heart never frowned. It was naturally tender, [and] sensitive...." Her hospitality is evidence as well of her good heart. Although she describes Mr. Holgrave's friends as disreputable, and she suspects him of illegal activity, she willingly allows him to remain her boarder, and harbors no ill will towards him.
Another distinct virtue of Hepzibah's personality is her loyalty. She is entirely devoted to caring for her brother, recently released from prison. Although he treats her with disdain, her primary aim remains to make him as comfortable and happy as she possibly can. When we first meet Clifford, it is at breakfast the first day Phoebe arrives. Hepzibah is visibly upset and nervous about whether or not he will be pleased and contented by the breakfast, but she makes her utmost effort to effect his comfort. She knows that "he always liked bright faces" and "could never abide tears" (page 94) so she tells Phoebe to smile and be cheerful, and she herself almost hides from him, as not to upset him with her face, which is neither bright nor cheerful. She is willing to put Clifford's comfort before her own.
I don't identify fully with any of the characters of The House of the Seven Gables, but Hepzibah is the best fit, I think. I can certainly identify with her shyness. We both are afraid of people and develop very small circles of close friends. I can also identify with her loyalty. I care very deeply for my friends and would do anything to make them happy, like Hepzibah would do anything for her brother Clifford. I'm willing to overlook people's faults and give them the benefit of the doubt, as Hepzibah did for Mr. Holgrave.
There are some facets of Hepzibah's personality with which I don't identify. If I had been in Hepzibah's position and had been forced to open a cent-shop, I believe I would have thrown myself into it. I would have been excited for the change, for something new to do. I am not nearly as dependent on routine as she is. When I discovered Judge Jaffrey dead in the old Pyncheon's office, I would have first screamed very loudly. Then I would definitely have gone to get someone to help me. I would never have run away; I would be too frightened that they would assume my flight meant I had killed him. I can't identify with her family pride, likely because I'm not from a proud, aristocratic family and don't live in an awesome house with cool architecture. But I can still identify with Hepzibah much more closely than I can with any of the other characters. Phoebe is too perfect; Mr. Holgrave is too secretive; Clifford is too feeble and particular; Jaffrey is too cruel. Hepzibah is my favorite character of all of them, and the one I think I'm most like.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
The Word "Love"
Here's my problem with the word "love." There's only one of it. If you think about it, the word "love" can be used to describe a multitude of emotions that are entirely different from each other. We "love" pizza. We "love" our boyfriends/girlfriends. We "love" our siblings. We "love" our best friends. We "love" our parents. We "love" shopping. We "love" our country of origin. We "love" our favorite television show. We "love" skydiving or rollerblading or music or football. The emotions we feel for the aforementioned people and objects are quite different from each other, but we use the same word to describe all.
Of course, we could rephrase some of them. Pizza tastes good. I enjoy shopping. I like to watch White Collar. I am loyal to America. But there's no other way to say that I love my mother and my boyfriend. The emotion is completely different; the word is the same because there is no other word for either feeling. We could qualify it: I romantically love my boyfriend. But how many people say "I romantically love you!" when they leave for work in the morning?
And sometimes, we love one thing in different ways. I like to watch tennis, but I also enjoy playing it. However, I still only "love" it. I love my brother both as my brother and as my friend, but I still only "love" him. There aren't two different words.
I'm out of words and have homework to do. Much love.
ZB
Of course, we could rephrase some of them. Pizza tastes good. I enjoy shopping. I like to watch White Collar. I am loyal to America. But there's no other way to say that I love my mother and my boyfriend. The emotion is completely different; the word is the same because there is no other word for either feeling. We could qualify it: I romantically love my boyfriend. But how many people say "I romantically love you!" when they leave for work in the morning?
And sometimes, we love one thing in different ways. I like to watch tennis, but I also enjoy playing it. However, I still only "love" it. I love my brother both as my brother and as my friend, but I still only "love" him. There aren't two different words.
I'm out of words and have homework to do. Much love.
ZB
Monday, February 14, 2011
2011 Book List, or, My Love for Persasion
At the end of 2010 I made a book list composed of about twenty-five books or series that I would like to read. As many of the items are quite long, I told myself that I would only read ten of the items on my list, and continue working on it next year.
One of the items on said list is all the Jane Austen novels: Pride & Prejudice, Sense & Sensibility, Emma, Northanger Abbey, Persuasion, and Mansfield Park. I will also likely read Lady Susan and Sandition, two of her shorter works, sometime, but they're not on my list. I own all of Jane Austen's novels except for Mansfield Park. I can't find it anywhere! I've looked at four different bookstores in my area, and none of them carry it except for one, but it's a copy of Mansfield Park in a volume with all Austen's other novels. As I have all the other novels already, I am definitely not spend thirty-five dollars on a book that I already have most of. The fact that I can't find it disappoints me. I haven't read it yet, and will probably just borrow it from the library to read it, and buy it from Amazon.com later, but it bothers me that I can't find it. I don't like reading library books. Somehow the fact that it doesn't belong to me makes it difficult to read.
Since I haven't yet obtained Mansfield Park, I started the next book on my list: Wuthering Heights. Now that, I must say, is a strange book. All the characters are either complete idiots or complete demons, except for the narrator, Ellen Dean. I like her; she's sensible and practical. It's a well-written book, and difficult to put down, since it's so interesting. The events of Wuthering Heights are violent and strange, and seem surreal. Contributing to the sense of surrealism is the fact that Wuthering Heights and the Grange, the two main places of the action, are entirely isolated from the world. They are miles away from any civilization, out on the windy moors of England. Emily Bronte chose this spot for a reason. It emphasizes the loneliness of the characters, and their helplessness, so far removed from any other person. The unpredictable weather is also key. It reflects the extreme moodiness of the characters, and their constant warring with each other. As I said, it's a well-written book, but a little frightening and I dislike the characters. It's hard for me to like a book if I don't like the characters, so I don't think I like Wuthering Heights, per se, but I don't dislike it, either. It fascinates me.
My primary topic for this post was going to be the Austen novel Persuasion. Now, this is my favorite Austen novel. (So far. I haven't read Mansfield Park, but I can't imagine I'd like it any more than I like Persuasion.) In fact, it easily makes my top twenty favorite books. It is Austen's best work, the last full-length novel written before her death, and it is impressive. It is a masterpiece. It is subtle but clear in its treatment of the conflict. It is an easy read, but takes time, time to savor and digest and understand. It took me a week to read. (For comparison, Persuasion is one of Austen's shortest novels, and her longest novel, Emma, took me about three days. A week is forever for me to read a book.) I plan to reread it after I finish Wuthering Heights and Mansfield Park, to take it in again. Immediately after I finished Persuasion, I read Northanger Abbey, Austen's first novel, and I was struck by how much Austen matured in her writing style. Northanger Abbey isn't poorly written, in any way, but Persuasion is far superior. The dialogue is well-placed and revealing. The characters aren't static or stereotypical. Each setting is well-described but not too much emphasis is placed on them.
Anne Elliott is my favorite Austen heroine. She is different from the other Austen heroines. She is quiet and introspective, and very observant. She is very much a background person; others rely on her without even realizing how much they do. She isn't free-spirited like Lizzy Bennett, isn't imaginative like Catherine Morland, isn't mischievous like Emma Woodhouse. She represents more the quiet strength of Elinor Dashwood, but she isn't like Elinor, either. Elinor is firm and in control at all times. Anne Elliott is, again, content to let others decide what to do. She is simply there when they need her to be there, and gone when they need her to be gone.
I read in the introduction to Persuasion that Marilyn Butler divided the Austen heroines into two categories: the ones who are always right, and the ones who are always wrong. In the "always wrong" category Butler puts Emma Woodhouse, Elizabeth Bennett, and Marianne Dashwood. These are the girls who through the book learn that they are wrong, that they made a mistake. Then, in the "always right" category Butler puts Elinor Dashwood, Fanny Price, and Anne Elliott. I disagree. Anne is not always in the right. She is often wrong. When she is nineteen, eight years before the novel begins, she gives in to her family's persuasion that she disappoint Frederick Wentworth, though she knew she should have married him. She didn't stand up for herself enough. And again, she was wrong in her perception of Mr. Elliott. She likes him very much, and even forgives him for disowning her father and scorning Elizabeth when he comes back to charm his way into their lives. He turns out to be a perfect scoundrel. No, Anne Elliott is not "always right". However, her imperfections, as all imperfections do, add dimension to her.
I've always been a Darcy girl, ever since I first saw the BBC movie adaption of Pride & Prejudice almost six years ago. However, now I think I'm more of a Wentworth girl. I think I like him better than Mr. Darcy. Mr. Darcy is great. I still love him. But I like Captain Wentworth better. He's more human than Mr. Darcy, more fallible, more real. Mr. Darcy seems almost too good to be true. Captain Wentworth, however, is not too good to be true. In fact, he can be a jerk. But he's so lovable. I don't have time right now to expand on just why I love him, but I do. Go read the book and find out why for yourself.
As a side note, I watched the 2007 BBC movie adaption of Persuasion. While I wouldn't call it terrific, I do say that they did a very good job for the ninety-eight minutes allotted to the film. The book is simply too complicated to be compressed into a movie of ninety-eight minutes, but they did do a good job with what they had. They changed Wentworth's proposal, though, and that I didn't like. Everything else I was satisfied with.
Well, I'm done avoiding homework. Much love.
ZB
One of the items on said list is all the Jane Austen novels: Pride & Prejudice, Sense & Sensibility, Emma, Northanger Abbey, Persuasion, and Mansfield Park. I will also likely read Lady Susan and Sandition, two of her shorter works, sometime, but they're not on my list. I own all of Jane Austen's novels except for Mansfield Park. I can't find it anywhere! I've looked at four different bookstores in my area, and none of them carry it except for one, but it's a copy of Mansfield Park in a volume with all Austen's other novels. As I have all the other novels already, I am definitely not spend thirty-five dollars on a book that I already have most of. The fact that I can't find it disappoints me. I haven't read it yet, and will probably just borrow it from the library to read it, and buy it from Amazon.com later, but it bothers me that I can't find it. I don't like reading library books. Somehow the fact that it doesn't belong to me makes it difficult to read.
Since I haven't yet obtained Mansfield Park, I started the next book on my list: Wuthering Heights. Now that, I must say, is a strange book. All the characters are either complete idiots or complete demons, except for the narrator, Ellen Dean. I like her; she's sensible and practical. It's a well-written book, and difficult to put down, since it's so interesting. The events of Wuthering Heights are violent and strange, and seem surreal. Contributing to the sense of surrealism is the fact that Wuthering Heights and the Grange, the two main places of the action, are entirely isolated from the world. They are miles away from any civilization, out on the windy moors of England. Emily Bronte chose this spot for a reason. It emphasizes the loneliness of the characters, and their helplessness, so far removed from any other person. The unpredictable weather is also key. It reflects the extreme moodiness of the characters, and their constant warring with each other. As I said, it's a well-written book, but a little frightening and I dislike the characters. It's hard for me to like a book if I don't like the characters, so I don't think I like Wuthering Heights, per se, but I don't dislike it, either. It fascinates me.
My primary topic for this post was going to be the Austen novel Persuasion. Now, this is my favorite Austen novel. (So far. I haven't read Mansfield Park, but I can't imagine I'd like it any more than I like Persuasion.) In fact, it easily makes my top twenty favorite books. It is Austen's best work, the last full-length novel written before her death, and it is impressive. It is a masterpiece. It is subtle but clear in its treatment of the conflict. It is an easy read, but takes time, time to savor and digest and understand. It took me a week to read. (For comparison, Persuasion is one of Austen's shortest novels, and her longest novel, Emma, took me about three days. A week is forever for me to read a book.) I plan to reread it after I finish Wuthering Heights and Mansfield Park, to take it in again. Immediately after I finished Persuasion, I read Northanger Abbey, Austen's first novel, and I was struck by how much Austen matured in her writing style. Northanger Abbey isn't poorly written, in any way, but Persuasion is far superior. The dialogue is well-placed and revealing. The characters aren't static or stereotypical. Each setting is well-described but not too much emphasis is placed on them.
Anne Elliott is my favorite Austen heroine. She is different from the other Austen heroines. She is quiet and introspective, and very observant. She is very much a background person; others rely on her without even realizing how much they do. She isn't free-spirited like Lizzy Bennett, isn't imaginative like Catherine Morland, isn't mischievous like Emma Woodhouse. She represents more the quiet strength of Elinor Dashwood, but she isn't like Elinor, either. Elinor is firm and in control at all times. Anne Elliott is, again, content to let others decide what to do. She is simply there when they need her to be there, and gone when they need her to be gone.
I read in the introduction to Persuasion that Marilyn Butler divided the Austen heroines into two categories: the ones who are always right, and the ones who are always wrong. In the "always wrong" category Butler puts Emma Woodhouse, Elizabeth Bennett, and Marianne Dashwood. These are the girls who through the book learn that they are wrong, that they made a mistake. Then, in the "always right" category Butler puts Elinor Dashwood, Fanny Price, and Anne Elliott. I disagree. Anne is not always in the right. She is often wrong. When she is nineteen, eight years before the novel begins, she gives in to her family's persuasion that she disappoint Frederick Wentworth, though she knew she should have married him. She didn't stand up for herself enough. And again, she was wrong in her perception of Mr. Elliott. She likes him very much, and even forgives him for disowning her father and scorning Elizabeth when he comes back to charm his way into their lives. He turns out to be a perfect scoundrel. No, Anne Elliott is not "always right". However, her imperfections, as all imperfections do, add dimension to her.
I've always been a Darcy girl, ever since I first saw the BBC movie adaption of Pride & Prejudice almost six years ago. However, now I think I'm more of a Wentworth girl. I think I like him better than Mr. Darcy. Mr. Darcy is great. I still love him. But I like Captain Wentworth better. He's more human than Mr. Darcy, more fallible, more real. Mr. Darcy seems almost too good to be true. Captain Wentworth, however, is not too good to be true. In fact, he can be a jerk. But he's so lovable. I don't have time right now to expand on just why I love him, but I do. Go read the book and find out why for yourself.
As a side note, I watched the 2007 BBC movie adaption of Persuasion. While I wouldn't call it terrific, I do say that they did a very good job for the ninety-eight minutes allotted to the film. The book is simply too complicated to be compressed into a movie of ninety-eight minutes, but they did do a good job with what they had. They changed Wentworth's proposal, though, and that I didn't like. Everything else I was satisfied with.
Well, I'm done avoiding homework. Much love.
ZB
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)