The Lord spoke to Abraham," I am the Lord thy God, and I command thee to sacrifice thy only son".
Abraham replied,"There is something not right here. your commandments say,"Thou shalt not kill".
"The Lord giveth the rules and the Lord taketh away", replied God.
"But how do I know you are God?" insisted Abraham, "perhaps you are the devil trying to fool me?."
"You must have faith,"replied God.
"Faith or insanity?."
"Me almighty!" exclaimed the Lord."what you're saying is that it is reasonable for you, a mere mortal, to refuse to do what I, the Lord thy God,commands."
"I guess so," said Abraham,"and you've given me no good reason to change my mind."
HA HA.. I wish it was so.
IN the book of Genesis, God found a more compliant servant in Abraham, who went along with the instruction to sacrifice his son, when, knife in hand, he was stopped from going ahead by an angel. Abraham has been presented as a paradigm of faith ever since.
What on earth was Abraham thinking? Let us assume that Abraham firmly believed in God and that God exists, and he receives the instruction to kill his son. Wouldn't he be mad simply to go ahead and do so?? It might not be God talking, but the devil; Abraham might be mad; the test might be to see if he refuses. All these possibilities seem more acceptable than the idea that God wants his son dead,since what kind of loving God would command such a barbaric act?
Faith sometimes needs the devout to go beyond the evidence and believe what is contrary to all they previously thought was right and true, consider for a moment the people who believe that God wishes them to become suicide bombers, to murder abortionists or gays or to persecute an ethnic minority. Before you say that God could never command such wicked things, remember that the God of the three Abrahamic faiths not only ordered the sacrifice of Issac, but also condoned the rape of a wife as punishment to the husband(2 Samuel 12),ordered the killing of followers of other religions(Deuteronomy 13)and sentenced blasphemers to death by stoning (Leviticus 24). I wouldn't even start enumerating other loving commandments from other books.
It seems there are no limits to what God might ask,and some people of faith will always faithfully do.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
TILL DEATH DOES US APART !!!
If we want to take seriously the words the minister, shaikh or judge would utter as we exchange rings, our lives are now joined in one unbroken circle. This means putting our collective interests first, and our individual interests second, if we could do that, the marriage would be better for both parties.
But we have seen too many friends and parents relations go so badly or end up in divorce, the calculating part of my brain reasons that, if I put myself second, and my spouse puts herself first, she would get a good deal from our marriage, but I wouldn't. In other words, I risk being taken for a schmuck who romantically fail to protect his own interest.
Most couples have similar thoughts. They even discuss the problem and agree that they really would not be egotistical in the marriage. But neither could be sure the other would keep their part of the bargain, so the safest course of action for both is to secretly look out for themselves. That inevitably mean the marriage would not be as good as it could have been. But surely it was the only rational course of action to take, or is it ???
Something doesn't sound right. Two people are trying rationally to decide what is in their best interests. If they both act in a certain way, the best outcome for both of them is assured. But if one acts differently, he or she secures all the advantages and the other is left worse off. And so, to insure against this happening, neither does what is best if both do it, and so both end up with an outcome which is worse than it could have been.
Our dilemma is so poignant, as our ability to trust and communicate has been eroded by long years of wrong assessments in our modern times marriages.
Who can blame us for our scepticism though ??
If there is a wider moral to this tale, perhaps it is that trust and better communication, though it involves a certain amount of non rational risk-taking, is required to get the most out of life. It is true that if we trust others, we have ourselves open to exploitation, but if we don't, we close ourselves off from the possibilities of what is best in life. Again putting our collective interests first, and our individual interests second, should be the guide to our frame of mind, of course till death does us apart, salamat.
But we have seen too many friends and parents relations go so badly or end up in divorce, the calculating part of my brain reasons that, if I put myself second, and my spouse puts herself first, she would get a good deal from our marriage, but I wouldn't. In other words, I risk being taken for a schmuck who romantically fail to protect his own interest.
Most couples have similar thoughts. They even discuss the problem and agree that they really would not be egotistical in the marriage. But neither could be sure the other would keep their part of the bargain, so the safest course of action for both is to secretly look out for themselves. That inevitably mean the marriage would not be as good as it could have been. But surely it was the only rational course of action to take, or is it ???
Something doesn't sound right. Two people are trying rationally to decide what is in their best interests. If they both act in a certain way, the best outcome for both of them is assured. But if one acts differently, he or she secures all the advantages and the other is left worse off. And so, to insure against this happening, neither does what is best if both do it, and so both end up with an outcome which is worse than it could have been.
Our dilemma is so poignant, as our ability to trust and communicate has been eroded by long years of wrong assessments in our modern times marriages.
Who can blame us for our scepticism though ??
If there is a wider moral to this tale, perhaps it is that trust and better communication, though it involves a certain amount of non rational risk-taking, is required to get the most out of life. It is true that if we trust others, we have ourselves open to exploitation, but if we don't, we close ourselves off from the possibilities of what is best in life. Again putting our collective interests first, and our individual interests second, should be the guide to our frame of mind, of course till death does us apart, salamat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)