This month's bookclub will be online due to the pandemic.
Please post your comments on the book below.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
Sign with your name, not your e-mail.
Stay safe!
The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman
This month's bookclub will be online due to the pandemic.
Please post your comments on the book below.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
Sign with your name, not your e-mail.
Stay safe!
Alice Through the Looking-glass
Please post your own comments below.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood
Please post your own comments.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
Tender is the Night by Scott Fitzgerald
You can post your own comments, too.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
The Only Story by Julian Barnes
Click on the map below to view it full size.
You can post your own comments, too.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
Solar by Ian McEwan
Click on the map below to view it full size.
You can post your own comments, too.
Add a short slogan to summarise your opinion.
Man in the Dark by Paul Auster
The summary of the May reading is outlined below. You can post your
own comments under it. Click on the map to view it full size:
1984 by George Orwell
The
April book is outlined below in mind map format. You can post your
own comments below. Click on the map to view it full size:
Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
The
February book is outlined below in mind map format. You can post your
own comments below. Click on the map to view it full size:
Agnes Grey by Anne Brönte
The January book is outlined below in mind map format. You can post your own comments below. Click on the map to view it full size:
The Dying Animal by Philip Roth
Alice in Wonderland
The November book is outlined below in mind map format. You can leave your own comments below. Click on the map to see full size:
Nutshell
This is the feedback site for "Nutshell" which we discussed in October.
Below is an outline of some of the aspects discussed. To enlarge the image click on it.
You are invited to leave your own comments on the blog using the comments link below.
The Structure of the Bible 4: The Covenant with Abraham
In
Genesis12 and following Abraham lives in Ur of the Chaldees, a place
known for moon worshippers.
He
is approached by El Shaddai to create a new covenant.
- The epiphany of God as El Shaddai (Gen 17), meaning 'The Nourisher, Benefactor”, the succourer as a mother to a baby. This is not a menacing God but one who will support and give life and meaning.
- El Shaddai establishes a new covenant with Abraham and his descendence, making good the promise that Israel will be the promised people (Gen 17). Circumcision is to be the outward sign of the covenant. Abraham is the first in the line of prophets (Gen 20/7).
- The promise made is redemption through the seed of Abraham.
- However the prople of Israel apostasise and lose faith in the one God (Josh 24).
- The curse is the destuction of Sodom & Gomorra (Gen 19).
- Promise of the land of Canaan
The Structure of the Bible 3: The Covenant with Noah
The
background to the flood episode in Genesis 6-11 is the “Epic of
Gilgamesh”, written in the Akkadian language of Babylonia and
Assyria, particularly
Tablet 11, kept in the British
Museum.
These
findings are in keeping with the writing down of the Bible story
while the Israelites were still in exile in Babylonia. The Babylonian epic
is assumed and transformed into the Israelite myth through the
theology of the covenant and God's special relationship with his
people. The narrative follows the covenant structure adding another layer to the
interpretation of Israel's history in the light of the covenant.
- Epiphany: God now appears as Creator and also Judge.
- The promise of a new covenant is offered where their will be no more universal destruction, the reversal of creation.
- However, the Israelites default on their part of the covenant and build religious shrines, ziggurats, copying their Mesopotamian neighbours. Their is also the case of Sodom & Gomorra.
- The curse is a confusion of languages and the dispersion of the 12 tribes, something witnessed by the Israelites in their divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and the Assyrian and Babylonian invasions.
- The story immediately follows up with that of Abraham, the promise that Israel will be the chosen people. (Gen 12)
The Structure of the Bible 2: The Adamic Covenant
During
their exile in Babylonia the Israelites began to put together the
book about their beliefs. They started the Bible with a story about
the beginnings of their relationship with God. However, they found
that they were faced with two competing narratives:
- one from the Northern kingdom, Israel, which had succumbed to the Assyrians in 734 BC and in turn had been absorbed by the Babylonians
- another from the Southern Kingdom, Judah, which was taken over by the Babylonians in 587 BC
The
peoples of both kingdoms had been reunited in their babylonian exile
but they had two differing versions about the beginning of their
relationship with their God.
The
northern kingdom (Israel) proposed the poetic first narrative (Gen 1
– 2/3) called P, for priestly because it was probably the work of
priests.
The
southern kingdom already had a J versión (Gen 2/4-25), so-called
because they gave the name YHWH, the modern-day Jehovah, to their
God. This is a less poetic and indeed older versión probably written
before the babylonian exile. It was modeled on an existing Arkaddian
narrative: The
Epic of Gilgamesh.
The
editors of the book decided to include both versions about the first
covenant God made with his people since the salient fact was not the
truth of the narratives but the affirmation of the belief that God
had established a relationship with Israel. Thus they knew who they
were: the people of God.
The
narrative structure of the Adamic Covenant follows a similar scheme
to the other covenants found in the Bible:
- An Epiphany: God appears as the creator of the relationship (the Covenant maker).
- The Covenant: the relationship with Yahweh gives creation meaning.
- Rejection: sin is the breaking of the covenant, the rejection of the relationship offered by God (in this case the disobedience of Adam & Eve, the sins of Cain, Lamech(polygamy) and Seth.)
- The Curse : Expulsion from Eden, work & death. The flood, a de-creation, chaos and meaninglessness.
- The Promise: of covenant renewal, redemption. The seed of the woman will destroy the serpent. (Good will conquer evil.)
The Structure of the Bible 1: The Background
The year 587 BC was a
turning point for the peoples who wrote the bible. The Babylonia Empire invaded
their land and Jerusalem fell. Worse, they were taken as captives to Babylonia
and treated as slaves.
Until this
point the 12 tribes of Israel had had a powerful sense of identity thanks to
their oral and written traditions in which they had seen themselves as God’s
people. Now, however, they had all ended up as slaves, not as the chosen race. It
is easy to imagine that dismay and disbelief set in through this fall from
grace. In order to retain their own identity in the midst of slavery they had
to reaffirm it. The exiles did this by setting down their beliefs in a
book: the Bible.
The core
belief of the Israelites was that they had a special relationship with God. It is this
link which structures the book they wrote to preserve their identity. The main
theme of the book then, became the covenants, or testaments, between themselves
and their God. This is what we know as the Old Testament and its purpose
was to revise their own history and reaffirm Israel as the people of God.
The first
five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, were probably written down during the Babylonian exile; others were added after Cyrus, the
Persian, released the Israelites from their Babylonian exile in 538 BC.
Recognising
this covenantal structure of the Bible allows us to divide the whole book into
seven different Covenants: The Adamic covenant; Noah’s covenant; the covenant
with Abraham; the covenant with Moses; David’s covenant; the Restoration
covenant and finally, in the New Testament, that of Christ.
(View the outline of the 7 Covenants on a one-page mind map.) to be continued...
Galápagos & Ecology?
Visited the Galápagos islands, Ecuador, this year.
The 'Charles Darwin Research Foundation', founded by a Belgian, is an unusal zoo situated next to Puerto Ayora, the prime tourist spot of Santa Cruz island.
Darwin is renowned for his discretion on the theory of evolution : the survival of the most adapted; Puerto Ayola zoo is famous for its adaptation of the least adapted. The century-old tortoise, Lonely George, is the last of a species of giant tortoise about to become extinct since he has no surving mate. No problem, the Foundation has deposited two females of another species in his caged area to see if he will mate. To date George has not done this to the disappointment of the 5 planes of human species of tourists who disembark on Galápagos each day.
Speaking of 5 Airbus planes a day, the Galápagos airport, built by the US military during World War II on Santa Cruz island, is now called an Eco airport. Eco as in ecological? Yes sir, the first ecological airport in the the world!. You may well ask: how can an airport which lands and sees off 5 Airbuses a day be ecological? It's the branding and cash flow, not the ecological reality, that counts.
By the way, the airport is around 45 minutes by bus and ferry from the capital, Puerto Ayora. This entails a ferryboat and a bustrip or taxi for all who land on Galápagos. Needless to say both the bus or taxi and the ferryboat spew out carbon monoxide to be added to the carbon footprint left by the departing Airbus. Did someone say ecological trip?
Many 'introduced' species were brought to the Galápagos islands by pirates and sailors. One of these was the tick bird (garapatero) which was introduced to rid the imported cattle of worriesome ticks:
However, the tick birds found that plundering the nests of the endemic species was easier and allowed them to survive better. Man has decided that this is not the 'endemic' way of living and has decided to eliminate the tick birds. If we followed this logic we would also eliminate the human population as non-endemic. But we are also of the human species so we don't apply this logic.
Is Galápagos a brand rather than a place? Is it a place where Mankind poses as God almighty?
I Believe
There’s an intriguing story told about that eye-catching insect, the bumblebee. In summertime it is frequent to see its plump form buzzing around gardens or other natural areas in search of nectar and pollen to feed its young. You have probably spotted one flying around tipsily, pollinating flowers and gathering food. They are difficult to miss because of their insistent buzz and striking yellow and black stripes. However, you might be surprised to learn that, according to the laws of aeronautics, bumblebees can’t fly! Restated in another way: the laws of aeronautics still cannot explain how bumblebees fly. In other words this aeronautical model is not altogether wrong, but certainly defective.
Our beliefs are just like this model for flying, they are constructions of how the world works, built up through our daily experience. There is no problem with that unless we succumb to the temptation to believe that our model really explains how the world works. The aeronautical equivalent would be expectations of lots of bumblebees toppling out of the sky.
Beliefs as Generalisations
In his book “Changing Belief Systems”, Robert Dilts defines beliefs as generalisations. According to Dilts they are generalisations about the connection between different experiences. For example one day in the middle of one of your boss’s tantrums you happen to notice that he is wearing red socks. You think it a little unusual and record it in your memory bank. However, the next time the boss goes off the deep end he happens to be wearing the same red socks. This double sequence of events, seeing the boss in a bad mood and seeing his red socks only has to happen to most of us three times and we’ll start believing that there is a causal relationship between the two events. From then on we’ll begin to expect the boss to start bellowing if we notice he has his red socks on because we have generalised the relationship between the two experiences into a reality when in fact it is a coincidence. The important point is that it is we ourselves who forge the connection between the two experiences. It is a mental construct. That is the nature of belief - we construct it in our minds.
The positive angle, of course, is that we can also learn to deconstruct, or change our beliefs. I believe that this is window of opportunity. If we can reconstruct our beliefs to make our lives more fulfilling and happier then we should grasp the chance. Why not learn to laugh at the boss and his red socks instead of seeing them as an ominous sign? Why not ignore them and avoid provoking a confrontation because we believe one should take place?
The Placebo effect
Another striking example of the power of belief to alter our lives is the placebo effect. Dilts looked into the research on placebos done in the USA where every new drug has to be tested against a placebo. He concluded that more than a third of the time placebos had the same effect as the drug being tested. This means that in over thirty-three percent of cases belief in the placebos effected a cure equivalent to the available chemical stimulant. This may not be so surprising if we reflect that vaccination works by eliciting the body’s own defence system and that, possibly, belief has the same immunological effect. However we explain it, the placebo effect remains a powerful example of the capacity of our beliefs to transform our lives. In education, for example, we can turn the placebo effect to our advantage simply by expecting students to learn well. Those who swallow the pill of our expectations will learn more than the subject matter; they will learn the benefits of constructing positive beliefs. Unfortunately our beliefs are often self-limiting and we don’t actually expect as much as we should. As Nelson Mandela put it,
"... our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure."
A model for beliefs
In his book Dilts goes further and offers a framework which enables us to explore the way in which we construct beliefs. The model of organisation he proposes distinguishes 5 different levels : Identity – Beliefs – Capabilities – Behaviour - Environment. For example if a child is having problems learning maths, a parent might talk about the problem from any one of the 5 viewpoints:
|
|
| Beliefs: “Maths is only one area of problem solving.” |
| Capabilities: “You’ll have to develop better maths strategies.” |
| Behaviour: “You don’t put effort into concentrating so you can’t calculate correctly.” |
| Environment: “You don’t do your maths well because you can’t concentrate on your maths homework and the TV at the same time.” |
The impact on the student of an isolated analysis will range widely depending on the level chosen, from Identity : “I am not intelligent.” to Environmental : “I can’t do maths because of the surrounding noise.”. Dilts invites us to view beliefs not as an isolated occurrence but as one level of the system. It is important to note that the higher levels of Identity and Belief have a knock-on effect and that working at these levels is probably more efficient. The function of beliefs, for example, is to activate capabilities and behaviours. The student above is encouraged to improve his maths strategies and make an effort by the belief that in this way she will be better able to solve other problems. In the same way enhancing a learner’s Environment, through supportive feedback, will also underpin their chances of believing long enough in themselves to allow change to take place, despite temporary failures. Belief is a construct and can be analysed as part of a system. It affects and is influenced by the other levels of the system. It is not to be confused with reality.
Belief and Faith
I believe that there is a difference between belief and faith. It is a difference in quality. Both terms suppose a leap in the dark, but faith is a belief which matters deeply, because it makes the world more sensible to the believer. Belief goes something like this:
- Do you believe that Australia exists?
- Oh, yes, I saw it on a TV documentary the other night.
- Did you believe the documentary? (Back to square one.)
Faith, however, goes more like this:
- Do you believe we were created by God?
- Well, no, I’m an atheist.
- Oh, how does that help you to make sense of life?
In other words, faith deals with the unanswered questions which seem to haunt humans. We appear to be doomed, probably by the structure of our brain, to seek to understand the whole meaning of things, including our own existence. This innate impulse towards holistic comprehension of life has lead humans to depths of despair and also to peaks of beauty. This is surely what Art in all its forms is seeking : to give more meaningfulness to life, be it in the form of a symphony, a classic play, a good book or a great painting? This is also what religious faiths are striving to offer us: the ultimate meaning of existence. Sin, after all, is just the name for the contradictory human experience of needing wholeness yet being unable to attain it. The Existentialist philosophers made a brave attempt to live on a horizontal plane with no reference to anything outside mankind. Yet Camus was haunted by what he called “le soupçon d’autre chose”, the suspicion that there is more to living than what we can quite explain. Sartre himself also admitted that there was no explanation which could account for the suffering of an innocent child. They had come up against ‘sin’, which doesn’t admit philosophy with ease.
We are makers-of-sense and we cannot but help look for patterns in what we experience around us. Christianity, for example, follows the Jewish tradition and sees in the two Genesis creation stories the expression of how life can be given meaning, the affirmation that creation exists for a purpose, not just by accident. The rest of the biblical story is an attempt to analyse and convey the meaningfulness of living. The ancient Greeks, the Maya and the Celts also created a meaning for their world through myth, as all cultures have, because they needed a holistic explanation of how their world was.
Many contemporaries prefer the modern myths of science to those of religion. It is curious to reflect that Science doesn’t claim to give a whole explanation to life but we have such a thirst for complete explanations that we attribute it that capacity. This conjures up that fun picture of bumblebees falling out of the sky.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
