One Nation Under God

Americans across the country are stocking up on fireworks and hamburgers in preparation for Fourth of July week, and newspaper columns are taking the opportunity to reflect on the US institution as vital to the 4th of July as BBQ: the myth of American exceptionalism.

It was John Winthrop who imagined America as "the city on the Hill," a country that would be a shining beacon of liberty and hope to the rest of the world. As a nation founded on ideas rather than ethnicity, defining America's values has been both a unifying and dividing national project.

In his new book, Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion, David Gelernter argues that because America's identity has so grounded itself in its values, Americanism, like Zionism in Israel, has come to resemble a religion.

"Most nations are based on no principles; they are based instead on shared descent or ethnicity," Gelernter, a professor of computer science at Yale told the Washington Post, "The United States is different. It has a religion because it must have. Without one, it is a band of displaced persons and little more."

According to Gelernter, the Bible has been the common unifying source able to bond the nation together. It is what we use to discuss how we should rehabilitate criminals (a debate that Paris Hilton reignited), approach immigration, elect our politicians, conduct business, and curb overpopulation. In fact, Gelernter believes the Bible is so essential to the US, our current state of cultural confusion and cynicism is the result of the systematic elimination of the Bible from public life.

Ann Coulter would agree and points to liberals as the culprits. "Everything liberals believe," says Coulter, "is in elegant opposition to basic Biblical precepts." In her book Godless: The Church of Liberalism, Coulter argues that liberals are attacking the Judeo-Christian roots that hold-up America. In addition to their love of Dawinism, environmentalism, and acceptance of homosexuality, according to Coulter "[Liberals] deny the Biblical idea of dominion and progress, the most ringing affirmation of which is the United States of America." (You can read chapter one of Coulter's book here.)

Actually, argues Cullen Murphy in his new book Are We Rome?, it is America's ability to adapt and assimilate to new ideas that has lead to its prosperity; our failure to assimilate to new ideas and our ignorance of the outside world will lead to our demise. (Read Salon's review of Murphy's book here).

Take the rise of Pentecostalism in Africa, for instance. The American-bread brand of Christianity, with its prosperity gospel and promise of healing diseases such as AIDS and cancer, is beginning to over shadow the European colonial religions of Catholicism and Protestantism. American evangelists come to Africa and instantly gain popularity--making a fortune on the promise to raise the fortunes of others.

According to Reuters, US politicians such as Sen. Sam Brownback encourage these missionaries to Africa as part of the biblical call to serve the poor. (As a side note, Brownback's new book From Power to Purpose: A Remarkable Journey of Faith and Compassion outlines how he was able to overcome his hatred of the Clintons and how he came to realize through studying the Bible that his only constituent was God.)

America's continual instinct to frame our interactions with the world in religious terms--from alleviating poverty in Africa to improving relations with Cuba (Bush recently said "One day the good Lord will take Fidel Castro away")--has also fueled the global anti-Americanism.

This is an ambivalent moment in US history. On one hand the early start of the 2008 presidential election has already revealed how important it is for candidates to tie their beliefs to the Bible. On the other hand, Christopher Hitchen's new book God is Not Great is the surprise best-seller of the summer. Yet, this struggle, which seems so critical to the future of America, has also been a part of every stage of our past.

Gelernter argues that Americans needs to unite through religion, I would argue that America thrives on the debate. On Thursday Christopher Hitchens debated Al Sharpton on the existence of God. No one made any new arguments but what was fascinating was the palpable excitement from the audience clearly loving the friction. Maybe we're not "One Nation Under God" but "One Nation that Talks a Lot About It."

Should the Bible be a part of Political Platforms?

Barack Obama defines himself as part of the Joshua Generation; Hillary Clinton is fond of quoting James 2:26 ("Faith without deeds is dead"); John Edwards believes relieving poverty is a biblical mandate; Sam Brownback follows the scriptural account on the origins of man. Nearly all the US presidential candidates are defining themselves through scripture.

The Chicago Tribune is conducting a poll reflecting on scripture and the 2008 election. It asks readers: "Should Scripture be used as a model for a modern-day political platform? If so, which Scripture works best? Furthermore, should it be Christian?"

You can post your comments at: chicagotribune.com/seeker.
I will post the results as soon as they are available.

Bible Bending Movies: More Pain, Less Laughter?

Evan Almighty, a modern day Noah story, opened in theaters Friday and the reviews have mostly lamented the wasted talents of Steve Carell. But at least one review had the good sense to spare a moment to lament the film's Bible bending.

David Plotz, the Slate.com writer of Blogging the Bible fame, does not think anyone involved with the film even bothered to read the Noah story of the Bible. "I'm no great religious scholar, but it doesn't take Pope Benedict to see that the Noah story is not a charming little tale about familial love, but a terrifying lesson about our dependence on God: a warning that we are alone in the world and always at the mercy of a wrathful and demanding Lord," writes Plotz.

Plotz is especially concerned with a scene where God, played by Morgan Freeman appears to Noah's wife and tells her that most people "miss the point" of the famous flood story. Rather than a tale of God's anger, God points to out the cooperation it took to bring pairs of animals and a family together, "I think it's a love story about believing in each other."

This "pander at the Christian market," says Plotz, reveals "Hollywood's embarrassingly stupid approach to religion and faith." The simple coffee-mug morality "strips away anything Christian (or Jewish) about the story and replaces it with a message of universal hokum."

That any writer would have the acumen to recognize Bible bending is so exciting and rare I am loathe to criticize Plotz; but it can not be helped. Plotz was right to call Hollywood out for its infantile morality tales. The Bible is ripe for parody; why the need to come to a sugary resolution? But Plotz's concern is not that they are using the Bible to cater to the belief that its message is eternal, but that the movie uses the Bible wrong.

First of all, assuming that there can be such a thing as having a film be "Christian and Jewish," what could possibly be more Christian and Jewish than retelling that story over and over again using whatever cultural means available? Plotz believes that Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ, with its portrayal of "suffering and sacrifice" was closer to Christianity than Evan Almighty (I am not kidding, Plotz actually said that). Cinematic tastes aside, how does a film about coffee-mug morality disqualify it as Christian? The Bible is full of coffee-mug morality ("Do unto others as you would have done to you" comes to mind).

The problem with Plotz's conclusion, is that while criticizing Evan Almighty's attempt to distill the Bible's message into a neat feel-good moment about Acts of Random Kindness (or "ark," get it?) Plotz does the same thing, minus the feel-good. "The lesson of the Bible is that faith is hard, and unrewarding, and painful," writes Plotz.

So here is my plea to movie makers and journalists and politicians: stop coming about with lessons we need to learn from the Bible. There is only so much to be squeezed out of a two thousand year-old text; stop trying to make it support every idea that pops into your head.

Lost, found and fallow: Israel attempts to heed biblical commands

The Hamas take over of the Gaza Strip has seriously impeded a deal that would have allowed flour farmers to remain profitable while observing the biblical command to allow the land to go fallow every seven years. Highlighting further how much Israel's economic and political fortunes are tied to biblical commands, last Friday Israel today reported:

"Residents of Beit El on Tuesday joyously resumed compliance with the forgotten biblical commandment to tithe the first wool sheared from a sheep born and raised in the Land of Israel to the priests."

Luckily, because the residents suddenly became aware of Deuteronomy 18:13, Beit El's Chief Rabbi reports, “These commandments bring us closer to our dream of rebuilding the Holy Temple and supporting the priests.”

Obama's Bible

During a trip to Iowa last weekend, US Senator and presidential hopeful Barack Obama told an audience of delegates that America's current issues were "moral problems." Obama is establishing himself as the canidate with "religious values" who will dedicate his presidency to fighting AIDs and ending genocide. And when it comes to raising taxes, Obama believes he has a biblical authority to do so, "There was a period of time when the Christian Coalition determined that its number one legislative priority was tax cuts for the rich...I don't know what Bible they are reading," Obama said, as the crowd applauded. "Didn't jive with my version."

Andrew Sullivan, the popular disgruntled conservative blogger, is not surprised that Democrats are using the Bible to justify tax hikes--they learned it from Bush.

Listen to Obama's speech here.

Catching-up

As my penance for neglecting this site last week, here is a quick up-date of what the Bible is up to these days:

Why the need to report on violent uses of the Bible?
The Melbourne Herald Sun (AUSTRALIA) reports that the man convicted of raping a Muslim woman as punishment for reading the Bible will lodge an appeal against his jail term today, based on new evidence from a witness who was named but never called to testify at his trial. Florida newspapers report that a prison inmate tried to pound a pen into his left eye using a Bible as a hammer. Then there is a man in Tennessee who set several small fires in his hotel room using pages from the Bible. Is the irony too irresistible for a journalist to pass up?

The Bible and Society: An International Debate
In a letter to the editor, a man from Jamaica argues that the Bible is a poor moral muse. If Jamaica were to draw moral values from the Bible, then they would need to support genocide, slavery, and the suppression of women. The letter writer concludes, "What Jamaica needs at this time itself up from the moral abyss into which it has been led is not more religion or the appointment of religious persons to important governmental office. Rather, it needs to provide quality education for its citizens, particularly the young, to enable them to unshackle themselves from primitive superstition and mental slavery--to think, to question and to investigate instead. It is the proper use of our minds that will put us above lower animals."

Other countries are debating how much the Bible should and should not be a part of their society. I have already reported on Hong Kong's debate over whether or not the Bible should be classified as offensive. The government of Burma, a predominately Buddhist country, has restricted Bible imports to 2,000 a year. Some newspapers in Poland insert passages from the Bible into their publications. In the US, a writer for the Mens Daily News argues that the US child support policy is not biblical while another writer hopes the US Congress adopt an immigration policy based on the Bible.
Bible Speak: The Endless Comic Material of the Bible
From Sarah Silverman's "Jesus is Magic" to Monty Python's "Life of Brian," the Bible is a comedian's most valuable muse.

"Evan Almighty," the "contemporized" Noah's Ark story starring comedian Steve Carell, opens in theaters this Friday. Director Tom Shadyac prefers that the film be referred to not as a comedy but as a "Bible parable." Watch a trail here; it promises to be a "film of biblical proportions."

Also seizing the opportunity to mine a comic goldmine like the Bible, Jewish comedian David Steinberg has written a novel about his life--in the style of the Bible. "There is something in 'Bible speak'," observes one book review, "— that vague, generalized cadence where so much is left unsaid — that has set many imaginations on fire."

I think the comedians may be on to something about our Bible curiosity when they play around with its material. Trying to believe the impossible and apply the vague and unrelated to our everyday lives says something about the intensity of our desire for a coherent, mutually agreed upon order to our lives. We are struck by the prisoner and the hotel patron who misappropriated the Bible because it reminds us of just how prevalent the Bible is--it was the only thing readily available to them. No wonder so many societies try to articulate themselves using the language of the Bible. But, just as the image of Steve Carell building a giant ship in the middle of Manhattan strikes us as ridiculous, we have to ask: can't we do better?

Lets Talk About Sex

Douglas Todd, a highly regarded feature writer of the Vancouver Sun, says that everything we know about the Bible and sex is wrong. This is especially important, Todd claims, because "For good and ill, what we think the Bible says about sex matters a great deal."

Teresa Hornsby's recent addition to the literature on the Bible and sex "Sex Texts and the Bible" concludes that the Bible sends no message, or mixed messages, about divorce, adultery, masturbation, abortion, celibacy, sexual abstinence, homosexual relations and even sex with slaves. In other words, says Todd, the Bible has no justifiable place as the source of all our cultural sexual angst.

Tell me about it, says Dan Agin, a professor of Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology at the University of Chicago. "The crazy religious roots of America's sexuality" with its poor grasp of biological necessity and the complexities of social order, is "America's Sexuality Time-Bomb." A religious understanding of sex, with all its phobias and taboos, will either need to make room for the evolution of sexuality or we will see social order "crack into miserable little pieces."