Anyone who has spent time amid scholarly religion tomes knows how cases used to be made for connections.Similarities were seen as parallels, and it wasn’t unusual for the learned to assert that ideas were organically related.This same style (now much out of date) was borrowed by writers proposing that what we now call “ancient astronauts” visited the earth and helped with things like the pyramids of Egypt and Stonehenge.Jason Colavito knows how to parody such writing as he demonstrates in his Cthulhu in World Mythology.Known as a skeptic and critic of what he calls “pseudoscience,” Colavito is also a Lovecraft aficionado.This tongue-in-cheek treatment approaches the subject with an earnestness that almost convinces the reader that Colavito actually believes what he is writing.Meanwhile he’s poking fun at those who like to draw untenable parallels and invent unwarranted scenarios.
All of this is accomplished by using H. P. Lovecraft’s brainchild Cthulhu.Good old-fashioned common sense tells readers that a fictional god-monster created by a fiction writer is not to be believed.What Colavito does, with a straight face (or straight pen) is pretend all this is real.Finding tenuous connections between ancient myths and words that can, from certain angles, resemble the name Cthulhu, Colavito takes the unwary reader down the garden path that suggests Cthulhu was the origin of nearly all world mythologies.Or rather that all world mythologies are reflections and recollections of when Cthulhu was widely known.Treating both fiction and factual sources with footnotes, this is a fanciful romp through “research” published by fictional characters made up by Lovecraft right next to actual sources where scholars are addressing something else, most of them in older tomes.
As an example of good fun, one thing worries me about the book.Granted, it was published before the great Cthulhu was elected in 2016, but many people today have difficulty discerning actual facts from alternative facts.“Fake news” can cover a host of sins.Reconstructing the ancient past is notoriously laborious.Not having written records means guesses are necessary.When writing does appear it is so far removed from contemporary uses of the art that its original usages are sometimes completely opaque.Receipts we understand.Myths not so much.Rituals even less.Many scholars spend their lives in attempting some logical reconstruction of ancient cultures.We have very little scientific means to test them.It might make sense, in such situations, to offer Cthulhu as a suggestion for filling the gaps.
I make it a practice not to discuss books I’m still reading on this blog.There’s no reason I shouldn’t, I suppose, but it just feels like cheating getting more than one post for a book.Besides, there’s so much other stuff to blog about!I’ll make an exception this time, because it involves an unusual typo.Well, it’s not so much unusual as it is apt.In chapter 82 of Melville’s classic, Moby Dick, “The Honor and glory of Whaling,” he discusses the mythical history of whaling.In typical Melvillian style, he takes mythical stories to support his contention of how honorable whaling is.After Perseus and St. George and the dragon, he mentions the curious biblical episode of Dagon and the ark of the covenant, found in 1 Samuel 5.It’s here that my edition has a typo.Melville writes “this whole story will fare like that fish, flesh, and fowl idol of the Philistines, Dagon by name” but my edition reads “Dragon by name.”
Image credit: Vignette by Loutherbourg for the Macklin Bible 12 of 134, via Wikimedia Commons
My very first academic publication was on this story about Dagon (I had intended to write my dissertation on that deity).I had no idea of H. P. Lovecraft’s appropriation of Dagon at that point.The interest was purely based on the fact that you couldn’t find much information on this curious god.It was clear that he was well known among ancient cultures of West Asia.He was attested at Ugarit, specifically as the father of Baal.(Both would later be assumed to be demons.)Further east, he was apparently a fairly major deity in Mesopotamian religions, although we are still awaiting a readable synthesis of that massive corpus of texts and the religions toward which it points.In other words, Dagon is mysterious.Lovecraft likely picked him up from the biblical story.
The tale in 1 Samuel is provocative.After defeating Israel, the Philistines (who would eventually give Palestine its name) took the ark to the temple of Dagon as spoils.The image of their god fell face-down before the ark overnight.Disturbing as this was, the next morning after they’d replaced him, Dagon was again tumbled but also decapitated and with his hands broken off.That meant his body was all that was left.Somewhere along the line the name Dagon (close to the Hebrew word for “fish”) was interpreted as a maritime entity.This seems unlikely, given what we know of his origins, but the idea stuck, leading to some compelling horror fiction.Dagon does indeed become a kind of dragon in that realm.My edition of Moby Dick has a typo that we today would blame on autocorrect, but in reality was likely the result of a copyeditor not knowing his or her Bible as well as Melville did.
In my more radical moods I sing along with John Cougar about fighting authority.Living in society means never being completely free.This pandemic only amplifies that.What I want may not be best for others.Not to mention excessively corrupt authority *ahem* Washington DC [coughs into elbow].Still, a friend sent me an article titled “Did judgmental gods help societies grow?”The piece by Lizzie Wade appeared in Science recently.The article begins by noting that judgmental gods are rare.It then suggests complex societies seem to have had judgmental gods at their beginnings.Moralizing gods demand cooperation.People want to do what they want.If we’re going to reap the benefits of a highly specialized society we all need to play our part, however.Authority always does win, I guess.
Wade’s article suggests that this kind of orthodoxy is now being called into question.Moralizing gods, it’s suggested, appear after a complex society gets started.Interestingly, these gods tend to be males.(That point’s mine, not Wade’s.)I have been wondering for quite some time just how the data from Göbekli Tepe will influence the re-construction of models concerning how civilization began.It seems that long before settled populations emerged, back in hunter-gatherer days, people still came together to build temples.Were they afraid of judgmental gods?Certainly they thought it was important to gather occasionally at numinous places and ponder the larger questions.Since they left no written records and they’ve all died out the best we can do is make educated guesses.Who knows what might’ve been their motivation?
The one thing that seems certain to me, no matter how we nuance it, is that religion is integral to society.Science is necessary for our survival (ancient people weren’t backward rubes, by the way—they had a kind of scientific outlook, but without all the advanced math).Religion, however, seems originally to have brought us together.Outside our comfort zones.Hunter-gatherer societies limit their sizes to people you can know reasonably well.They tend not to have private property and they share things most people in “civilized” settings wouldn’t.To grow larger than a roving band that can sustain itself by moving from place to place once the food’s gone, agriculture was necessary.But Göbekli Tepe suggests it only followed after religion began bringing people together in the first place.Were their gods authoritarian?There’s really no way of knowing that.So when I’m feeling radical I have to remember than when it’s over I turn the volume down, comb my hair and go back into society.Well, once the pandemic’s over.
What happens when someone encounters something anomalous?In real life this is often described as a religious event.In fiction that sometimes happens as well, as in Christopher Coleman’s The Sighting.Set on a beach somewhere along the Atlantic, the story is about a woman who encountered a sea monster and decided it was a god.Gods, of course, require sacrifice, and thus the tale turns on her effort to placate the beast in its current appearance cycle.Such sacrifice doesn’t come willingly, and this introduces a murderous main plot.Unlike the gods of lore, however, this one literally eats, tipping the reader off that its divinity is somewhat of an illusion.The hungry beast becomes the divine only to its blind follower.
I’ve not read any of Coleman’s fiction before, and this self-published novel appears to be a good introduction to his story-crafting.His monster, like a god, comes with no explanation.It simply is.Since religion isn’t really susceptible to being examined under a microscope, the truth of not being able to locate an origin for gods seems natural enough.Still, people are curious about monstrous origins.Mary Shelley tells us the genesis of Frankenstein’s monster, but Bram Stoker leaves Dracula’s ultimate origins somewhat misty.In the present day, with its ubiquitous cell phones and information, we do wonder if monsters can’t simply be explained.Even if that simple explanation is complex.Coleman’s title page tells us this is book one, so further elucidation perhaps comes later in the series.
The sea, in classical thought, gives rise to monsters.Coleman’s creature comes from the Atlantic.All the world’s oceans are organically connected, and their surface area is so massive that we really haven’t figured out all of what’s under there.Stories still appear in newspapers announcing this or that unidentified creature that has washed out of the sea.Its depth and relative impenetrability make it a natural birthplace for monsters.By the end of The Sighting the reader is really still only given a glimpse of what this god might be, or why, indeed, it is considered a god at all.Origin stories make monsters less scary sometimes—Shelley’s genius was to take it in the opposite direction.Often in horror stories, the humans are more frightening than the monsters. So it is here. What makes this story so disturbing is the unquestioning human acceptance of belief, for it is often here that gods can become monsters.
It’s perhaps the most deeply rooted human dream.Flying.Women Who Fly, by Serinity Young, is a fascinating book.Subtitled Goddesses, Witches, Mystics, and Other Airborne Females, the book covers all of these and more.The dream of flying is played out in many ways here, but often the narrative comes back to how patriarchy imprisons women.Is it any wonder they want to fly?Very wide in historical scope, the book can’t cover all cases in equal depth.It nevertheless demonstrates how pervasive the idea is.Beginning with ancient female figurines bearing bird-like features, Young moves through the related concepts of captivity, transcendence, sexuality, and immortality, showing how female characters are related to these idea in universal and unrelenting ways in the form of flying females.
There are many lenses through which to view patriarchy.It can be explained as a consequence of settled agricultural existence with its subsequent division of labor.Such a scenario raises questions of whether women dreamed of flight before that, and I believe the answer must be yes.For as long as we’ve observed birds and associated the sky with gods we have longed for flight.Although birds make it look easy, it is an incredibly difficult and costly adaptation.Still, women dream of travel without obstacles (let the reader understand) to the realms where deities dwell.It is difficult to summarize a book that covers so much historical territory.Young doesn’t limit herself to western religions but also spends a fair bit of time among Buddhist, Hindu, and Daoist ideas of flying women.She covers mythical, folkloristic, human, and historical flying females all the way up to modern astronauts.
As I was coming to the close of the book the real message hit me—I can be thick at times, although much of my own writing is metaphorical—men have actively tried to clip women’s wings for a long time.Often under the auspices of religion.Think of it: for centuries of existence the major monotheistic traditions have refused female leadership.The one (inevitably male) god has set up a boys’ club of sacerdotal leadership.As Young points out, even the named angels in the Bible are male.I used to comfort myself with the explanation that male leaders were simply too self-centered to consider others, but it is becoming clearer, the more I read, that men have always had a tendency to try to keep women down.And thus they fly.There’s much in this book for both women and men to ponder.
I’ve obviously been reading about the Greek gods.Apart from being borrowed and renamed by the Romans they’ve remained pretty much unchanged through the millennia.Those who read a blog like this will recognize the names of many Olympians and would recognize the name of the head honcho as Zeus.The name of Zeus is Indo-European—this is a linguistic group, and not necessarily an ethnic one.That is to say, the languages of ancient India and ancient Europe are related.Zeus, it has been postulated, is related to the word Deus, familiar to many Catholics as a Latin word for God.In antiquity most gods had personal names as well as titles, but this is something we see a little more clearly in the Semitic linguistic realm.The texts of the Bible and its surrounding cultures often preserve titles as well as names.
Photo credit: Marie-Lan Nguyen, via WikiMedia Commons
Hera is widely recognized as the consort of Zeus.It’s a bit of a misnomer to refer to divine couples as “spouses” since they really don’t comport themselves according to human-style conventions.In any case, Hera in Greek mythology is an underdeveloped character.She’s jealous of Zeus’ many affairs, and she sometimes punishes his children by other women or goddesses.Her name is a bit of a mystery, and the other day I was trying to remember where I’d read that she may be a shortened form of Asherah.My research on Asherah is now nearly old enough to fit in with the classics, but much of it still remains fresh in my mind.In any case, the reasoning went like this: Asherah always appears as the consort of the high god.The Greek Zeus was clearly influenced by Semitic ideas associated with Hadad, or Baal.And while Asherah was not Baal’s consort, Zeus is clearly the high god so his main squeeze should be that of the highest order.
Greek, as a language, had trouble beginning words with a vowel followed by the “sh” sound, like Asherah.The argument went that if you knock the “as” off the front of that divine name you’re left with Herah, and the final h isn’t pronounced anyway.This line of reasoning always made sense to me.Deities in antiquity were defined more by what they did than by what their names were.In a patriarchal world, being the consort of the highest male was about the most a goddess could aspire to.Still, we all know of the more colorful individuals who take a more forward position: Athena and Artemis—both powerful virgins—and the somewhat more naughty Aphrodite.All those names beginning with alpha!They could teach us something today, I suspect, if we read our classics.
There’s a lot to like about Iceland.It has geothermal heat.The people are literate and proud of it.They don’t have an army.Viking heritage and northern lights—what an interesting place!A friend recently sent me a satirical piece on Patheos titled “Iceland Declares All Religions Are Mental Disorders,” by Andrew Hall.I may not be as naive as I once was, but I have to admit I was nearly taken in on the fly.Maybe because the idea seems so much better than what we have over here in our warmer, but less educated world.Clearly, however, religion is extremely important to people, and if it is a mental disorder it’s an essential one.Hall mades the astute point that Iceland didn’t want to become like the United States.Who would, at this point?
Although this is a satirical piece, like most satire it works because it has chunks of truth in it.Countries run by religions do seem to get into quite a lot of trouble.I often think this is primarily a monotheistic problem.If a nation accepts many gods, then adding those of other peoples is hardly an issue.With a single deity, however, there is a single truth.Anyone different is, by default, wrong.When entire nations self-identify with a religion, it is only too easy to begin seeing those who believe differently just across the border as a threat.Faith becomes fight.As if a deity who always claims to value peace is only satisfied when we’re killing those who don’t share our same peaceful outlook.Irony and satire have met together, it seems.
I’ve never been to Iceland.It’s on my bucket list.As a rockhound, the volcanic nature of the place calls to me.I do wonder, however, how a vegan might fare on a far northern island.My times in Orkney are among my mental treasures.Those northern Scottish isles were places of wonder.Not the most options regarding comestibles, however.What they lacked in food they made up for in magic.Iceland, despite the satire’s bite, has a considerable population that believes in the little people.Anyone who’s too quick to dismiss such things ought to spend some time in the far north.Driving to the ancient sites of Orkney certainly shifted my perspective a bit.There’s great value in listening to the wisdom of those relatively isolated from the rest of the world.You might, however, have to bring your own beans.
Symmetry.It’s pleasing to the eye.And significant dates are often the basis for holidays.Today is one of those extremely rare palindrome days.As my wife pointed out to me 02-02-2020 is a configuration that hasn’t occurred since 01-01-1010, or over a millennium ago.The next one will be after we’re all long gone, on 03-03-3030.Not only that, but today is part of a holiday cluster.It’s Groundhog Day.Yesterday was Imbolc, the Celtic cross-quarter day initiating spring.Imbolc is also known as St. Brigid’s Day.Today is called Candlemas, by liturgical Christian tradition.We are living through a truly unique day.Every day, I suppose, is unique, but the spirits are afoot today.
I’ve written about Groundhog Day before.With its prognosticating rodent, it tells us if spring is on the way or if it’s going to be delayed.Imbolc falls about halfway between the winter solstice and the vernal equinox.In Celtic cultures this was a cross-quarter day, a time of uncanniness.Spirits cross between worlds on days such as this.In days of yore, it was also the feast of the goddess Brigid.Christianity has always been an opportunistic religion.When missionaries to places like Scotland and Ireland couldn’t convince the locals to give up their deities, they made saints of them.St. Brigid is a fabrication of a Celtic goddess, not an actual saint.For similar reasons in the quarter-year counterpart to Imbolic, Samhain, the church moved All Saints Day to November 1 and All Souls to November 2.The Celts continued using the trappings of their cross-quarter day and eventually gave us Halloween.Imbolc never caught on in quite the same way.
The early Christians didn’t know when Jesus was born.Christmas was established on December 25 because of all of the solstice celebrations at that time of year.All that pagan jubilation had to be subsumed under a more solemn occasion.Building on that mythical date, New Year’s Day was January 1 because that’s when Jesus would have been circumcised, eight days later.Thirty-three days after a male child’s circumcision, a woman was to make an offering for purification in the temple.According to Luke, Mary did this, and 33 days after January 1, in keeping with our fictional date-keeping, is February 2.A tradition grew that Christians would bring their candles to church to be blessed that day (Jesus being the light of the world).This blessing of candles was named Candlemas.I first encountered it at Nashotah House, where it was still celebrated even as a sleepy woodchuck in Punxsutawney was rubbing his eyes.Not exactly a palindrome, but there’s a remarkable symmetry to it, no?
Some books take you to strange places.Not all of them are fiction.I began Nightmares with the Bible as a way of understanding the many, disparate ideas of demons I encounter in popular culture.(I can’t tell you too much about my conclusions, otherwise you wouldn’t be tempted to buy the book!)One of those nagging questions is: what does “based on a true story” mean?I’ve known of Walter Wink’s powers trilogy for many years.Because of my research I’ve now settled down to read Unmasking the Powers (number two, for those keeping count).This book will take you into strange places.Wink was very much a Christian in his outlook and orientation.At the same time, he raises questions I’ve had other Christians put to me—were the “gods” of other nations, as in the Bible, real?That word real is slippery, and Wink tries to hold onto it.
Unmasking the Powers is a kind of systematic exploration of the various “spirits” found in the universe we inhabit.One of these is the Devil, and although Wink doesn’t see him as necessarily a “being,” neither does he find the Bible making him entirely evil.Indeed, one of the great conundrums of monotheistic belief is theodicy; how is it possible to justify the goodness of a single, all-powerful deity in a world with so much suffering?Wink approaches this question from an angle we might not anticipate.He then deals with demons.Since this is my subject in Nightmares, I found his discussion apt.And yet again, strange.Powers emanate from the institutions we create (you might have correctly guessed this was the book I wrote about on Tuesday).Wink is willing to challenge materialism and take such powers seriously.
Finding a new perspective when we’ve been reared in a materialistic one, can be difficult.For those of us raised religious, there was an inherent schizophrenia involved.Our teachers told us of a mechanistic universe, but had Bibles on their desks.(Yes, this was public school, but let’s not kid ourselves.)While physics taught us everything could be quantified, church taught us that spirit couldn’t.At least not by any empirical means.Wink will unblinkingly take you there.He offers both scientific and spiritual points of view on these entities, although he tries to refrain from calling them such.Still, he records many people who have seen angels.And although quantum entanglement wasn’t really known when he wrote this book, if it had been, Wink would’ve been nodding his head.
Time. It’s a resource of which I’ve become acutely aware.If I probe this I find that among the assorted reasons is the fact that I’ve finished my fourth book and I realized I’m much further behind that I’d hoped to be at this point.It took me a decade to get Weathering the Psalms published and Holy Horror seems never to have gotten off the ground.I’ve pretty much decided to try to move on to writing that people might actually read, and academic publishing clearly is not the means of reaching actual readers.I can’t help compare myself with prolific writers like Neal Stephenson.(It helps that he’s a relative.)I just finished Fall, Or Dodge in Hell, and was wowed by the impact of both the Bible and mythology on the story. I’ve always admired the way that writers like Neal can not only comprehend technology, but also can project directions into which it seems to go.
Not to put lots of spoilers here, but the story of one generation of gods being conquered by another is the stuff of classic mythology.Many assume it was the Greeks who came up with the idea, what with their Titans and Olympians and all.In actual fact, these stories go back to the earliest recorded mythologies in what is now called western Asia.For whatever reason, people have always thought that there was a generation of older gods that had been overcome by a younger generation.Even some of the archaic names shine through here.Like many of Neal’s books, Fall takes some time to read.It’s long, but it also is the kind of story you like to mull over and not rush through.Life, it seems, is just too busy.
There’s a lot of theological nuance in Fall, and the title clearly has resonance with what many in the Christian tradition categorize as the “Fall.”(Yes, there are Adam and Eve characters.)Those who are inclined to take a less Pauline view of things suggest that said “fall” wasn’t really the introduction of sin into the world.Anyone who reads Genesis closely will see that the word “sin” doesn’t occur in this account at all.One might wonder what the point of the story is, then.I would posit that it is similar to the point of reading books like Fall.To gain wisdom.Reading is an opportunity to do just that.And if readers decide to look into matters they will find a lot of homework awaits them.And those who do it will be rewarded.
“Which god would that be? The one who created you? Or the one who created me?” So asks SID 6.7, the virtual villain of Virtuosity.I missed this movie when it came out 24 years ago (as did many others, at least to judge by its online scores).Although prescient for its time it was eclipsed four years later by The Matrix, still one of my favs after all these years.I finally got around to seeing Virtuosity over the holidays—I tend to allow myself to stay up a little later (although I don’t sleep in any later) to watch some movies.I found SID’s question intriguing.In case you’re one of those who hasn’t seen the film, briefly it goes like this: in the future (where they still drive 1990’s model cars) virtual reality is advanced to the point of giving computer-generated avatars sentience.A rogue hacker has figured out how to make virtual creatures physical and SID gets himself “outside the box.”He’s a combination of serial killers programmed to train police in the virtual world.Parker Barnes, one of said police, has to track him down.
The reason the opening quote is so interesting is that it’s an issue we wouldn’t expect a programmer to, well, program.Computer-generated characters are aware that they’ve been created.The one who creates is God.Ancient peoples allowed for non-creator deities as well, but monotheism hangs considerable weight on that hook.When evolution first came to be known, the threat religion felt was to God the creator.Specifically to the recipe book called Genesis.Theistic evolutionists allowed for divinely-driven evolution, but the creator still had to be behind it.Can any conscious being avoid the question of its origins?When we’re children we begin to ask our parents that awkward question of where we came from.Who doesn’t want to know?
Virtuosity plays on a number of themes, including white supremacy and the dangers of AI.We still have no clear idea of what consciousness is, but it’s pretty obvious that it doesn’t fit easily with a materialistic paradigm.SID is aware that he’s been simulated.Would AI therefore have to comprehend that it had been created?Wouldn’t it wonder about its own origins?If it’s anything like human intelligence it would soon design myths to explain its own evolution.It would, if it’s anything like us, invent its own religions.And that, no matter what programmers might intend, would be both somewhat embarrassing and utterly fascinating.
While not a woman, I am over fifty and I have both a personal and professional interest in goddesses.Some friends recently asked how I came to write a dissertation on a goddess, and thinking about that has revealed some aspects about my outlook, but those will need to wait a little.We read Goddesses in Older Women by Jean Shinoda Bolen because my wife wanted my opinion on it.We read books together while washing dishes—we’ve been doing this since we married over thirty years ago—and despite my not requiring the subtitle, Becoming a Juicy Crone, I was game.I have been curious about the experience of others since I was quite young.Since half the others in the world are female, it makes sense to be in dialogue and to be willing to learn.
Bolen uses classical goddesses as Jungian archetypes to help post-menopausal women sort out their feelings and spirituality in what has been called the “crone” phase of life.This is part of an antique triad that many would rather dismiss: virgin, mother, crone.Still, Bolen embraces it as fairly common in women’s experience.Men, although they can be elected to the White House while doddering old fools, don’t pass through such distinctive stages.In fact, some never mature.Women’s lives are defined by reproductive capabilities in ways men’s simply aren’t.Instead of dismissing half of human experience as irrelevant, we should listen to the accumulated wisdom of women.Bolen, who is an M.D., isn’t an historian of religion, but her remarks about the various goddesses explored (Asherah isn’t one of them) are insightful.I listened as my wife read, and this was quite a learning experience.
We have, as a species, often failed our females.Males, using that “might makes right” physiology and theology, have often assumed masculine agendas are the only ones that matter.Look around the world today and see where that’s gotten us.We’re killing our own planet in the name of greed and ignorance just so that nobody can be richer than me.I think it’s time we let the women have a chance to run things.Even though ancient mythologies often reflect the patriarchies under which they were written, many allow women more powerful and authentic roles than they currently have.Even El, the head of the Ugaritic pantheon, could change his mind when approached by Asherah.I learned much from this book, just as we learn so very much by listening to those who differ from ourselves.And the goddesses, almost always, are the ones who possess true wisdom.
I am not a conservative.There, I’ve said it.You have very little control over who your parents are or how they raise you.As I confessed here many times, I was raised in a conservative Christian home of the fundamentalist stripe.Like most kids scared of Hell I took it all very seriously.It is the reason I followed the career path—or perhaps career swamp trek—that I have.In any case, the other day I was looking through a Baker Academic catalogue.Baker, in case you don’t follow the high drama of the publishing industry, is one of the many Christian publishing houses with roots in Grand Rapids, Michigan.Like most publishers in that collective, it tends toward the conservative end of the theological spectrum.As I flipped through I noticed bio after bio of authors with Ph.D.s from Edinburgh, Cambridge, and other prestigious universities in the United Kingdom.
I hadn’t been warned, you see.Many conservatives who want a doctorate study in the UK because they can do so without taking all those classes that will make them examine the Bible critically.That’s not why I went to Edinburgh, but I can see how it might look like that from the outside.I went to Grove City College—a bastion of conservatism.(I was raised that way, remember?)My next educational move should give the lie to my attempt to remain conservative; Boston University School of Theology was considered the most liberal United Methodist seminary in the pre-Internet days.I attended for that very reason.Edinburgh, my true alma mater, was selected because they offered a scholarship that made it possible for a poor kid to finish a doctorate.I wasn’t conservative when I went, and I wasn’t conservative when I came out.
I didn’t get the memo, I guess.The sneaking suspicion that I might be conservative has dogged my career.My dissertation can be read that way, but it’s not a conservative argument.I merely suggested the decision to marry Yahweh off to Asherah was a bit hasty, based on the actual evidence.I’m all for married deities—they tend to be less frustrated toward humanity.Maybe the Almighty could speak to Mrs. God about correcting these worries about what I “really believe.”I went to a conservative college to learn—there were a fair number of attempts to indoctrinate there, but if you thought about things you could see through them, even with a fundie upbringing.But as I thumb through the catalogue I can see how perceptions can work against you, especially when your first job is at a conservative seminary, eh, Mrs. God?
The failure of India’sChandrayaan 2 to maintain contact, intended to make India the fourth nation to successfully conduct a lunar landing, sent me reading about the moon.I remember the first manned landing, which happened when I was six, so the idea that we could make it that far seemed less impressive than it really is, I suppose.I was fascinated by early space travel, and part of this may have been because of the moment of silence announced in school the day Apollo 13 safely returned to earth after the oxygen tank explosion that made its landing impossible.As I was reading about the many moon missions that took place before I was born, I was surprised to learn how many nations are still attempting to reach our nearest neighbor.This year alone China, Israel, and India have all attempted to land up there.
Israel’s mission called its lunar lander Beresheet.It was the first attempt to land the Bible on the moon.Beresheet is the Hebrew title of Genesis.The US missions were named Pioneer, Ranger, Surveyor, and Apollo.Ironically for the persistently religious nation, our only supernatural title was the name of a Greek deity.Israel was true to its roots with its naming convention, but there is kind of a paradox involved.In the world of the Bible the earth is the center of the universe and the moon is a quasi-living being circling about our stationary fix in this fictional view of the cosmos.That’s not to say our own views may not some day be regarded as fictional as well, but simply that we now know the view in Genesis is incorrect.
Of course, the word “genesis” can mean a purely secular beginning as well.It is a compound word that is often translated as “in the beginning.”As such, it is appropriate for the first attempt at a moon landing, or any other great venture.Still, it is instantly recognizable as the first word in the Bible, indicating a kind of strange juxtaposition where the biblical moon—which is not the same as the astronomical moon—are brought together.Unlike the book of Genesis, the moon has been reached many times by others before.The old and the new meet in this attempt to reach into space.Meanwhile our problems continue down here.Maybe that’s why we continue to attempt to reach the heavens.And in that sense, no better title applies than that of the book that somehow defies rational explanation.
This past week we had a plumber here for a day.Our house has been owned by a succession of DIY weekend warriors who had more confidence than ability when it came to things like electric and water (which, I’ve learned, you want to keep apart).Somehow our home inspector failed to spot these costly fixes, and I try to think of them all as investments—a concept foreign to a guy with my background of living paycheck to paycheck.In any case, all this plumbing has me thinking deep thoughts about water.And depth.Things are seldom what they seem—there’s more below the surface, and those who struggle with the depths often come up with sayings we call profound.And they often express them in poetic form because, when you get deep enough, words themselves break down.
I often consider this in the context of science.Physicists break things down into formulas.There’s a certain uniformity, they tell us, until you reach the quantum level, then the rules change.I sometimes see this as an analogy with the staid nature of scientific prose versus the depth of good poetry.Or even, dare I suggest it, profound fiction.These sometimes explain our world better than the accepted facts of mundane existence, such as water always seeking the lowest point.There comes a profundity, however, at which down becomes up.The behavior of water, which we want in our houses but only in controlled locations, is somehow indicative of this.“Deep calls unto deep” as one ancient source says.And the plumber walks away with a good chunk of your cash.
Learning about science in school, I was always taught that good science is elegant—there should be beauty in a theory that explains the world.I’ve often wondered how this fits in with a reality that is often messy—chaotic even.Ancient peoples from the area that produced our Bible believed water to be chaotic.It had to be controlled by the gods.It is vital for life, we need it and yet it wreaks havoc on dry land as those who experience hurricanes know all too well.The world into which I was born was one of indoor plumbing.Once water gets in, as our leaky roof attests, it introduces chaos in a place we want to stay dry.When water won’t behave like we want it to, however, we no longer call on the gods.We call a plumber and pay our offering with profound reverence.