O Little Ones!

Book fifteen tells a lot of separate stories with separate meanings, it is the only way to look at it that makes sense. Most of these stories ii liked very much, they are very true and can totally be adapted for life. For example, Confucius explains that even gentlemen have problems, but they don't let their problems overwhelm them. This inspires me to be a gentlemen, to at least pick up that habit of controlling my own life and not letting exterior things control me. It also says something about judging a person based on what you, not others, think- regardless if it is good or bad. I think this distinction is very important to make, because we hear everywhere the 'don't judge a book by its cover'. We always assume that we are judging it based on wrongness, but no one ever points out that it's exactly the same with judging it as good from the outside. It doesn't work.

In Book seventeen we hear more still about the Odes. We have no idea what they are yet they keep coming up again and again the text, like here where The Master asks, 'Little Ones, why do none of you learn the Odes?' (17:9) (I thoroughly enjoy the use of 'Little Ones') He talks about how The Odes are great because they teach you how to act correctly and they educate you about the trees and birds- here we go again with the culture. This man has got a fascination! - But aren't told what the Odes are.

In another part he complains about having to speak so much, after all, all he ever does is talk, and when asked how he could direct his 'Little Ones' without speaking he answers: 'What does Heaven ever say? Yet the four seasons are put in motion by it and the myriad creatures receive their life from it. What does Heaven ever say?' I say that this is a great comeback. It makes me think about how this all really works: everything works perfectly in sync yet there is nothing guiding it. Earth truly is a miracle. Plus, that was a big burn to the person who asked, Burn!

In Book eighteen Confucius confronts himself with a question: Why does he spend his time teaching all of this to the bad men of today? And he says, 'If the Way were realized in the world, then I would not need to change anything.' (18:6) this makes me kind of depressed because it means that we are so bad that we need to be saved, but hundreds of years later we are even worse than we were before.

Dream of Little Sheep

Book seven of the Analects summarizes the whole concept of Confucianism in one sentence: 'Set your heart upon the Way, rely upon Virtue, lean upon Goodness, and explore widely in your cultivation of the arts.' (7:6) These are the main points I've understood, but I only wish it was this simple. Book seven also has some parts different from all the rest, they describe what the Master does- or what he doesn't do- instead of quoting him. He is always doing one thing while acting completely oppositely, like balancing out the forces, 'composed and yet fully at ease.' (7:4)

In Book eight the Master says: 'The common people can be made to follow it, but they cannot be made to understand it.' (8:9) This makes me feel like we are a stupid flock of sheep. This statement is sadly true, people, society, as a whole is stupid. We all follow the same fashions, all buy the same things, all act the same way. And why? Well, nobody knows. We just do it because everyone else does it. Not even do we understand it.

The Master seems to have a strong passion for culture and for people who are cultured. We see this when he is praising Yao and one of the things he exalts is 'glorious [he is] in cultural splendor!'

Book eleven also brings up the topic of the disciples' ambitions. They each plan for something of importance, except Zengxi who wishes with 'a company of five or six young men and six or seven boys to go bathe in the Yi River and enjoy the breeze upon the Rain Dance Altar, and then return singing to the Master's house.' (11:26) Confucius was completely with this ambition, because he says that the others are too big. It is like that saying that goes: taking one little step at a time. Dream big but make those dreams reachable, or else it will only cause unhappiness.

Confucius Confuses Me!

The Analects, the kind of Holy Book for Confucius, is arranged in Books. I can't see how the contents of each Book are related to each other, and this leads to a bunch of life lessons taught by 'The Master' bundled up in an unorganized matter. It is confusing but at the same time it somehow makes sense.

Book four says something I really like: 'Do not be concerned that no one has heard of you, but rather strive to become a person worthy of being known.' (4:14) I think this is a great aphorism because it is basically saying stop waiting around for others to do something, do it yourself! I am so freaking tired of having everybody complain about other people, when in reality the problems they have are their problems and it is nobody else's job to solve them and make them happy. It's kind of a like do-it-yourself kind of theory.

This Book starts by taking of Goodness, is followed by The Way, then moves on to being your own person, and finally ends with how you should treat your parents. See what I mean? It's kind of like a disorderly order, very much like my room!

In Book five Confucius (who I assume is 'The Master') talks mostly about the Way a gentleman has to go through to be Good, however, he teaches this by giving examples of what not to do. He never says what makes a man Good, instead he asks: 'what makes you think he deserves to be called good?' (5:19)

Something that grabbed my attention in this Book is when Confucius asks his students what their aspirations are. One of them is 'to be able to share my carts and horses, clothing and fur with my fellow students and friends, without feeling regret.' The other is 'to avoid being boastful about my own abilities or exaggerating my accomplishments.' (5:26) What surprises me is that out of everything they could have wished for they ask for generosity and modesty. Even the Master asks for something a little more self-centered.

I didn't really understand Book six. It starts by praising Yan Hui for his dedication and goes on to describe the Good ways and how virtue and Goodness is maintained. I did notice however that the Master talked to a lot of different people, probably students. This gave me the idea that these rules and these concepts can be applied to anyone who seeks them and wants them enough, probably the effect they wanted.

Random Aphorisms, or Psalms

Psalm 23 is a Psalm of David, and it describes his life and his relationship with God perfectly. The main thing which does that is when it says: 'I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.' This might be talking about the covenants that God has, mainly about the one he has with David, because no matter what happened, God always had his back, always defended his and saved him from other petty humans who weren't as good. 'The LORD is my shepherd;' 'though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me'. These two passages show how devoted David is, was, to God. It shows the safety that all the covenant men feel, from the jealousy of other men and their anger which I have previously mentioned.

Psalm 42 is all different metaphors, like brooks and tears and swords, which ask the same question: 'Where is thy God?' I found this Psalm written in a very different manner than the rest of the Bible, it seems more metaphorical, poetic, romantic but at the same time, desperate. We don't know who is talking, who is searching for his lost soul in God, so that makes it even deeper, I think.

Psalm 51 is rather confusing. In the beginning it says: 'To the chief Musician' from David. We can assume it is David who wrote it, but we can't assume who he is speaking to. He seems to be ordering the musician to clean him-if you take it literally- but he is at the same time asking God to 'Create in [him] a clean heart, O God'. David seems to be recognizing his sins before he was overthrown by his own son, and he is asking for forgiveness from them. I think this shows David has grown a lot, after all, apologizing and asking for forgiveness is never easy- I should imagine doing that to God must be even harder.

Psalm 137 talks about someone asking for forgiveness. I assume it is the children of Edom: 'Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom'. I think they are being rather selfish, saying that they shall be remembered and that they shall always be happy. This is another very conditional form of faith, I do something for you and you give me something back. I think so many cases of this might reflect on the leader, no offense.

I don't know if these Psalms are the most important, or relevant, or if they are in fact random, but I did notice something that they all have in common. They all talk about God in a way that seems unreachable, they all proclaim God as a superior but yet someone who takes care of them. This is the God I'm actually used to, and because of this and the much simpler language that is used, I like this part of the Bible better than the rest. I can easily relate to it- metaphorically speaking.

David’s Faces

The impression I get of the people in the Bible, from Samuel and all the other Books, is that they have no sense of self. They just follow what their leader says, without doubting or giving their opinion on it, whether it means to give up your wife, to give yourself up, or to go on a task that will surely end up bringing your death. What spurred this train of thought is when Michal, David's I think ex-wife, Saul's daughter, and now Phaltiel the son of Laish's wife, is summoned for Abner. Her husband of the time goes after her, weeping, but when he gets there Abner says to him: 'Go, return.' 'And he [stupidly] returned.'

After an episode where two of David's men killed one of Saul's sons, as a kind of revenge on Saul for being David's enemy, we see how good David really is, how holy he acts. I don't know why he does this, maybe to be good in the eyes of the Lord, but when he hears about what happens he reprimands the two men and, going too far, sends them to be killed. I think his acts balance out, because he says he has no respect for death yet he is the one that causes two of them.

One thing that caught my eye was this: 'David was thirty years old when he began to reign' This surprises me because all throughout the Book of Genesis we saw that the people lived up to nine hundred years, just started their lives around the one hundreds', but here is David at a mere thirty years and at the top of his life.

I can now doubt what I said about David being good and holy, because David himself says something about 'the Jebusites, and the lame and the blind, that are hated of David's soul,' and I am very confused because in everything that I previously knew about God, he was supposed to have even more love and compassion for the lame and the blind, he cures them and keeps them safe. However, David represents just the opposite of that, banishing them from his city- which he took from them.

In the part where David and all the cities go out and celebrate for the ark of the Lord, I see God reinforcing his power and putting everybody in their place through fear. He kills Uzzah just because he touched the ark, and makes an example of him, as if saying, 'I am The Man, nobody deserves anything except me, and you lousy humans exist only to worship and respect me.' This kind of attitude from God, the self-centered, pompous, arrogance is something very recurrent throughout the Bible, especially in this Book. It is unlike any image I've ever seen of God, as the traditional image we are given is that he is caring and loving and only cares about our wellbeing. I am beginning to really have a different perspective on this religion, and feeling a little tricked into a false image of God. From what I have read of the Old Testament I get the feeling that God is a morally ambiguous character.

'And it was so, that when they that bare the ark of the LORD had gone six paces, he sacrificed oxen and fatlings.' This is when David brings the Lord's ark into his house from Obed-edom the Gittite's house just because the ark's keeper is blessed by the Lord. We see how David only worships God because he fears Him, how he only prays and sacrifices in His honor when it will bring something good for him. I think David is a total suck-up, only doing good things when God tells him to and seeking His approval and advice in anything he does.

I noticed that even after the whole struggle with Saul David is willing to forgive, He asks: 'Is there yet any that is left of the house of Saul, that I may shew him kindness for Jonathan's sake?' He does good for Jonathan's son just for being Jonathan' son. He does that again with another kingdom, he says: 'I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto me.' And he sends servants to give his blessings. However, that is what I don't like, that he sends servants to do everything for him, as if he couldn't be deigned to go himself. This is also probably why his actions are taken the wrong way by 'the children of Ammon' and reciprocated that way.

Later on, after battling with half of the continent and conquering and killing it all (much like a tyrant, I must point out) we see David commit one of the basic sins: adultery. He sees a beautiful and even after being told she is married he goes and lays with her. Then he goes further on to arranging this man's death, by telling Joab, 'Set ye Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he may be smitten, and die.' I am opposed to this in two ways. First of all, and most importantly, David is supposed to be God's favorite, that person who always does what is right and who lives by God's rules forever. Then not only does he commit adultery, but he even participates in an evil-fated murder. I'm not sure if the Ten Commandments had been written yet, but he must have had some kind of idea that it is wrong, although all his war's fought and men killed proves otherwise. Secondly, we see again another case of how women aren't respected. They have no say- or don't enforce it- in what happens with them.

David was punished for these sins, which is surprising, by having his child die. He then stops praying to and worshiping God, a great example of his conditional faith. Still after all this God still has his back and helps him.

We presence a kind of change in David after this: he becomes a victim, he becomes better and more forgiving, as we can see when he forgives his son and lets him back into the city: 'And the king said unto Joab, Behold now, I have done this thing: go therefore, bring the young man Absalom again.' (Samuel 14:21) I t was done in good spirit, even if it all turns out wrong for him.

We see hismtrue love of his sons in the end when Absalom is killed and David weeps and says, 'O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!'

‘Inherit the Wind’- My Verdict

In the movie Inherit the Wind the main dilemma is the People vs. Bertram T. Cates. Cates is a school teacher who has the horrible idea to bring forth the theory of, can you imagine?!, evolution. He is found guilty, but because 'there is no precedent to this case' he is not sentenced to any time in prison. I personally am totally sided with Cates. Ignoring what the obvious answer to this question today would be, given that evolution has been scientifically proven, I base myself whole on freedom. Freedom to think what you like to think and freedom to say what you like to say.

In this case, Cates was in no way harming anyone when he introduced his ideas and his beliefs, yet he was charged for speaking against the Lord. Yes, maybe the idea of evolution in its base goes against the story of God creating the earth with His own two hands in seven days but the Bible itself says: 'the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil' (Genesis 3:22) This is talking about after Adam and Eve have eaten of the Tree of Knowledge and God himself says that after eating its fruit they have been able to know bad from good, they have gained new knowledge, and they have become gods like Him. And yes, Adam and Eve were punished for their act, but only because the Lord was jealous, it was unthinkable for him to have equals, because that is what knowledge does, it makes us gods. How can it be bad?

Still, if what Cates said about evolution offended God in any way, then let Him take His revenge. In the same situation of Adam and Eve we see God himself take care of those who disrespected Him. This is a passage taken from the Book of Genesis:

    'And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.'

                    (Genesis 3:15)

Who are we to intervene between God and his actions? Who are we to punish and do unto, in this case, Cates, without God having told us to?

New knowledge and discoveries have always been encouraged, even in these early times, so this shouldn't be any different even if it contradicts God. Who are we to fight the Lord's battle?

Taking a Break

While reading the Bible I have realized that they use almost the same language, or slang, as in A Clockwork Orange. Take into consideration that this book is almost unreadable (but it is still a very good book!), therefore my difficulty to understand the KJB. Just saying.