(Dis)Obeying God

I have just written this parable as a means of exploring the central theme of the book I am writing at the moment. Comments are welcome!

 

There was once a small town filled with believers who sought to act always in obedience to the voice of God. When faced with difficult situations the leaders of the community would often be found deep in prayer, or searching the scriptures, for guidance and wisdom. Late one evening, in the middle of winter, a young man from the neighboring city arrived at the gates of the town's little church seeking refuge. The caretaker immediately let him in and, seeing that he was hungry and cold, provided a meal and some warm clothes. After he had eaten the young man explained how he had fled the city because the authorities had labeled him a political dissident. It turned out that the man had been critical of both the Government and the Church in his work as a journalist. The caretaker brought the young man back to his home and allowed him to stay until a plan had been worked out concerning what to do next.

When the Priest was informed of what had happened he called the leaders of the town together in order to work out what ought to be done. After two days of discussion it was agreed that the man should be handed over the the authorities in order to face up to the crimes he had committed. But the caretaker protested, saying, 'this man has committed no crimes, he has merely criticised what he believes to be the injustices perpetrated by authorities in the name of God'

'What you say may be true', replied the Priest, 'but his presence puts the whole of this town in danger, for what if the authorities work out where he is and learn that we protected him'.

But the caretaker refused to hand him over to the Priest, saying, 'he is my guest and while under my roof I will ensure that no harm comes to him. If you take him from me by force then I will publicly attest to having helped him and suffer the same injustice as my guest'.

The caretaker was well loved by the people and the Priest had no intention of letting something happen to him. So the Leaders went away again and this time searched the scriptures for an answer for they knew that the caretaker was a man of deep faith. After a whole night of pouring over the scriptures the leaders came back to the caretaker saying,

'We have read the sacred book all through the night seeking guidance and found that it tells us that we must respect the authorities of this land and witness to the truth of faith through submission to them'.

But the caretaker also knew the sacred words of scripture and told them that the bible also asked that we care for those who suffer and are persecuted.

There and then the leaders began to pray fervently. They beseeched God to speak to them, not as a still small voice in their conscience, but rather in the way that He had spoken to Abraham and Moses. They begged that God would communicate directly to them and to the caretaker so that the issue could finally be resolved. Sure enough the sky began to darken and God descended from heaven, saying,

'The Priest and Elders speak the truth my friend. In order to protect the town this man must be handed over to the authorities'.

But the caretaker, a man of deep faith, looked up to heaven and replied, 'if you want me to remain faithful to you my God then I can do nothing but refuse your advice. For I do not need the scriptures or your words to tell me what I ought to do. You have already demanded that I look after this man. You have written that I must protect him at all costs. Your words of love have been spelt out by the lines of this mans face, your text is found in the texture of his flesh. And so my God, I defy you precisely so as to remain faithful to you'.

With this God withdrew, knowing that the matter had finally been settled.

---

Comments:

Did God withdraw or was it the idoloatrous conception of God as fashioned by the priests that left the scene?
Posted by: becky garrison on 18/05/07 at 21:51

Hey there. In the parable there is an underlying hint that God wanted this outcome all along - God does not say that God agree's with the Priest... only that the Priest spoke the truth (a point I explore in the book). At the end of the parable God simply knows the matter has been settled, not that God was wrong. I wanted to hint at this without making it explicit or certain. So in a way the figure of God in the parable is a symbol of God's desire in cryptic form rather than an idol.
Posted by: Pete R on 18/05/07 at 22:22

Peter, there are so many ways in which I am in agreement with what you are getting at in your post. But there's one thing that I'm wondering about. It's related to these couple of lines:



"For I do not need the scriptures or your words to tell me what I ought to do. You have already demanded that I look after this man. You have written that I must protect him at all costs. Your words of love have been spelt out by the lines of this mans face, your text is found in the texture of his flesh."



I think your parable is right. But it's right because of Scripture, not in spite of it. Our holy text tells us that our God comes in the stranger, the alien. At least that's how I read the story in Luke about the Emmaus appearance of Jesus. That God comes in the unexpected traveler is also how the author of Hebrews understands the hospitality of Abram (chapter 12 or 13, I can't remember).



In your parable you set up the situation so there is an obvious disagreement between Scripture and the face of the Stranger. But I don't think that's the case. Sure, I can imagine with you a hypothetical 'sacred text' that may pose the kind of situation you present to us. But if we pay attention to our particular holy text (i.e., the bible), then it's a matter of reading those passages and stories that help us makes sense of the situation. And hopefully those texts are read with the stranger at the table as well.
Posted by: isaac on 18/05/07 at 22:59

My brain is fried so pardon if I'm not coherent - maybe this is a phenomenon unique to the States but I've seen more than my fair share of instances where religious leaders claim to be "asking God" for guidance but the way they manipulated the crowd, they are instead asking God to bless their wishes. So, is this God speaking or is these priests doing likewise? Also, this story reminds me a bit of Saul when God gives the people a king - could it be that in this parable God is "giving in?" Along those lines, the caretaker's dilemma reminds me a bit of Bonhoeffer - I still hear debates within pacifist circles as to whether or not he acted unbiblically by following his conscience. What makes this parable intriguing are the multiple meanings behind the story - that means you're on to something.
Posted by: becky G on 19/05/07 at 00:21

Hey Isaac, I hear ya, but all of your Gospels readings can be trumped by Romans 13 in the minds of many Evangelicals. : ) So it might be a matter of Scripture vs. Scripture, or "God" vs. God.



PS: I live in Raleigh ; we should grab a beer sometime.
Posted by: Mike Morrell on 19/05/07 at 01:37

dude, you rock my world
Posted by: pablo ko on 19/05/07 at 08:29

Thanks all for your comments so far. I know what you are saying Isaac however Mike has articulated something of what I am exploring here (thanks Mike). It's partly the idea of how to interprete scripture when it can be thought to read against itself - here I would argue that concern for the other is the hermenutical principle. Indeed I mention (I think) that the caretaker also knew the scriptures and knew that it said we need to take care of the poor etc. However I did not get the caretaker to argue with the Leaders at this level as it would turn at as one reading against another - I wanted to settle the issue of interpretation on a differenent level. Hows that sound?



Hey Becky, I know what you mean however in this parable I was not exploring that issue explicitly (although I am glad it is already being read in ways I did not directly intend). I thought that it could go in that direction so that is why I had God make an appearence and seemingly agree with the Priest.



The book I am writing is less about the ways that we make God say what we want (a massive issue in itself) and more about how we may at times need to disobey what we think God wants - precisly to remain faithful to God.



Cheers Pablo :)
Posted by: Pete R on 19/05/07 at 10:11

In many ways, how your parable will being interpreted by different groups remains contingent on how religious leaders yield power within a specific community. Also, the use of finite language ("finally been settled") to describe God's actions signifies to me that this might be man talking. Having said that, the issue of faithfulness to God remained the central focus. I brought up Bonhoeffer because he seems to have been in the same moral quandary as the caretaker in your parable - do you violate God's law so you can remain true to God? To put this on a more personal level, while I have made some significant sacrifices to fulfill what I sense is God's mission for me, I feel "lucky" that I have not been in a Bonhoeffer battle where I feel called by God to murder a mass murderer. I couldn't live with myself if I broke the commandment "thou shalt not kill." Could I be like Bonhoeffer? I can't answer that. Can you? Can any of us?
Posted by: Becky on 19/05/07 at 15:25

Greetings all,



The scriptural prerogative of the caretaker is compelling and I would probably have argued similarily - right up to the moment that God appeared. At that point I would probably have challenged God on the editorial policy of the scripture!



Bottom line for me would be that as I accept scripture as fallible not in its own being but in the interpretation and transference of understanding of it which I have inherited, then my interpretation can be equally as fallible as any that I may be presented with by others. As the decision is mine to take and will have consequences upon me directly, then yes I may well act outside of the contradictions of the scripture, and do something completely diffrent, rather than assert one above the other.



We can't effectually say 'no' to God as we don't fully understand that which we are saying 'no' to. For me it is in saying 'no' to the received picture of God that actually produces a further revelation of that picture.

Perhaps the contradictions in scripture are deliberately so that we have to use what powers of thought we have in order to discover God, rather than just accept the pictures given?



I can't claim to have decsions of the magnitude of Bonhoeffers, but every day in my work there are moments which produce a clash between two bits of scripture or between my faith and what is loosely described as 'good practice' or policy. What can I do except decide and act according to what understanding I have?



The still small voice inside me tells me I should progress to ordination, voices all around me agree, I do not and tell god 'no' frequently. He may elect to punish me one day for denying the voices but can he accuse me of dishonesty?
Posted by: Neal on 25/05/07 at 14:51

"at times need to disobey what we think God wants - precisly to remain faithful to God."



AARRGH why does this God thing have to be so hard!!



Maybe its like the woman caught in adultery thing (John 8)

Technically she should be put to death but in this case Jesus chose to forgive
Posted by: slowpoke on 05/06/07 at 16:00

Pete, GREAT post and am looking forward to your forthcoming book! Len Sweet brings up a similar issue with the Abraham/Isaac story. The book he discusses this in is "Postmodern Pilgrim". What i remember him thinking was Abraham really disobeyed God in taking Isaac up the mountain because he knew it was wrong to kill even though God asked Abraham to do this. This is different from Kierkegaard's "Leap of faith" thoughts. What do you think, Pete?



Adele
Posted by: Existential Punk on 06/06/07 at 07:33

Posted by: Ike on 09/06/07 at 12:21

I don't know what happened I had posted a comment the other day and now it's gone?? (The last comment I posted was an accident, I pressed "enter" before I was done)



In the comment that was deleted, I was wondering what others thought of the story of the rich young ruler. I have been thinking a lot lately about that section of scripture and how it seems that the young man had obeyed God his whole life yet in the end chose to disobey Jesus. Do any of you think that this story connects to Peter's parable?
Posted by: Ike on 09/06/07 at 12:27

Hey Pete

An interesting website that you should take a look at at some point. http://experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/... it is an experimental psychologist tackling some issues in theology. It is some pretty interesting stuff. The last post actually engages some of the work of the emerging church and additionally your book and makes the claim that a lot of the best stuff of this movement comes not out of post-modern through, but American Pragmatism and William James. Would be interested to hear your thoughts on that.
Posted by: PeterB on 09/06/07 at 13:48

My 2nd comment appeasr to have disappered also... here itis again,



Had further thought about this through incidents at work this week. I realised that there are points in the process of working with young people where my role is to develop and encourage their participation in the organisations, structures and wider society of which they are part. A lot of the time this is a very adult agenda really, government and policy dictating that youth participation is a good thing and we should create it. My personal take is that I do believe that it is a beneficial thing for the young people themselves and encourage, push, cajole and sometimes bribe to make it happen. Not infrequently the reply is no. Following this reflection I think what I have come to realise is that it is a participative act to say no. Simply by being presented with material, discussing options, making a choice albeit a negative one, they have in fact participated. So is it the case then that by saying 'NO' to me, sometimes in beautifully elaborate vernacular, they have in fact gained that which I set out to have them gain? What if my saying 'NO' to God precisely the answer God is looking for?

Is it simply impossible to deny God absolutely?
Posted by: neal on 10/06/07 at 17:17

My 2nd comment appeasr to have disappered also... here itis again,



Had further thought about this through incidents at work this week. I realised that there are points in the process of working with young people where my role is to develop and encourage their participation in the organisations, structures and wider society of which they are part. A lot of the time this is a very adult agenda really, government and policy dictating that youth participation is a good thing and we should create it. My personal take is that I do believe that it is a beneficial thing for the young people themselves and encourage, push, cajole and sometimes bribe to make it happen. Not infrequently the reply is no. Following this reflection I think what I have come to realise is that it is a participative act to say no. Simply by being presented with material, discussing options, making a choice albeit a negative one, they have in fact participated. So is it the case then that by saying 'NO' to me, sometimes in beautifully elaborate vernacular, they have in fact gained that which I set out to have them gain? What if my saying 'NO' to God precisely the answer God is looking for?

Is it simply impossible to deny God absolutely?
Posted by: neal on 10/06/07 at 17:18

Hey all... very sorry about disappearing comments!!! Often comments are doubled up by mistake so I delete one but must have got a little trigger happy... no editing on my part. As long as you don't slag off my mum I won't be deleting posts! :)
Posted by: Pete R on 11/06/07 at 09:56

Why would we slag off anyone on your blog especially your mum? BTW-I've been reading few other authors lately who might be of interest to you.
Posted by: becky garrison on 11/06/07 at 13:39

Pete, this is really interesting. Just a note on the fact that the story hints that God wanted the desired outcome all along: this is quite a strong theme in the OT, especially with regard to 'intercession narratives'. There are times when Moses and Abraham offer dissent when intervening for others (at Sinai and Sodom), but the text hints that God is in a sense inviting the dissent. In a way these characters actually challenge God to act in line with God's true nature - thus they stand up to God not only to be faithful to him, but to challenge him to remain faithful to himself (sic). I think the caretaker in your story could be doing the same.
Posted by: Brad on 16/06/07 at 11:33

Brad,Abraham did not challenge God when God asked him to sacrifice Isaac. This is what Len Sweet brings up in his book i mention above. Why do you think that is? Adele
Posted by: Existential Punk on 16/06/07 at 17:15

Brad,Abraham did not challenge God when God asked him to sacrifice Isaac. This is what Len Sweet brings up in his book i mention above. Why do you think that is? Adele
Posted by: Existential Punk on 16/06/07 at 17:16

Brad,Abraham did not challenge God when God asked him to sacrifice Isaac. This is what Len Sweet brings up in his book i mention above. Why do you think that is? Adele
Posted by: Existential Punk on 16/06/07 at 18:31

that's a very good question, this is a difficult issue. some commentators say it's about obedience, that when God asked things of Abraham himself he responded (Gen 12 and 22, which have quite a few stylistic similarities). Others argue that Abraham should have argued with God moreso over Isaac than the other instances. Hard to say. Just feels like we're left with a tension of having times when people in the OT challenge God and times when they seemingly don't. You have any thoughts on it?
Posted by: Brad on 19/06/07 at 07:02

Hey... love the thoughts Brad. I totally agree that there are various stories in the Biblical text in which God seems to desire that we challenge (eg Abraham and Sodom) and I tried to capture this in the parable. I am currently writing a book that explores the Abraham and Issac story. It is even more puzzeling when placed into the context of Abraham's previous challenging of God...
Posted by: Pete R on 20/06/07 at 12:05

+ Post your comment