First, I’m not talking about their software or business practices. What I am talking about is a great video clip (da SBS Code) that they had produced for the lauch of a recent product, which you can accesss here.
The clip is a take-off of The Da Vinci Code, one of my favorite things to make fun of. It is brilliant, and hilarious, even when they’re trying to make a point. It’s definitely worth 4 minutes of your time (or 8, or 12…; I watched it several times…).
Everyone needs a little levity…
First, before you do anything else, read this (just don’t forget to come back here).
Everyone knows that the Middle East is a mess, and has been for mega years. The other day I came across a rather humorous analysis of the situation, written by writer/actor/humorist (apparently he played a doorman on Seinfeld), who is a contributing humorist to The Daily Standard. That being said, here are some select quotes from the full article, written in 2002:
“The Palestinians want their own country. There’s just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It’s a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like “Wiccan,” “Palestinian” sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no “Palestinians.”
As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the “Palestinians,” weeping for their deep bond with their lost “land” and “nation.”
The history of the Middle East is not quite so simple as Mr. Miller lays it out, but he is correct in that there are no historical “Palestinians” and that those who would be Palestinians turned down an offer of having a country called Palestine in 1947.
I recommend reading a bit about this history – it’s more convoluted than “The Da Vinci Code.” And, it’s enough to let you know that most of the people blowing off steam about the current situation are over-simplifying it. The liberal analysis tends to ignore many of the salient points (since acknowledging the elephants in the living room would undermine their position). The ultraconservative analysis is tainted by other issues, not the least of which is the bad theology of Christian Zionism that fuels much of conservatism.
The real story is about power, and hatred, contradictory extremist idealisms, and about imperfect past decisions for which there is no easy answer. The question now is not how to fix the past, but how to proceed. It seems all are making errors – who can blame that, considering the mess that exists. It seems there is no real good side to Hezbollah, who seems to operate mafia-style within Lebanon and whose primary reason to exist is apparently the eradication of Israel. Lebanon is, if nothing else, guilty by omission. Syria and Iran may be involved more than we know. Israel is at times a victim, but often appears to be too willing an aggressor; a blind support of Israel is no answer, but neither is a blanket condemnation.
While we argue over the appropriate use of violence, that is not an issue for any country actually in the Middle East. The Jews have a violent history, often apparently with the blessing of Jehovah; there’s no reason for them to stop now. The Islamists, it goes without saying, have no issue with violence. We can work to try to avoid major violence, but it seems all we will do is delay it. If violence escalates, it is sure to involve us one way or another; the world is now too interconnected.
Over here, of course, the main issue is politics. We haven’t gotten any straight talk out of the Left for years, and it’s not going to get any better. No matter what Bush does, he’ll be criticized by both sides, who are afraid to offend the voters. Working with the UN, especially if the UN actually wakes up to the larger game going on, seems wise.
All of this, of course, involves millions of people who would just as soon be friends. I know, through the internet, of Israelis who periodically check up on Lebanese friends. It’s a weird world.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
– The Declaration of Independence
One of the problems with “we, the people” is that our country began with the assertion that we have been given, by God, these “inalienable” rights. It’s interesting, then, that God allowed His people to spend so much time as slaves. Or, perhaps it’s just us Americans who have these rights?
I ask this rhetorically, of course, not to mention sarcastically. In America, we’re all about rights – we yell and scream over them, file lawsuits about them, and create news stories about them. We’re more than just the land of opportunity; we’re the land of rights. Everybody has rights – more rights than we know what to do with. We’re up to our necks in rights. We’ve got more rights than the Colonel has chicken. I have rights that I’ve never even used.
Do we really have these inalienable, God-given rights? Just where in the Bible might we find them? It has always been my impression from reading through the Bible, especially the New Testament, that we have been given gifts, not rights, except for this: Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— (John 1:12). This, in turn, does give us certain rights as “fellow heirs.” However, these rights are not necessarily what is conjured up by the D of I. Physical liberty is not guaranteed (as evidence by Paul and other apostles), eternal life is ours, but again, the apostles’ example is enough to show that does not necessarily apply to physical life. And “pursuit of happiness?” We have joy, of course.
We can debate to death what is ours through Christ- some would even go so far as to say wealth and perfect health (though they are dead wrong). My proposition is this: it doesn’t matter.
If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
– Paul, Letter to the Philippians
The only heir who wasn’t adopted had all the rights of the one who created everything; that includes the right to crush creation on a whim and start over. He had the right to take whatever he wanted, do whatever he wanted, live like a – well – a God. The point is that he didn’t; he gave up all of these rights in order to serve his creation. He gave up position, safety, comfort, a life without pain, a life without hassles, a life without physical death, and – think of it – a life without the confines of a human body.
Jesus, Paul states, is to be our example. To live a life without rights, constantly putting yourself in a position of weakness and humility, serving others. Our expectation is not that we will be great in this life, or rich, or even comfortable. We are not promised this – in fact, we are sometimes promised quite the opposite.
Wow… that kind of takes all the fun out of being an American, doesn’t it?
… there are no innocent readers anymore. Each overlays the text with his own perverse view. A reader is the total of all he’s read, in addition to all the films and television he’s seen. To the information supplied by the author he’ll always add his own. And that’s where the danger lies … Arturo Peres-Reverte, The Club Dumas
There are no innocent readers. We may think that we read the Bible and take away from it what is plainly there; but do we? Can we read, for example, one of Paul’s letters to a first Century church, without somewhere in the back of our mind understanding that they occupy a building such as the ones we attend, or that they have an organization similar to what we know, or hold services of a similar nature to ours? Can we read the Old Testament and understand what it was like to live without the presence, or even the direct influence, of the Holy Spirit?
We may try, and think we do a mighty fine job. And perhaps, given the fact that we are “polluted” with extrinsic information and experience and interpretation, we do. But, maybe we don’t. Maybe we assume too much, jump to too many conclusions. We trust the Holy Spirit to speak to us, and I believe that He does – but, we know for a fact that the Holy Spirit doesn’t prevent us from error. Remember, we’re not perfect, just forgiven… (that was sarcasm, in case you missed it).
And what about those of us who claim to “hear” from God directly? Can we even hear what the preacher says, and walk away with a correct impression of what he said? We’ve all played the rumor game, where you sit in a circle and pass around a bit of information, which ends up completely different than what was originally said.
I’m not mentioning this to make us feel hopeless and dejected, but to merely point out that we need to keep in mind what is called “interference,” the other information and noise that makes us not be innocent readers and hearers. It’s just a fact; we do see through a glass darkly. It’s scriptural…
We read and hear with our individual and cultural filters in place, and it takes work to photoshop the information back into a reasonable likeness of what was really said. Discussion is probably a good way to recognize and deal with our filters, as long as we are discussing with those with a different set of filters (otherwise we just justify our common filters). When we talk (or blog), we display our filters, not only to others, but to ourselves. That’s why I do this…
So, know this: you are not an innocent reader. But then, neither am I.
