Welcome in another part of The Taboo topics. If English is not your mother tongue and you are here to learn, feel free to use the Quizlet vocab set I created specifically for this article. At the end of the text, you will find some tricky comprehension questions, with the link to the correct answers.
For those new to this series, I am writing my thoughts on some issues that are, for whatever reason, banned from language textbooks. Traditionally they are referred to as PARSNIP, an acronym for Politics, Alcohol, Religion, Sex, Narcotics, Isms and Pork. I have already written about Pork and Politics, click the hyperlink.
The more I am thinking about PARSNIP topics, the more it seems to me that most, if not all, are just extensions of RELIGION. Religion and Politics have gone hand in hand throughout human history for so long that they have become virtually inseparable, in some times and places more than in others. Alcohol and Sex, (and Pork) are issues sometimes forbidden, sometimes used and almost always regulated by religious rules. Christians drink wine during the Holy Mass, Muslims prohibit all alcohol (and pork), and ancient shamans used narcotics to change their state of consciousness. As far as -Isms are concerned – give me any 10 isms and let’s see how many are connected to religion: Catholicism, Islamism, Protestantism, Buddhism, Hinduism – see? – chauvinism, racism – not exactly religions, but very close topics nevertheless – Marxism, Leninism, Nationalism, Imperialism, Capitalism, Nazism, Communism – all political schools of thought, but I dare say that calling them modern religions would not be stretching the point too far. And virtually none of these have universally positive connotations, do they?
No wonder that to treat any of those topics in the school books is… unsafe. People can get offended. Discussion can become heated, feelings can get hurt and uncivilised monsters may suddenly start peeping through the thin veils of politeness behind which we have hidden them. However, I believe that we can’t call ourselves rational, civilised and simply decent people as long as we feel forced to avoid some topics of conversation. Yes, other people may disagree with what we believe and practise, and may even challenge it. The question is, why it should offend us. If we can defend our beliefs in a logical, civilised, rational manner, we have nothing to fear. Discussing these topics in classrooms may enhance tolerance, as well as practise such communication skills as persuasion, polite disagreement, giving reasons, asking for clarification, among many others.
Sadly, there are virtually no texts covering these issues in our textbooks. They are taboo. So, a teacher brave enough to bring them up must look for them elsewhere. Since the topic of this blog is RELIGION, let’s look into the Bible, more specifically the story of Abraham sacrificing his son Isaac.
For those who are new on this planet, or who at least come from the areas completely untouched by Christianity, Judaism and Islam – so basically if you come from one of those lost stone-age tribes in the Amazon rainforest – the story goes that God asked Abraham to kill his only son, Isaac. Abraham set up to do just that but in the last moment, an angel stopped him and told him to sacrifice a lamb instead. Happy end. For the full version see Genesis 22:1-19. The official explanation of this grim story is that God wanted to test Abraham’s obedience – and I dare say he passed with flying colours – and also to tell the people of Israel that He has just changed his mind and it is not nice to sacrifice human beings from now on.
Let’s think about it for a moment. What kind of a father kills his son because he hears voices? Ok, it is a bit unfair question, we are dealing with religions and not mental disorders. So, what would any decent, loving parent do if God asked him to kill his son?
Maybe it is just me, but if God came and ask me to kill any of my three children, I would – very politely and quite possibly on my knees – say something along these lines: “Oh, mighty Lord, creator of Universe and all things beyond. If you want my children dead, I know I cannot stop you. But I will certainly do anything in my feeble powers to try. „
Some may say that it is blasphemy, mostly the priests who live in celibacy and have very little idea of what it is really like to have their own children. But if I were God who calls Himself Father, I would be immensely happy that at least one of my children has enough spine and enough love to defy me in this matter. I would be happy that at least one of those gravelling worms at my feet has learnt the lesson that Love is not just a good trade-off along the lines: ok, I die for this or that person because I will be rewarded in the afterlife. I guess it is somewhat safe to assume that denying God His wish is NOT something that would exactly guarantee a very happy afterlife. In fact, such a person would sacrifice both his life here and his life eternal for Love. What a paradox.
I strongly suspect that this is exactly what happened in the story of Abraham and Isaac. I think that Abraham refused to kill his son because he loved him, because he was a decent person, because he was not willing to do someone else’s dirty job, even though that someone happened to be God. He returned to his village and announced that God had sent him an angel with new instructions. And he might have even been right. For it may very well have been a miracle that one man dared to risk the wrath of God for the love of his son. If I were God, I would be very happy that day.
For comparison, I recommend to your attention the story of David and Absalom. David was the king of Israel and Absalom an ungrateful son who rebelled against him and even waged a war to dethrone him. However, he died before that could happen. The following short video gives an account of David feelings when he heard the news. I guess that Abraham as I understand him and David would understand each other perfectly.
Comprehension task: (the key is here)
1. The author feels that all PARSNIP topics are, in fact, just one.
2. The author feels that some topics should not be discussed in classes because they are uncivilised.
3. The author claims that all people are familiar with the story of Abraham and Isaac.
4. The author dares to suggest that people should not obey authorities blindly.
5. In the author’s opinion, God gives some commands because He hopes to be disobeyed.
6. The author claims that Abraham lied to his people about the angel.
7. According to the author, David, the king of Israel, was a very different kind of father in comparison to Abraham.