A canyon cuts across our culture. Deep and wide, it separates one group of Americans from another. It does not separate blacks from whites; it does not separate rich from poor, or men from women. It does, however, separate those who consider the Bible to be a still valid and vital guide to right and wrong from those who dismiss it as an ancient relic with little contemporary significance.
That the Bible is really at the core of the conflict becomes clear when one identifies the Biblical roots of most of our major political disputes. For instance, of paramount importance to the forthcoming presidential election is the question of homosexual marriage. Yet, were it not for a few Biblical verses describing homosexual activity as an “abomination,” it would be a non-issue just as it is in Europe.
Although the Bible plays a central role in American life, it is important to avoid falling into either of the two traps which await the unwary. The first is to mistakenly assume that only primitive zealots could pay any attention to such an old and judgmental volume that clearly lacks any value to modern Americans. The second trap is every bit as insidious. It is imagining that the Bible can be used as a sort of Ouija board that will quickly and easily disclose hidden secrets of the future to untutored neophytes.
Falling into the first trap of utterly ignoring the Bible’s significance fatally shuts one off from the implications of this powerful cultural influence. The second trap however risks making all those who treat the Bible with reverence, as the word of God, appear to be simplistic fools not much better than those who think that horoscopes reveal the future.
Yet this does not mean that the Bible cannot help us see the future. To be precise, the Bible is encoded in such a way as to hint at fundamental principles that can indeed be employed to hear the soft footsteps of approaching events. Allow me to offer an example of contemporary relevance.
The Jewish holiday of Purim, on Sunday March 7, is when observant Jews read the Book of Esther. This volume relates the story of a threatened genocide against the Jews to be executed by the wicked Haman. Providentially, beautiful Esther has been installed as the queen of the witless King Ahasuerus. Her uncle, the Jewish scholar and leader, Mordecai, an implacable foe of Haman, implored Esther to approach her husband the king and to beg him to intercede in the dreadful plot to destroy the entire Jewish community.
In the light of local protocol, Esther is fearful and hesitates, but after Mordecai warns her that relief and deliverance will come to the Jews from elsewhere if necessary and suggests that perhaps it was precisely for this historic moment that she had become queen, she relented. Mordecai had basically said, “Look, this is an opportunity for you to be part of history. The end will come to pass with you or without you.” Urging the Jews to fast and pray, with great trepidation, she approached the throne. Uncharacteristically, King Ahasuerus welcomes the interruption and offers Esther whatever her heart desires, “up to half the kingdom.”
Now this is the point that needs our attention. Here is the compelling question: surely this is the moment to denounce Haman and beg for the lives of the Jewish population. Instead, inexplicably, Esther only asks that the king and Haman attend a banquet in her boudoir. At the intimate little banquet, the king again offers his queen anything that her heart desires, “even up to half the kingdom.” Surely now would be just the moment to denounce Haman as the villain that he is.
Yet again, Esther seems to demur and only asks that the king and Haman attend a second banquet in her boudoir the next day. Is this some sort of meaningless game? Can Esther simply not summon up the courage to do what must be done? Shouldn’t she have done at that first banquet what she later did at the second? She should have denounced Haman at the earliest opportunity? After all, maybe tomorrow would have been too late-events were moving quickly in Shushan.
It is at the second banquet that she exposes Haman and the great turnaround now starts. Esther knew that the future of the Jewish people hung in the balance. At any moment Haman and his cohorts could have eliminated the Jews. Why did she not act decisively at the first banquet? Why did she so strangely request nothing but a second meal? Did she develop cold feet?
The answer reveals a transcendent truth, one that really does hint at future events. You see, at the time of the first banquet, Haman was so thrilled with the idea of hanging Mordecai and destroying the Jewish people that he was filled with exuberance. Esther recognized Haman’s state of exhilaration and realized the powerful principle that brimming confidence flowing from deep happiness confers a kind of invulnerability. Profound joy brings one immunity or a mysterious spiritual protection.
This may well explain some part of the astonishing ability of former President Clinton to survive every attempt to bring him down. To say the least, the man was overtly joyful in office, seeming to delight in every moment of his presidency. He always displayed conspicuous confidence that seemed to deflect danger.
Winston Churchill was another personality who exhibited this principle. His wartime memoirs reveal that he almost felt guilty at how much he was enjoying WWII. You’ll recall that no matter how hazardous his environment and how reckless his many adventures, he was never injured and died of old age safely in bed in 1963. Conversely, most of us have observed how misery, fear, and foreboding become self-fulfilling in some people.
Let’s return to Esther at the first banquet. What does Esther do when she realizes that Haman is too “high” to hurt? Why, she simply waits and merely requests that they return to a second banquet, hoping that by then, his condition of euphoria will have subsided. Well it did a whole lot better than subside.
Of course that night the events started to unravel for Haman. By the end of the day Ahasuerus directs Haman to parade Mordecai around upon the king’s horse in triumph. Haman had a really bad day. A verse in the Book of Esther tells us that Haman came to the second banquet in a state of depression and self-pity. Now Esther knew that she could safely attempt to expose and destroy him with some expectation of success. Which is precisely what then transpired.
And the contemporary relevance of this story? Any human who is a walking wellspring of happiness and optimism helps to create his own success. On the other hand, despair, depression, and general negativity are more often the cause of failure than its consequence.
Seldom in American presidential election history has the more dour and depressing candidate won. Generally, the sunnier and more optimistic candidate has won the White House. Think back, consider the Bible and its powerful truths, and contemplate the faces and natures of John Kerry and President George W. Bush. Then predict a Bush victory this November to all your friends. In eight months they’ll think you were prophetic.
