The same night the Lord said to Gideon, “Take the second bull from your father’s herd, the one seven years old. Tear down your father’s altar to Baal and cut down the Asherah pull beside it. Then build a proper kind of altar to the Lord your God on the top of this height. Using the wood of the Asherah pole that you cut down, offer the second bull as a burnt offering.
So Gideon took ten of his servants and did as the Lord told him. But because he was afraid of his family and the men of the town, he did it at night rather than in the daytime. (Judges 6:25-27)
A while ago, my friend Matt was teaching on this passage. Matt did an incredible job teaching that day about God’s yearning for justice, and His passion for things to be set right. It was inspiring to say the least. It was also during this teaching that I was moved to ask a question. I’m not entirely sure that Matt wanted his audience to leave asking this question, but regardless, this was the question that burned in my mind for the remainder of the day: under what circumstances is property damage okay?
Let me fill you in with my thought process a little bit before exploring this one. I spent the last five years of my life in Bowling Green, OH before moving here to Kent. Bowling Green is a neat, little college town surrounded by cornfields. Like any other neat, little college town in the Midwest, Bowling Green could be considered a party town. There are days every now and then, that the entire town seems to be one big drunken, sloppy, mess.
This is where Girls Gone Wild enters the picture. Girls Gone Wild has a tour called the “Wildest College” tour. Essentially, they tour the nation in a big party bus, traveling from college town to college town, buying drinks for people, filming the results, and making a crapload of money off of it.
To be completely honest with you, I hate the whole concept of Girls Gone Wild, and I wish nothing but bad things upon the people who created/run it. So you can imagine my frustration when the Girls Gone Wild “Wildest College” tour bus came to Bowling Green, and parked only a few blocks away from my apartment.
I had always wanted to force some kind of confrontation when the film crew came to town, but to be honest, I hadn’t really thought about what the confrontation should look like. So when Matt taught about Gideon tearing down his family’s Asherah poles, something popped into my head. Would it be wrong to spray paint “date rape” on the side of the Girls Gone Wild bus?
Something about that phrase on the side of that bus seems so right. Partially because I believe you are just calling it by its proper title. And secondly, it would be great for others to be forced to think about it in that way too. Everyone from the casual passer-by to the film crew would have to read that and at least compare the two actions.
So what do you think? Under what circumstance, if any, is property damage okay? Is my little plot to speak prophetically about pornography justifiable?
12 comments:
As much as I'd really love to give a nod and an emphatic yes to both of your questions, I'm led to refer you to 'love your neighbor as yourself' and 'who is your neighbor'. We may strongly dislike our 'neighbors', but we are commanded to love them as ourselves. I guess this includes not spraypainting busses. Sorry :)
I see your point Wendy. However, it still begs the question, under what circumstances is property damage okay? Gideon tore down, and burned his family's Asherah pole. Jesus flipped over tables, scattered merchandise, and cracked a whip at animals and money lenders. Were these actions loving? They were certainly not nice things to do, but I do not believe that nice and loving are necessarily synonymous terms. I am not quite convinced that tagging a bus is always an unloving action.
Interesting thoughts, Mark... I think the most important factor in my mind would be to ask how the action would be perceived by the "average non-believer." Would they see it as a thought-provoking reminder of some truth they already know deep inside themselves (even if it may make them uncomfortable at first)? Or would they see it as an act of ignorance and Christian "narrow-minded meanness?" I honestly don't know enough about the show or its audience to make assumptions on how these questions would be answered in the particular instance you bring up. But that might be my tack at trying to figure it out...
This morning I thought about how much I hated the most common and mind-numbingly stupid counterargument to the pacifist's anti-war belief: "If someone was trying to kill your family, would you use violence to stop them?" Anyone who says this, by principle, should be slapped upside the head.
The two situations do not compare--Invading another country and protecting your family from an invader. I won't argue that it isn't an interesting starting-off point, but it's still probably a bad one because there are so many different factors in the two scenarios that differ. To start the conversation there requires you to sift through the differences: the innocents in war, the magnitude of war, the more direct threat of the invader, etc., etc. The two examples are simply much, much too different to be even remotely applicable.
I can't help but feel similarly (although not as strongly) to the examples from the Bible that you brought up. As much as Jesus lead his life as an example, the particular action you mentioned was a.) a political one that carried weight because of who Jesus was (would it have been different if one of his disciples did this?), and b.) something Jesus did publicly.
And as Eric touched on, there are social implications to how the act is received. Even if you would have been able to get away with it, you leave yourself at the mercy of the local media (and beyond?) to present and interpret the action. I could see an argument that it would be a Banksy style work of art, but Banksy is able to retain some sort of control over his message. Spray-painting "Date Rape" on the side of a bus is reckless with the message. In our media saturated culture, if you do not keep control of your message, somebody else will.
Simply put, there are more creative, effective, and Biblical ways to spread a message like this to people in our culture. I'm not arguing that spray painting couldn't be effective, but I would consider it lazy and reckless with the message.
I understand that there are social implications to how the act is received, however, I believe there are also social implications, perhaps much greater ones, to sitting around and not doing anything. What gives me a lot of peace about the social implications of the action, is that there is nothing inherently Christian about the action. For me, it is certainly motivated by my faith, and the knowledge that the actions of this company make God angry. But the phrase "date rape" has no exclusive connection to Christianity. In fact, I doubt that most people would even assume a Christian committed the crime, I know I certainly wouldn't.
I don't believe that the scriptural comparisons are a stretch. Gideon tore down and burned property that did not belong to him, and he was not perceived favorably for his actions by those who saw what he did. In fact, people wanted to kill him for doing what he did. This was not a popular thing to do, but Gideon did it because something radical needed to happen. The Jewish people needed their eyes opened to their idolatry.
I agree that the situation of Jesus turning tables over is a complicated one, he was fulfilling prophesy, while making dual statements about taking advantage of others, and Jewish/Gentile divisions in the temple. However, the fact that this was a nuanced event, does not mean we should shy away from boldness in our words and actions. In fact, we should do quite the opposite. Shouldn't we also be "consumed with zeal" for things that God cares about as well? In this case, his exploited and oppressed creation.
Since I think you've already made the case Biblically quite adequately, I'll just say that I think the bastards need more than spray paint on their bus. But maybe a more accurate tag would be "Rape for Profit." Although, people would probably assume it was just some liberal since you've criticized making money. I guess I would prefer people to see it as a Christian act. Gideon's act was a blatantly Jewish act - he tore down another god's altar to make one for YHWH. I'm pretty sure people would assume he did it out of religious conviction. Actually, to more closely mimic Gideon's actions we would need to steal the cameras, build an altar with them and then burn the bus with the flames of the film. Or, as the modernist church has approached such issues we could write our local representative and complain. Both would likely awaken the social conscience of the community, right?
"This was not a popular thing to do, but Gideon did it because something radical needed to happen. The Jewish people needed their eyes opened to their idolatry."
This is true, and I do believe that something radical needs to happen in regards to pornography in our culture. Gideon did what he needed to do in his culture at his time, which is a much different culture and time than we are in now. It's fair to say something radical needs to be done, but choosing the same act oversimplifies things too much. When we talk about our Biblical obligation to feed the needy, it doesn't mean we need to choose bread and fish because they did so in the Bible. In the same way, Gideon's actions weren't meant to be a blueprint, it was meant, in some ways, to show what you mentioned: that desperate, socially unappealing actions can be justified. However, I don't think that all desperate, socially unappealing actions are justifiable. The issue of what connects with our culture is a deep discussion.
Honestly though, I'm not opposed to property destruction. But out of all of the choices, it is one of the least appealing to me, even if it would be satisfying to see.
I think we've proven over the last eight years that blowing things up is the easiest and most effective path and talking to the enemy is pretty much letting them win. Go USA.
I reasonable compromise could be to print out a long and well-crafted argument and then tape it to a bomb. Everyone gets what they want.
u need an updated photo...
it's the photo on you gcm link as well...
chad
pee in their gas tank
I LOVE YOU MARK.
Christian Ice McClure
Post a Comment