Peeking at other gods

申命记第12章：29节-13:18
Sermon on Deuteronomy 12:29-13:18

Title: Peeking at other gods (Deuteronomy 12:29-13:18)

Recently, I was watching a Taiwanese variety talk show. They invited a bunch of male celebrities as guests and the topic was “Who is the most moral male celebrity, impervious to sexual temptations?” 誰是不近女色最正直男藝人 . [1] There were 2 segments to the show. First they did a survey among lots of female celebrities on who they thought among the 10 guests was lecherous and who they found to be a decent gentleman. Then the show ranked the guests based on the survey. I would say that the results of the survey conformed to the general image of those celebrities. Those with a clean image ranked high, and those with a playboy image ranked low. But the interesting part was the second segment. Weeks before the recording of the show, the producers pretended to do a private interview with each of the guests. At the interview, they intentionally included a new, pretty and shapely staff member who was wearing a low cut top. This lady pretended to be a co-interviewer for the interview. What they didn’t know was that the pair of glasses she was wearing was actually a hidden camera, and all their behaviours during the interview were recorded secretly. Based on the video footage, they then ranked the 10 male celebrity guests again. This time the ranking was based on the number of times those guys were caught peeking at the pretty staff member. As you might guess, lots of the male celebrities were caught glancing at the wrong areas, and two of them were even overtly friendly with their touching and unsavory compliments. In short, this pretend interview was actually a secret test of their true behaviour when faced with an attractive target.

By and large, the two rankings were quite similar. The best regarded guy passed the temptation with his reputation relatively unscathed. He took only 2 peeks at the girl, though one peek was arguably slightly below eye level. Those that already ranked low from the survey performed badly at the secret test as predicted. Therefore, the results of the secret test were pretty much reflective of their habitual behaviour. However, I would like to highlight two guys who managed to buck the trend. Both of them were initially mid-table in the first ranking. It wasn’t so much that they were the lecherous sort, but they both had a somewhat bad boy image, and were not the squeaky clean boy-next-door type. But at the second ranking, the secret test ranking, surprisingly both of them rose all the way to the first and second place. Throughout the entire pretend interview, they did not take any peeks or glances at the pretty girl. They even managed to beat the guy whom everybody thought would be the sure winner.

Do you want to guess what happened, or how they managed to achieve this feat? The hidden video footage showed that they intentionally sat facing away from the pretty girl and just looked only at the main interviewer throughout the entire interview. They did this even when the pretty girl was the one who was asking a question. Of course, it looked rather unnatural, and you could tell from their posture that they were purposely avoiding looking at the girl. So the hosts of the talk show asked them why they were behaving in that way. Was that their consistent behavior with women, or did they already suspect that something was fishy? Everybody said that they didn’t suspect a hidden camera, but the two of them confessed that they had noticed immediately that that new staff member was dressed provocatively. Hence, in order to behave decently, and wanting to resist all temptations, they forcibly faced away from the girl and shut her off entirely from their line of sight the whole time. It was funny because they ended up with an awkward body posture and the whole process of avoidance looked too deliberate. The hosts wondered about their motivation for such extreme behavior. One of them did this because he was newly married. The other one was a new Christian. One of the guests even commented that ‘religion had changed him’.

Whatever the underlying reason for this peculiar behaviour, I now wish to reflect on this unusual act of radical avoidance. What would be your view of such a posture of radical avoidance? I guess you might say that if it is just the posture itself, it doesn’t really mean anything if it is done blindly. The blatant avoidance can be just a superficial act. I’m reminded of a story of 2 monks who were on the way home. They came to a river that could only be crossed using a tricky stone trail. You had to hop from stone to stone to go to the other side. A young pretty lady was unable to cross it because she was afraid of using the trail. The older monk said, “No worries, I’ll carry you across.” And he did that. After crossing the river, they parted ways with the lady. Later, when the monks were almost reaching their temple, the younger monk confronted the older monk. “Brother, as monks, we have a prohibition against women. How could you have such close physical contact with the young woman at the river just now?” The older monk replied, “Who? Oh, you meant the incident just now. Frankly, I’ve almost forgotten about it. It is true we have a prohibition against women. But I’ve merely carried the woman in my arms. Yet, you’ve carried her in your heart until now.” I guess the message of the story is that if your morality simply takes the form of behavioral avoidance, but is not something that you believe in, then it is just superficial and artificial. The principle behind your actions is more important than just the form.
Similarly for the two guys who avoided all sight of the pretty girl. They have chosen a posture to display their radical avoidance. It may not be the most ingenious thing to do, and socially, it can be rather awkward, yet if you think about it, there is no denying that it actually works. By purposely shying away from the object of desire, these two guys manage to preserve a perfectly clean record of not even taking a single peek at the girl. It is silly, but it works. By setting a clear boundary as to what they will see and what they will not see, they managed to avoid the trap that was laid out for them. Unlike everybody else, they did pass the secret test. You can argue that it is still very superficial, but you have to admit that it worked for them. In the show, some of the other guests did indeed mock their awkward posture. But even the guy who came in third, the hot favorite who was ranked first from the earlier survey, admitted that he too could learn from them.

What I’m doing with this illustration is to paint for you a vivid picture of a posture: a posture of radical avoidance. I was reminded of this behavior of radical avoidance when I was reflecting on the passage today. Today’s passage is about the laws against worshipping other gods, and Moses demanded the same level of radical avoidance. Keep your focus totally away. Don’t even look. Don’t even ask. And if anybody even dares to suggest otherwise, kill them. This is total radical avoidance. We will only read parts of the passage (in NIV) because it is quite repetitive.

Deuteronomy 12: 30 and after they have been destroyed before you, be careful not to be ensnared by inquiring about their gods, saying, “How do these nations serve their gods? We will do the same.” 31 You must not worship the Lord your God in their way, because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the Lord hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods. 32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.

Deuteronomy 13: If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the Lord your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

These laws are then repeated for family members and friends.
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” … … 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death.

These laws are then repeated for neighboring towns and fellow Jewish tribes.
12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” … … 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock.

Two weeks ago, we talked about the Shema, a call for us to be totally faithful to God. He is the ultimate concern of our life. Last week, we talked about worship. Worship is God’s gracious way for us to relate to him. Our manner of worship reflects our belief on who God is. The purity of our love is determined how faithful we are to God. The purity of our love is also determined by our love for other temptations. You cannot claim to be a faithful lover if you are also a philanderer. And a faithful lover should have a posture towards temptations: a posture of avoidance. Our passage today speaks of the importance of setting boundaries. You cannot worship other gods. You cannot even use their methods of worship in your own worship. And any deviation from this is the punishment of death. The message is clear: take a stand and set a clear boundary.

Is such radical avoidance too extreme? While we might agree on the importance of setting boundaries, we may also find boundaries to be superficial and subjective. How much is too much? Why set the boundary here and not there? There are two determinants for the degree of extremity of the boundaries. The first determinant is the strength of the seduction. The greater the seduction, the stricter the boundary. For the Israelites, the temptations they faced were even more alluring than plunging necklines and rising hemlines. We know of cult prostitutes in these pagan temples. The Chinese have a saying, “食色，性也”. It is human nature to be preoccupied with matters of food and sex. And so the temptation also comes in the form of food sacrifices in these temples. It is no coincidence that this passage on the worship of other gods is sandwiched between the passages on the food laws. The Israelites in staying away from Bah Ku Teh and Curry Crabs were also distancing themselves from delectable and enticing foreign cultures. These foreign gods promised a more bountiful harvest, better weaponry for war and looser rules for sexual relationships. All of these were irresistable to the Israelites who arrived from a more simplistic culture. Imagine a country bumpkin stepping into the red light district. Fat chance.

The second determinant is the cost and severity of unfaithfulness. In the case of the Israelites, their complete devotion to YHWH was tied to the survival of the nation. YHWH promised blessings upon their faithful worship, and judgment upon their unfaithfulness. The prophets described their idolatry as adultery. And it was this unfaithfulness that led to the eventual demise of the kingdom of Israel to foreign oppression. This was true in the time of judges as well as the times of exile. I think it was both the high seductiveness of the foreign cultures and the high cost of judgment, that led Moses to set such a high level of boundaries for the Israelites towards other gods. Their behavior must exhibit radical avoidance. Their posture and behavior must be clear. They could not allow even one peek. Don’t even be curious. Don’t even think about it. That was the message and purpose of these laws. But unfortunately they took a peek. The peek led to further desires. And those desires eventually broke their marriage with God. Those laws may appear harsh to us today. But in light of history, those boundaries were there for a good reason.

What can we learn from these laws in the passage today? We certainly cannot apply them literally. They were issued based on a specific context at that time. And even then, “it is almost impossible to know whether they were ever carried into effect in more than a few instances.” [2] “Like other rules about capital punishment, Israel does not seem to have taken this literally. Its point is more to underline how serious an offense it is.” [3] My personal conclusion in terms of the modern application is the same. We should treat the matter of foreign gods seriously but not literally. When I mean serious, I mean we need to set clear personal boundaries. And you would know best what boundaries you should set for yourself. Like my beginning analogy of sexual temptation, the temptation of foreign gods works the same. You may think that there is no way you would be unfaithful. But curiosity killed the cat. It starts with something innocent, but you may be wandering slowly into danger. What sort of boundaries should you set? I guess it all depends on the strength of the temptation and the cost of a mistake. If you know you are easily tempted and your faith is weak, then it may be wiser to set a stricter boundary.

Some church members occasionally ask me for advice on subjects like Feng Shui and Horoscopes. Those who are more westernized have the western Zodiac signs, and the Chinese have their own Zodiac signs. There are also activities with indirect religious overtones like Taiji or Yoga. Can you also believe in things like luck or karma? I wish I can give a straight answer, but I really can’t. It is like stealing a peek. That peek can mean nothing to you. But for somebody else, it may lead to something further. Your decision and ensuing action actually says more about you than the object in itself. You should know youself and the boundaries you need. The two guys in the Taiwanese show knew the boundaries they needed and it worked for them. I say, good for them. So what if strict boundaries sometimes make you look out of place. If it works for you, I say, good for you too.

Though I cannot give you a set of clear cut rules to follow, or customise a set of boundaries for each one of you, I can share with you my personal set of boundaries. The well regarded guest who came in 3rd in the secret test ranking said something meaningful. Someone commented that his guarded actions towards other women could appear pretentious and prudish. The guest who is married, and happens to be a Christian, said, “Well, for me it is about respecting my wife and sending a clear message to others that I’m not an easy person.” This makes sense for me with regards to all ambiguous activities, that may or may not have to do with other gods, real or unreal. And so this principle, the principle of sending a message, is what I use to set my personal boundaries on such matters. Sometimes in travel, you may come across a wishing well, or a tree or an artifact for writing prayers or well-wishes. I know in my heart that most things have no real power in themselves. Nonetheless, I set the boundary not because taking a peek at other gods or other practices is that big a deal. It may not be a big deal. I simply choose to do it because I respect my God and others will know that I’m serious about my faith. My posture sends a message: I respect my God, and others will know that I’m serious about my faith.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgprbMCR97k
[2] New Interpreter’s Bible vol 2, p 394
[3] Goldingay, Numbers and Deuteronomy for Everyone, p 141