To Be Human is to Believe Stories

Human beings are the strangest of all earth’s creatures. We are strange because we don’t live as the rest of the animal kingdom does.

The animal kingdom is more reasonable than we are. They live directly with their appetites. If an animal is hungry it eats, thirsty it drinks, it has no problems being naked in this world. It doesn’t see itself in a story that dominates its reality. People are different.

Yuval Harari tries to write a brief history of Homo Sapien and integral to our identity is what is called “the cognitive revolution”.

Legends, myths, gods and religions appeared for the first time with the Cognitive Revolution. Many animals and human species could previously say, ‘Careful! A lion!’ Thanks to the Cognitive Revolution, Homo sapiens acquired the ability to say, ‘The lion is the guardian spirit of our tribe.’ This ability to speak about fictions is the most unique feature of Sapiens language.

Harari, Yuval Noah (2015-02-10). Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (Kindle Locations 413-415). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

Jim Carrey at this year’s golden globes summarized it nicely.

Here is a relatively hairless biped with nearly everything any hairless biped could want. Power, fame, food and physical security, wealth, his choice of virtually any mating partner or amount of partners available. Before he gives out the award he introduces himself.

https://youtu.be/uevbPqes7Wo

“From our perspective, this is huge…”

Humanity lives and dies on story. Harari asserts that what we’ve done is transcend our genetic material, that code of four letters with stories of 26.

Our stories determine who will live and who will die. Our stories determine economic distribution, warfare, mating, life and death. Story determines the material distribution of homo sapiens in this world.

The Divorce of Material from Story

Humanity has spent its thousands of years of history polishing the relationship between the story-verse and the material world only, at this late date, to announce a divorce. It was a quiet divorce, a selective divorce.

CS Lewis noticed the divorce and wrote a book about it entitled The Abolition of Man. He begins that book with a story about a text book on English literature.

In their second chapter Gaius and Titius quote the well-known story of Coleridge at the waterfall. You remember that there were two tourists present: that one called it ‘sublime’ and the other ‘pretty’; and that Coleridge mentally endorsed the first judgement and rejected the second with disgust. Gaius and Titius comment as follows: ‘When the man said This is sublime, he appeared to be making a remark about the waterfall… Actually… he was not making a remark about the waterfall, but a remark about his own feelings. What he was saying was really I have feelings associated in my mind with the word “Sublime”, or shortly, I have sublime feelings.’ Here are a good many deep questions settled in a pretty summary fashion. But the authors are not yet finished. They add: ‘This confusion is continually present in language as we use it. We appear to be saying something very important about something: and actually we are only saying something about our own feelings.’ 1

Lewis, C. S. (2009-06-03). The Abolition of Man (Collected Letters of C.S. Lewis) (Kindle Locations 33-40). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

Lewis noted that what we’ve done is divorced our story-verse from the material-verse. We don’t have a “universe”, we have two. Somehow we’ve introduced an “ought” into the world that when we make a judgment about something it can’t really transcend the two spheres, it must stay within its own space. The waterfall has no being in the story-verse. The story-verse cannot penetrate the material world.

The irony is that while the two “verses” have had a formal divorce they can’t help but keep sleeping together.

Here in this interview between Charlie Rose and George Lucas we see the thought divorce.

“I want to convey an emotion to another human being that’s something only human beings can do. Animals can do it by roaring in your face or biting your hand off and that usually has an effect, but to do it in a painting, to do it in a play, in a story, in poetry, or anything that’s in the arts, you have to be a human being.”

Lucas, however, doesn’t just want to convey an “emotion”, he wants to convey truth about the universe through story, which is why he made those prequels. Lucas just can’t admit it. He can’t transcend the new fashionable divide between the “story-verse” and the “material-verse”. We believe the waterfall is “sublime” but all we can publicly admit is that we have a feeling we describe as “sublime”.

The Crushing Fact of our Inevitable Destruction

What Jim Carrey admitted after his confession about his attachment to the story-verse was that the material-verse is headed for destruction. Ask any physicist and they will tell you that given enough time everything you care about in the material-verse will be destroyed and forgotten.

The public assumption is that since the story-verse is dependent upon the material-verse when the material-verse goes away the story-verse evaporates like the contents of the book whose last copy is burned and its author and readers deceased.

Still Sleeping Together

Jim Carrey says “cause then I would be enough. It would finally be true, and I could end this terrible search.”

His story-verse is driving is material-verse, how he spends his time, what he does with his body, how he spends his money, the tasks he orders his servants to accomplish.

Actually one of the present focuses is all about the dominion of the story-verse over the material-verse. Aren’t we terrified that we as a species are destroying the ecosystem upon which we depend? Don’t we believe that we know the material-verse mechanisms through which we are destroying ourselves? Isn’t it the release of greenhouse gasses that is killing the planet? All we need to do is stop, right?

Why can’t we stop? We doubt we have the political will, or the personal will to actually stop and even if the US and Canada stopped how could we trust the Chinese, Indians and Brazilians to stop. In other words our politics, which is in the domain of the story-verse, is killing the planet, which is in the domain of the material-verse. Story-verse wins again.

If I were to stand up and say, however, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and he did this by speaking it into being” legions would pull out the paperwork from the divorce and point to it. “The material-verse is foundational. The story-verse is derived. You cannot say such things in public.”

Material-verse and story-verse need to hookup in the dark while maintaining the divorce in public.

Story-verse and Material-verse Meet at a Wedding

In John 2 we find a story of Jesus, his mother, and his disciples at a wedding.

The story begins “on the third day” which has caused a of discussion with Biblical scholars. If you read chapter 1 of the book you keep seeing “on the next day” repeated, so where did he start counting? Is the author playing in the story-verse pinging a very famous “third day” to come far later in the story? There will be more signs.

Anyway, Jesus and his mother were invited to a wedding not far from their home. The disciples seemed to tag along.

Weddings in that culture were week-long affairs and invitations were loose, meaning that lots of people would come to celebrate, and the assumption was that there would be food and wine for all seven days. The gifts of the guests were used to help defray the cost of the wedding. Mary catches wind early that the wine is running out and just drops that piece of information on her son.

Jesus’ response to Mary is another highly debated element of this story. It is clear that the author is working the story-verse hard in this passage. Jesus isn’t being disrespectful nor mean to his mother but he is holding the need of the party at a distance to himself. His mother, however, knows that he will act and instructs the servants to obey whatever direction he offers.

The language and context of this passage are deeply tied to the long tradition of story telling in the Hebrew Scriptures and also the books of the Greek New Testament in the books associated with John. “Woman” here is not simply “Mary the mother of Jesus” but likely drawing story-verse connections to the woman of Genesis 3 and the woman of Revelation 12. Jesus is playing with a far larger story here than just the possible embarrassment of some wedding hosts.

Jesus’ response to his mother also references “the hour” which in the context of this book ties it deeply to his crucifixion. “The hour” is the time when the culmination of Jesus’ work will be found and by inviting Jesus into the drama of the failing wine supply Mary is inviting Jesus into his coming drama of all that a failed wedding banquet must point to. Any reader of the rest of the Gospels in the Bible, especially the Gospel of Luke might be aware that wedding banquets are favorite illustrations of Jesus for the version of the story-verse that he asserts is THE story of the material-verse. More on that later.

Ceremonial Cleansing

Any reading of this story in John will note that it is told in a very cryptic manner. So much is left unsaid, so many details are left to our imagination. This invites us, however, to invest in the details that are given and especially how they connect to other elements in John’s story-verse.

Jesus directs the servants to stone ceremonial water jars. These jars were used for Jews to do ceremonial washing. If you read the Torah, the first 5 books of the Hebrew Scriptures you’ll notice that ceremonial cleansing is vitally important in their story-verse. One’s ability to interact with the maker of the universe was connected to following the rites and rituals prescribed in the Torah. Uncleanness happens in life and for many types of uncleanness that might separate one from God ceremonial washing made convenient by these jars were important.

In the gospel of John whenever water is references its source is almost always illuminated. The source of the water for these jars in this story is not referred to. The focus remains on the jars.

Jesus instructs that these jars be filled. What do the servants imagine? Is Jesus observing some ceremonial uncleanness that might disrupt the presence of God at this banquet? How would any of this address the host’s present crisis of the lack of wine?

They fill the jars to the brim. Is this a meaningless detail? The servants have no idea what Jesus is doing, but whatever he will do they want him to do it to the brim.

He then directs them to share the water with the master of ceremonies. This master is in charge of the wine and responsible to make sure that the party has just the right amount of inebriation. Wine was often watered down as the feast developed so people wouldn’t become either violent, too loud or too sleepy. This master has no idea what Jesus has been doing with the servants.

Upon tasting the wine the master calls the bridegroom, who also knows nothing about what has been happening between Mary, Jesus or the servants. He congratulates the bridegroom for reserving this excellent wine. What might the servants have thought in that moment? How, when and where did it become wine? Did it become wine in their hands as they bought it to the master of ceremonies? Did Jesus do a miracle through their hands?

We should pause for a moment to contemplate the obedience of the servants. When Jesus instructed them to bring what they could only have imagined was water to the master of ceremonies for tasting what might they have been thinking? How surprised they must have been at his declaration? Did they too sip it to taste and believe that something had happened? Is this how this Jesus works?

The Secret Revelation of Glory

One of the most amazing things about this story is that the author declares that this was the first “sign” that Jesus did and through this sign he revealed his glory and his disciples believed.

Let’s look at the story in the material-verse of the master of ceremonies and the bridegroom. All they know is that they were brought wine and it was good. The perspective of Jesus, Mary, the servants and the disciples is very different. We, like they know that water was turned into wine, but none of us know exactly how or when it happened. By knowing what they know, however, the disciples “believe” in him.

What does it mean that his glory is revealed when it seems that even the miracle itself is hidden?

Jesus’ Story-verse 

Let’s look at some key elements of the story-verse in this story:

• Jesus
• “Woman”
• Wine
• Wedding Banquet
• “the hour”
• jars for ceremonial washing
• Water
• bridegroom
• glory
• signs
• belief

These elements are clearly part of a highly developed story-verse the canon of which is what Christians call “the Bible”. Jesus is fully immersed in this story-verse and the story invites the readers into that immersion.

Story-verse of the Golden Globes

When Jim Carrey walks on stage at the Golden globes and notes the divorce between the story-verse and the material-verse everyone in the room gets it. Yes he is a short lived hairless biped whose future demise is sure, but the story-verse still governs his “search”.

Despite the public divorce between the story-verse and the material-verse we can’t live without a story-verse. The material-verse itself is a story-verse, but don’t tell anyone. The material-story-verse in fact is what Jim Carrey refers to. He’s a relatively hairless biped whose large brain can’t help but make stories that keeps subjugating him. In the end, however, all story-verses are dark and meaningless apart from any emotional value they might have in the moment because they will all be destroyed when the material-verse that hosts them is wiped out. All that Jim Carrey can hope for are good feelings now.

He shares the material-verse with George Lucas who wants to share emotions with him, but he can’t publicly do any better than Jim.

Jesus’ Rich Story-Verse

Jesus’ story-verse is however very long, rich and deep. Jesus story-verse includes a creator God who made the world and declared it “good”. In Jesus’ story-verse we human beings, with our cognitive revolution unlike the animals participate in the story verse. The “woman”, connected to the “woman” who is the mother of Jesus is part of the story-verse. She sees the need, the failure of wine at the wedding banquet.

In Jesus’ story verse the woman who with her husband was responsible for their exile from the bounty of the garden notes that “wine has run out”.

Jesus from above can rightly say “what is that to us?”

This woman, standing now in the story-verse for the Gen 3 woman knows the God now though the Son. She knows he will act. She energizes the servants.

Wedding Banquets

If you read all of Jesus’ “wedding banquet” stories you’ll notice that they are very important. They are the climax of the story-verse where the story-verse with the material-verse in tow are brought to crescendo. Banquets must be filled with robed guests. Guests must arrive on time or doors will be closed and some left in outer darkness. Many permutations on this story.

In this event, however, Jesus becomes the silent patron, behind the scenes leaving the miracle hidden in the minds of servants who are of such a status that no one asks for their story. Mary knows. The disciples know and believe.

Jim Carrey’s Dominant Story-verse

To say to Jim Carrey that “his material-verse is subject to the story-verse of Jesus of Nazareth” may sound crazy. Carrey’s implicit story-verse has assumptions. CS Lewis captured them beautiful in his essay “The Grand Miracle”.

Then another thing. We, with our modern democratic and arithmetical presuppositions would so have liked and expected all men to start equal in their search for God. One has the picture of great centripetal roads coming from all directions, with well-disposed people, all meaning the same thing, and getting closer and closer together. How shockingly opposite to that is the Christian story! One people picked out of the whole earth; that people purged and proved again and again. Some are lost in the desert before they reach Palestine; some stay in Babylon; some becoming indifferent. The whole thing narrows and narrows, until at last it comes down to a little point, small as the point of a spear— a Jewish girl at her prayers. That is what the whole of human nature has narrowed down to before the Incarnation takes place. Very unlike what we expected, but, of course, not in the least unlike what seems, in general, as shown by nature, to be God’s way of working. The universe is quite a shockingly selective, undemocratic place out of apparently infinite space, a relatively tiny proportion occupied by matter of any kind. Of the stars perhaps only one has planets: of the planets only one is at all likely to sustain organic life. Of the animals only one species is rational. Selection as seen in nature, and the appalling waste which it involves, appears a horrible and an unjust thing by human standards. But the selectiveness in the Christian story is not quite like that. The people who are selected are, in a sense, unfairly selected for a supreme honour; but it is also a supreme burden.

Lewis, C. S. (2014-05-20). God in the Dock (pp. 84-85). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

We are back to the question we wrestled with last week. If the universe is actually a story-verse then which story-verse is it and how can I know?

The answer is that every story-verse is only accessible as story and so our story must somehow meet the larger story-verse and come together.

What we see in Cana with Jesus at this wedding is the shaping participation of Jesus and the story-verse. In this hidden miracle Jesus engages the story-verse and to the witnessing disciples makes a joyful statement about it. This is good news.

Now again, as we talked about last week, we imagine it would be better if Jesus had stood up at the wedding and exclaimed

“It has come to attention that your poor earthlings have botched even this wedding, not to mention management of the planet, and are short on wine. What an embarrassment. I have come to make wine for you!”

and then he orders the servants, does some dramatic squinting prayer and poof! Wine!

No. He does so quietly, humbly, like the way his Father makes wine every day.

The Hidden Miracle of the Cross and the other Third Day

In the gospel of John “the hour” stalks Jesus. As we saw last week “the hour” was haunting even his baptism. Now the first sign sets things in motion that will culminate on that hour. In that hour, however, the disciples too will doubt. Just as in this wedding things will be moving behind the scenes and no one will see the miracle or understand its significance in the story verse.

On the third day story-verse will move material-verse and a new material-verse begins in scarred and resurrected body of Jesus.

What Story-verse Do you Inhabit?

The irony of Jim Carrey’s story verse is that on one hand he rejects the Jesus story-verse because he believes it leaves him powerless over himself, devoid of the kinds of choices he wants to make for himself about his life and locked into things he’s not sure about.

If you listen to him though, doesn’t he have all of that?

• He’s bound to a search to “arrive” even as he knows he never will.
• His story-verse is bound by the material-verse which is fully believes will vanish and destroy
• How can he really escape meaninglessness, but he trudges forward anyway because he can’t imagine doing anything else.

Now what does Jesus’ story-verse offer?

• A story that makes sense of our human misery
• A story of a God and his Son who write themselves into our story-verse to rescue us from ourselves.
• This God rewrites the material-verse in the resurrected flesh of his son
• The sign of this story is wine. Wine in the hands of servants who don’t really know what they are doing but joyfully receive the blessing of the creator and his redeeming son.

Which story-verse would you rather inhabit?