The Atkins' Family...Diet

Da, da, da, dum...snap! snap!
Da, da, da, dum...snap! snap!
They're creepy and they're kooky.
They're off to get an ooky.
The Atkins' Family.

Have you seen anyone do this? You're in a burger place, and a person nearby orders a hamburger..sans bun! What is going through their mind? I mean sure, we all have different tastes, but a hamburger is a hamburger, and it has a bun! It's just not the same without it.

You know the routine. The Atkins' diet is the king of the low-carb craze. Dr. Atkins has convinced millions that carbs are taboo, that high-protein and high-fat diets are what we need to be healthy, slim, and happy. (An aside: How does that differ from the beer commercials? Oh well, another day...).

However, ask any nutritionist what the real deal is with these low-carb diets, and they will tell you: We need carbohydrates. We can't live without them. Not only that, but our intake of carbs should be the bulk of our caloric intake. A healthy diet is simply incomplete without them. We can choose to follow these diets, and even look and feel good for awhile doing so. In the long run, we are just risking our health for a short-term gain.

Americans, though, like to have choices, lots of them. They also like to believe just about any new fad that comes down the pike will make them healthy, wealthy, and wise, easily. Our Cultural Diner has evolved that way, so it is always pushing for us to eat more, faster; and the menu is constantly changing.

So what is my point? Well, I'm not trying to knock anyone's eating habits. One look at my daily fare would convince you of that! Also, most nutritionists would frown upon the prolonged fasts I occasionally take. They're tough on a body, too, the way other extreme diets are.

What I am getting around to saying is that, Dan Quayle was right! Potatoe is spelled that way!

I'm going to go out on a limb here. Now, it's a pretty strong limb; but some folks might disagree with me. We need first to understand how the world’s greatest social evils are rooted in “the chosen absence of the biological father,” whether physical or emotional in nature. This reality of broken aspirations and torn families permeates the entire spectrum of human life and history. If we listen to the children of divorce, we can trace most pain back to what is, or is at least perceived to be, such a chosen absence.

Ironically, the problem is originally seen in a story several thousand years old, and it describes both the social instability we see in America today and helps illuminate the struggle of the "War on Terrorism". Historically, the pain of just such a chosen absence most deeply affects the Arab and Muslim soul. Most of us know the story, but how many of us want to acknowledge the implications of it in our personal lives and in the world around us?

Abraham is the father to both the Arabs and the Jews; his son Ishmael is the father of the Arabs, his son Isaac is the father of the Jews, and Christians are spiritual descendants of Jewish history. The nature of the conflict between Ishmael and Isaac is thus defined forever.

In Genesis 16, Abraham’s wife Sarah sought to address her barrenness by suggesting that Abraham sleep with her Egyptian maidservant, Hagar. Her intent was to “build a family through her,” which is to say, the first recorded surrogate motherhood. Sarah was not even giving Hagar the status of a concubine, who at least could raise her own child. Sarah planned to take the child from Hagar at birth and claim him for her own.

Abraham agreed to the idea, and when Hagar knew she was pregnant, and understood Sarah’s designs, she despised her. Sarah despised Hagar in return, blamed the matter on Abraham, and began to mistreat Hagar. This led to conflict when Isaac was born to Abraham and Sarah thirteen years later. Ishmael was biologically the firstborn and resented the fact that Isaac was to be honored legally as the firstborn.

Now Abraham wanted to be a present father to his son Ishmael. But Sarah prevented him, and in order to keep his marriage intact, Abraham could not publicly embrace Ishmael. His relational absence from Ishmael’s life was not his desired choice, but it was the fruit of a choice he foolishly made. It was a chosen, yet not chosen, absence—with devastating effects on Ishmael and world history. The war between the women has produced a war between the sons, a war between the Arabs and Jews and, hence, a war between the nations.

From Ishmael’s perspective as a young boy, he grew up not knowing why his father Abraham was relationally absent in his life. There was his father, the patriarch of a large community, wealthy and with a status near to that of a king. Abraham was powerful, therefore his absence must be chosen, so the little boy would grow to reason. All that young Ishmael desired was the honor of being known and treated as his father’s son. But the choices made prevented it.

Thus, Ishmael grew up burdened in shame, written into his soul and his life from before his birth. Shame wounds most severely when it is through no fault of our own and we feel personally rejected by someone of great importance to us. As the Arab peoples have descended from Ishmael (directly by bloodline and/or more indirectly in cultural terms), their psyche has been shaped by the burden of shame. This reality of the shame-conflict in the Arab soul is clear to this day.

Dan Quayle was right. When families fall, societies fall. Fathers must be present. Fathers must make the right, responsible choices. We can know longer expect to enjoy our hamburger without the bun. It is incomplete, and unhealthy.

I am the broken product of poor family dietary choices. It hurts. In spite of that hurt, I took on the eating habits of my immediate family and my culture. I, too, have made those wrong culinary decisions. I and my family have suffered through the emotional heartburn and psychological indigestion for many years.

I ate too much! I ate too fast! How do you spell relief?

Gastronomically yours,

~Bill

The consequences of Ishmael’s shame are summed up in Genesis 16:12:

“He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.”