Synomyms: amalgam, blend, composite, grab bag, hodgepodge, medley, miscellany, variety (Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus)

Sunday, December 11, 2005

(The views contained herein do not necessarily reflect the mind of God. Although the author would like to think that they do.)

Since the topic came up on another blog, I have been considering exactly what I believe about the Bible being the "Word of God." The fact that it has been so many days of thinking doesn't mean that this is going to be any more comprehensive and cohesive an explanation, just that I finally had time to sit down and write it out.

The question was asked “Do you think God wrote the Bible?” I don’t think that a giant hand reached down from the clouds with a quill. I understand that it was written by men, men who were tied to their place and time. I don’t have a problem with calling it “The Word of God,” though, despite that. I believe that it ultimately came from God somehow. I know there are inconsistencies and contradictions. And there are things that it makes me uncomfortable to believe are true; things that give me a hard time because I don’t think I believe them myself, but the Book says so and I believe what it says is true, so… where does that leave me?

Re-reading this, it sounds like I’m saying I believe things even though I don’t believe them. Sky said earlier that she gets “annoyed with people who have the audacity to claim to know what God thinks on any subject, actually. He's _God_ (however such a being may be interpreted). Omnipotent and all that. How can mere humans claim to know what he thinks about everything??” The way my husband phrases it is, “I’d be disappointed in a God I could fully understand.” The way this relates is that I have faith that the inconsistencies and things that just seem dead wrong to us come from communication difficulties between God and humans. For example, Jesus said “"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” I believe that God is fair and just; but if I take that statement at face value does that mean that everyone who happened to be born in a non-Christian family is destined for Hell? That wouldn’t be fair or just, so I don’t accept that conclusion. Instead, I just assume that God has it worked out fairly, I just don’t understand how, and it’s not up to me to be Heaven’s Gatekeeper.

“bob“ said: “perhaps …it isn't the book that matters but the... study of it? Like a recipe, you can follow the instructions gramme for gramme or you can carefully consider why the ingredients and method is how it is and change it to suit your personal tastes (just as long as you end up making the same thing the recipe was for in the first place)?”

Yes and no. I think you need to do that to some extent, but I don’t think the criteria can be how it suits an individual’s personal taste. I think there is a criteria of truth that is outside of humanity and our perception of it; and that using one’s own preferences instead of “What is true?“ leads to shaky ground. “My marriage is horrible, so that whole ‘adultery thing’ doesn’t apply to me”; “My boss is a jerk and doesn’t pay me enough to put up with him, so it’s OK if I steal an occasional package of printer paper from him.”

There it is. Let the games begin.

7 comments:

skittledog said...

*grins*

I...mostly...agree. Definitely with the 'communication issues.' The number of translations between even us and the NT, and betwen what Jesus said and what his disciples heard...and then with the OT it's even more removed.

But. If there is a truth which is beyond us...how can we judge by it? Obviously going by what feels nice to you will not always be 'right,' but where do you get your absolute values from? Do you not still pick and choose the parts of the bible that you take the 'truth' from?

I know I do. And I'm not quite sure how I justify it. Just wondering if you can do it for me. :)

keppet said...

Okay so to summarise...

There are bits of the Bible I choose not to believe in and instead believe that there was a communication error.

Not everyone can use there personal preferences to sort out the true bits from the communication errors. But it is okay for me to do it.

Skywolf said...

But what with all the 'communication issues', interpretations, and differences in translation, how can anyone be sure that the Bible as it is today is as God would have wanted it to be when all of its different sections were first written down? (Assuming it originally was inspired directly from God, that is.)

I also have a problem with the belief that if it's not in the Bible, it's against the Truth and what God 'wants'. There are just too many issues for me that aren't dealt with at all by Christian teachings, and I can't accept that they're nonsense just because the Bible isn't clear on them or ignores them altogether.

Emano said...

I didn't say that no one but me could "pick and choose;" I said that I dont' think personal preference should be the criteria. I don't claim to know what The Truth is, but I think there is one and that that should be the criteria. Everyone will work that out differently, and I don't expect that anyone will get it 100% correct. But that the criteria is outside of oneself. It's not "preference" because there are times when what I would prefer goes against what I believe is true. Perhaps I would prefer to take printer paper from my jerky boss instead of buying my own, but it is wrong to do so.

There's more comments to comment on but my brain is shutting down for now.

skittledog said...

Oh look, you pretty much did manage to justify it for me. Bonus.

Everybody has to come to their own conclusions on The Truth. Because that's the point. If we knew, where would be the free will?

If you are Christian, you believe god sent Jesus to save us. That kind of implies we need saving, even with the Bible. If the Bible had the absolute truth and all the rules for life in - and more importantly if that was how God wanted us to exist: all knowing the absolute truth from birth - we wouldn't need Jesus. All we'd need would be a Montypythonesque pointy finger coming down from the sky and a big voice saying BELIEVE.

Ugh. I can't argue this stuff. And I sound illogical even though I don't think I am and I hate it. But I can't seem to stop myself trying to debate it...

La Tulipe said...

FAITH.

Have ye heard the term Cafeteria Christian?

It always makes Rian smile. And think of chicken nuggets.

Ata said...

If you are Christian, you believe god sent Jesus to save us. That kind of implies we need saving, even with the Bible. If the Bible had the absolute truth and all the rules for life in - and more importantly if that was how God wanted us to exist: all knowing the absolute truth from birth - we wouldn't need Jesus. All we'd need would be a Montypythonesque pointy finger coming down from the sky and a big voice saying BELIEVE.

There is a teaching that God's purpose in Jesus was not 'saving' as in 'You did something bad and I have to do this to patch it up', but rather adoption - to consider it differently, that Jesus' coming was part of God's plan from the beginning, rather than an element introduced to repair damage.

I do honestly believe that there is a great deal of biblical miscommunication taught in churches - but I think that this does not come from the content of the Bible so much as our interpretation of it - modern Christianity, having been around the world so many times through so many countries, has picked up a great deal of baggage from other religions. For example, many concepts of heaven and hell and punishment and purity are - probably not surprisingly - strongly influenced by ancient Greece (I have a Friend for whom this is a hot topic, so I could be here a while). And I also think that when we talk about inconsistencies, our perception of inconsistency stems from our incomplete understanding rather than existing contradiction. Taking individual verses or quotations to support a teaching can add to that problem by only presenting part of the story.

Having read some of the comments on Skywolf's blog, I had to ask myself the question of whether I pick and choose what I want to believe. And I really, really try not to choose bits that I will believe and obey and bits that I won't. I don't think that's what I do. I do try to consider every element as part of the whole, and add my experience of God to what I am taught about God.

And like you, Skits, I hate debating anything vaguely theological, but I can't seem to stay out of a discussion when it comes up...