People use scriptures and religions as a framework to understand the divine. However these institutions and tools can often become cumbersome and inadequate. Attempting to understand the incomprehensible can be a frustrating search that leads to multiple dead-ends and disillusion. Should one be shocked to find the texts we read imperfect and contradictory, the leaders we follow hypocrites, or the theology we ascribe to cruel or ridiculous?
Personally I think it should be expected that any tool we use to gain knowledge to have a very limited value. Just consider how difficult it can be to explain a simple viewpoint to another person. Is it possible to convey an idea perfectly? Now consider the divine conveying a message to 4+ billion people. Is it possible to use one tool to do so?
Many people consider The Bible as the be-all-and-end-all of God's voice to us. But when one considers it's multiple sources, authors, and it's very human editors such as the council of Nicaea and Martin Luther, who decided what texts and messages should be included and excluded, one starts to wonder how perfect this one tool can possibly be.
Add to the question of legitimacy the question of translation. One language doesn't translate perfectly to another, so how can could The Bible possibly translate perfectly into English. Add to this the fact that language itself is not perfect. We have complex emotions and ideas, that at times, may have no words adequate enough to express them.
I have to conclude divine communication can not translate into human language. I don't believe you can fit something perfect into a flawed system of communication, although I do think God does communicate perfectly, and in a way that doesn't necessarily involve language.
I wrote the this about a year or so ago and felt it may be worth revisiting:
I don't believe any scripture needs to be perfect to be inspired by God. Obviously the totality of scriptures we have contain many flaws, contradictions, and imperfections. But I don't think that discounts the influence of God or the movement of his spirit through us.
In my opinion God's "perfect" will can not be completed through "imperfect" beings without losing a little something. Just like a carpenter can't build a perfect house with crooked tools. But maybe the carpenter can build a house that is suitable for the people that have to live there. He might have to use his sawhorse as a level, he might have to use his screwdriver to hammer nails, but he gets the job done adequately enough to provide shelter.
In my humble opinion, it is not the process that spiritual knowing (or spiritual wisdom/Gnosis) is transferred that is important, but that simply that it is transferred, so that it can be implemented.
I was talking to my friend at work about how the NAB has more books than the King James. I told him there are tons of Christian writings that aren't in the Bible. This is a huge system shock to any protestant as I can personally attest.
But as I told him, just like I would tell anyone else who might be unsettled by this discovery, I think we have many books that are inspired by God in some way, that are written through the influence of the Spirit, and they are there for the people that need them.
If I felt the need to separate myself from my protestant roots, this might be my biggest theological split: The need to have one perfect "Bible," instead of a vast multitude of inspired books, songs, and stories, people, insights and experiences that get the job done when it really counts.
No comments:
Post a Comment