What a wonderful notion these Christians have, they find faith in the Bible. Hmmm, let us think about that. In the Bible Christ tells us that He is the Word. So does Paul. Paul got his stuff second hand for much of what he knew. He also had close encounters with a risen Lord Christ. Since he wrote a bunch of it, he clearly did not know the Bible.
I like this ditty: "Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so." Well that is a problem because I know about Jesus because of the written word, but Jesus is the Word.
Clearly the Bible is not "The Word". Like Paul we must have personal encounters with Christ to know the Word.
So when people quote old or new parts of the Bible that are antagonistic toward your personal encounter with Christ How do you rectify that in your God given brain?
(Of course Atheists and other "religions" are welcome to comment here --- but this is not a forum about existence or not or about anyone who has not had a personal encounter with Jesus Christ --- it just does not make any sense, that would be a different forum discussion)
Kathryn I have been working on it for a long time. But I mean that in a labor or love sense -- prayer, meditation, consultation, research, contemplation and desire. The concept of how we know(come to know) Jesus and then His teachings always comes back to the Bible. Even my wife who was converted without ever reading the Bible, knew of it through me and much of that is from the Bible.
But yet Jesus is not restricted by the Bible and my relationship with Christ is not determined by the Bible.
So I do not say this lightly. Knowledge and faith in the Bible is Holy as is the transfiguration. It is a Holy mystery. A mystery of faith. One could call it a miracle.
The 'Word' or logos (from the Greek) has always fascinated me. I'm not sure I understand your reasoning in your intro paragraph (probably my failure!), all i can say for sure, is that the word 'logos' has a very long theological/metaphyscial history. In a sense, what is accepted as 'the Word' in today's Christian debates (and these views can vary widely), often miss the fact that there's a long history behind this word.
Certaiinly, in Kashmir Shaivism, which is believed to have fed into much of Hinduism and Buddhism (some of it, not all of it), much is said about the 'veiling power of words', and how words and the act of creation are the same thing. In fact, how resonance and 'the Word' are part and parcel of creation. In Sanskrit, this is known, as the sounds used have deeper meaning, and are all primordial sounds that (apparently) reflect various aspects of creation.
So it is fascinating that the whole word debate wound its way into the Bible, and Jesus' relationship to it (as claimed by John). In Yoga tradition, rising above all the binding constraints of existence (including the veiling power of the word, hiding us from out true nature), is part of the Way, as it were.
This is a huge and fascinating subject!
Thanks Kathryn :-)
I think I've just 'got' partly of what Eric was saying.
Indeed, they wouldn't have thought of the Bible as 'the Word', as it hadn't been formed yet! However, my guess is that whoever wrote various parts of the New Testament, the theology of 'the Word' would have been known.
So what is being claimed regarding Jesus is completely central to who he's meant to be - in fact, turning completely around ideas at the time regarding the Word and the act of Creation. I think this would have been an incredible claim at the time.
In some ways, Jesus offered the easiest yoga there is (my yolk is easy), which in yoga tradition is bhakti yoga (worship) and where the guru takes away karma (sin) and bestows enlightenment (salvation) through skaktipat (transmission of energy/holy spirit).
It all makes sense. Though of course, this amazing claim about Jesus (and his relationship to the Word) goes further than that, that somehow his mission on earth was to uplift the whole of humanity - which, in evolutionary terms of our planet, is probably true. On the other hand, it's worth noting that the Romans got hold of Christianity, and their purpose was to unite and control.
I've written way too much now...
Electro-denizon, tre cool stuff man. I love the intonation of ancient Sanskrit. (as though there is another Sanskrit ;-)
And your excellent comment reminds me also of that whole scenario of "what to call God" -- what word, what name?
I like to hum a spiritual song even though I know the words. Just searching for the resonance. And when found it is truly Sukha, the root of the "sweets" called Sukhadia, the sweetness.
So "the word" becomes more intent that verbalization. And that brings us right back to Kathryn's awesome observation of the "innateness" of scripture.
"Know ye not that ye are gods." It has to be within if our spirits (gods) are of Spirit (God).
Indeed what is the real name of God? In Judaism that problem is resolved by not pronouncing the middle vowel of his name (if I'm correct).
Sometimes I think though, that the Bible can become a reflection of ones own understanding. Wise people use it wisely, and more foolish people use it more foolishly. And yet, the Bible is endowed with an energy, that can't be denied. Whether this comes from the accumulated use through centuries, or because of something different, I don't know. I'm not trying to deny the innateness of scripture, just mulling it over.
I was brought up a Christian, but as I've grown up more, have had to understand my experiences in a wider context.
Yes, the ego will obliterate proper perspective. In other words, true understanding requires the ability or determination to be in touch with the true self (as opposed to illusionary self.)
Isn't that the quandary that everyone is in? We all have our belief, or at least, our experience of something that then becomes a belief (well, hopefully it follows that progression rather than belief as just words and concepts), and then, it's as if the compassionate being behind creation, the Loving Creator, wishes to unknot and free everyone from too much conception.
I'm glad my cousin isn't on Hubpages, as he's a creationist/fundamentalist Christian and would find this discourse difficult.
Certainly, for him, the Bible IS the Word of God in everyway, and takes historical accounts of what people did and how they behaved, to qualify behaving today in a certain way. It makes my head ache :-)
I am mulling also. My main Bible has a feel to it. I hold it to pray sometimes, it is held in front of me for any church procession or liturgy. My wife will say "no, go get the real Bible" referring to the one I teach and read the Gospel in Church from. I have even more to think about now.
On "The Word" here is interesting stuff: Exodus 3:14
God said to Moses, “I am who I am.[a] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”
Makes you wonder why no "word" was used and certainly no name.
Yes, that is so interesting. Beyond words...
The Bible my father gave to me when I was about 10, certainly has a feel to it!
Really strange thing about that. In order to copyright a derivative piece one has to make substantial changes to it. That is just the law. Last I checked there were over 200 copyrighted bibles just in the US in English. They basically are all substantially changed derivatives off the Non-copyrighted KJV. Now you tell me which one is the word?
The modern Bible is a collection of ancient scripts cobbled together by Roman politicians and pontiffs in order to create a single, unified text to control the growing Christian movement. Interesting how the Gnostic texts, many of which are purported to have actually been written by the followers of Jesus, are mysteriously absent from the Bible.
Jesus is the word. So what is the Bible?
The corrupted word.
I think by modern "computing" terminology and IP (intellectual property) concepts your "word" for it might be somewhat accurate. I heard my momma once use that term for a jam that for some reason fermented to pretty strong alcohol content. And once maybe for butter that went rancid.
And maybe it works like the modern parlance of a politician changing the intent for personal gain.
by mishpat2 years ago
I have enjoyed many "debates" with folks here on the Hub, but in the long run, its seems those that believe still believe and those that don't still don't. Why is this?Could it be, Christians, that we...
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter8 months ago
In 10 words or less, what do you see as the biggest advantage of not studying the Bible on a regular basis.Question directed at Christians. Please stay on topic whoever decides to respond.
by Castlepaloma6 years ago
1. I am an artist and the poorest paid in the nation. Why can’t I be allowed to beg or be tax free like the churches, if Jesus cares about the poor?2. What will Jesus do with all the atheists in the world? We...
by mdawson176 years ago
I think many hubbers will be shocked at the fact that I would have posted such a thread! As I am a devout Christian. However recently after doing research I have been coming to the relization that not all of what is...
by Eric Dierker3 years ago
We all understand that Christians are supposed to study the Bible. Nobody is here saying they are not supposed to do that. But many say we must do exactly what is in the Bible. But that would make a Christian someone...
by mischeviousme5 years ago
If I ask christians to explain God, they talk about Jesus. If I ask them about Jesus, they talk about God. If I ask them to talk about creation without God, they bring up Jesus and the circle just keeps going round.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.