Is Deuteronomy our authority?
As you know, Wednesday is Question and Answer day here on the blog. Last week in this space I posted the following here... Question from a Reader:Why Are Jews So Special? Dear Neale Donald Walsch: CWG really knocked me out!...
Subscribe
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
What a great response, Neale!
It is amazing to me what singular lines modern-day literal interpreters of the Bible pick and choose to declare in support of the divine intention of God and which ones they simply choose to ignore.
It is apparent that some interpreters have an agenda. Rather than coming to the Bible openly, looking at the Bible as a text that is "alive" and breathing, they come to it with a preconceived interpretation already in mind, an interpretation in which they have a vested interest in perpetuating in our society. For instance, one might find all sorts of one-liners that could be used to subjugate women or various races, etc. etc. But do we really believe the insane notion that God loved women less or certain races less?
We must view the Bible holistically and keep in mind that the men who wrote the books of the Bible were just that, men, who, though inspired by God, were still limited by their own perceptions and horizons. CWG teaches us that everyone's experience of God is limited or filtered through their own perceptions of God. In fact, CWG teaches us that there is no exception.
We must use common sense. Do we really believe a God is so unloving to God's daughters that she would have them stoned to death, or is it possible that the writer of Deuteronomy lived in a historical time period in which "stoning" was the norm and an accepted way of life. Readers of the Bible, like readers of any text, must place themselves within the historical context of the one writing the text to reach the Word within Word--the transcendental truth.
Surely, we modern interpreters of the Bible have evolved enough that we can see past the historical constraints of one living in the days of Deuteronomy. Surely, we are capable of perceiving of a far more loving God.
Love and Peace,
Michelle
No it is meant to use to grow up and ude youre feelings.
This book is the book of the law. The letter of the law kills. We are now under grace. Grace makes alive. The law was our schoolmaster to reveal to us what God called sin. Now we have obtained grace through the Risen Christ. When I look at this book, I thank God that He brought salvation through His Son Jesus Christ.
I personally believe that God is a very loving God ever since!
i could still remember sometimes upon hearing a very old fashioned way of sermons, of course they also used the old fashioned way of interpreting the bible verses, i used to feel a part of me want to dis agree, because my common sense speaks itself telling me the WONDERS of Gods Love and Grace! Sometimes in recognizing our ways of justifying our chosen roads, upon asking guidance from Our FATHER iN Heaven,means those feelings occurs because of our compasionate hearts, that instead of continuining to live in hurts and pains we tend to have the capacity to forgive, nevertheless forgiveness not necessarily means we will return from where we have been but only to have a good feeling to be able to continue to walk in our chosen road, light hearted!
God is Good, John 3:16 i believe would be the best way to describe how great and overwhelming his Love for us!
God...is not any book. The essence of God is in humankind's will and choices. God is the soul,ie, compassion, kindness, and all beliefs and actions that elevate us to the universal spirit of God.
It is not about literal interpretations, or otherwise, of religious writing. God is enlightenent...of soul and spirit..that which extends beyond us and for the betterment of all living entities.
I have a sense that long ago MAN selected certain impressions of God in order to control. Certain Churches/Religions embellished on the untruths to control people. I can't imagine that the way to God is thru another's intervention.
the sadness the bible brings it brings because it is written by man, and it is their interpetation of what they think God wants.. and it has been written and rewritten and misunderstood by many over the centurys. Sadness is taking anything literly, instead of allowing our souls to tell us what is. Looking for other authority to give us permission to be cruel to our neighbors and kill in the name of God is mans justification. The judgement is excused, violence supposedly given permission by Gods word. As a woman Who has been ignored, descecrated and abused as those in the bible, raped killed sold and discarded. My belief in God had to change, Someone told me once you can"t just choose what to believe... But the answer is YES I CAN and have and will, therein comes forgiveness love and the joy of being that structured religion took away.
I loved the post and I loved the comments! I really loved the YES I CAN!!
So true, all of you..
Blessings
Nerisa
The sad fact is we take text that has been written a few centuries ago as the absolute authority without taking into consideration the historical context and dare I say the natural human tendencies into consideration. While I may not want to start a debate about the content of sacred scriptures I do take into consideration that a basic human tendency is to embellish and add to a story (often colored by their own cultural bias) that has been passed on. When a message is received be it from God or any other source most humans will ad-lib some of that information to suit their own agenda. Furthermore, from a historical perspective we know these texts to have been translated several times, from old language to new language, from one language to another. Being bilingual myself I am constantly faced with translated documents where it is evident the translator took some creative license.
I find it discouraging to hear that in this day and age we are still not being more astute about the source of any material.
Religious texts, such as the Book of Deuteronomy, are indeed sacred because of what they might provide one if one so chooses. They are sacred challenges to One's Awareness. The question in expanding One's Awareness is not is this good?, is this bad?, is this moral?, is this immoral?, is this allowed?, or is this forbidden according to a book or text? The question that serves One in all situations is, "Is my choice for another what I would choose for myself?" As a result, One will be aware if a choice is gracious or not.
Appreciating a religious text is not accomplished by being bound by it, as so many mistakenly believe. Anyone who thinks so has missed the meaning of appreciation. A sacred text should assist One in coming to a more progressive and expansive awareness. We find evidence in the histories recorded in sacred texts: the generation of benevolence arising from gracious choices, as well as the instructive consequences that arise from ungracious choices. The instructive consequences remind One that a more gracious choice was missed in the choosing. In this gracious framework, no consequence is unintended but rather instructive. It is so in all sacred texts.
We are all One. One demonstrates understanding this by appreciating the underlying Awareness one might come to in reading and then appreciating the purpose served by Deuteronomy. Progress arises when One sets aside the ungracious suggestions and supports gracious choices. One designed it the Law of Grace for One's selves before embarking on the journey of Many: All choices generate benefit for purposes of appreciation. One might always choose to appreciate the benefit of benevolence or instructive consequence. Or not, inviting further instructive consequence.
Our world is as it is this day, because we have lost sight of the Law of Grace functioning as it does in our lives, individually and collectively. One is always empowered to realize and appreciate the benefit of One's choices. It would not be a gracious Universe otherwise. One would not have designed the realization of experience through choices of Free Will any other way.
Namaste.
Dudes...
CWG is the one true source. Come on.
I don't believe the Torah is inspired by God. But do, definitely, believe the Bible is inspired by God. You must read the Bible in context and understand the different uses of writing styles and intentions of the Author/authors. We must understand the culture and times of the writing. God speaks to these situations and uses man's current level of understanding to speak to them. The old testament, especially the first five books, were written to people who were new to everything God would begin to show them. He was preparing a people to pass on the knowledge of Himself, to teach and train them, and to show Himself to them and make them His own. He was separating them, from their existing society,to Himself. Preparing what He did -looking back now, we can see the plan and process, the failings and triumphs and the ultimate triumph of Christ. There is much to say on the subject of Bible interpretation. I am not an expert but do understand the importance of reading, any book, in light of the authors experience and in context and style, etc.
Dear Neale,
Thank you very much for publishing my initial comment, and for your
own answer. I think that I understand your position (see below), and I
also think that your position is a common one, and one which makes
sense to have. In fact, I think that I myself once had a position much
like yours. Having said that, I nevertheless think that your position
is not the ONLY "reasonable" position one can have. But let me come to
that.
Before I start, however, I would like to make one thing clear, if I
haven't already. I am not a Jew myself, neither an orthodox one nor a
liberal one. So I am not culturally or religiously attached to "being
a good Jewish boy", to defend my grandfathers, or my community, or my
heritage, or anything like that. So in the current discussion, I am
just (temporarily) trying to see things from the (orthodox) Jewish
perspective, as some very serious rabbis previously have done. They
have read the Torah as absolute statements coming from God.
Now, your philosophical argument goes something like this (correct me
if I have read you wrong): The Bible contains statements and commands
that are horrible and downright preposterous (stone the woman who
can't prove she was a virgin; stone the men and women who are in
adulterous relationships; etc.). Therefore, we must conclude that the
Bible cannot possibly be an authoritative source on the word of God
and the intentions of Divinity.
For if one assumes that God is a person who is all-merciful, all-benevolent, all-good (commonly perceived as being 'kind',
'understanding', 'friendly', 'compassionate', 'loving', etc., as
opposed to being 'aggressive', 'angry', 'combattant', 'punishing',
etc.), then it impossible to see how God could issue such statements; in other words, God would NEVER recommend any stoning or punishing. Therefore, those statements in the Torah must either be misrepresentations of the 'real' statements of God (in which case they are not Divinely authoritative), or they are just man-made statements from scratch (in which case they are, once again, not Divinely authoritative). So the Torah is not the real Word of God or the real intentions of the Divine.
Now, the problem with this conclusion is that it is not an "automatic"
or a necessary one. Rather, it is heavily dependent on the premise
that God is a person who is all-merciful, all-benevolent, and all-good
(understood in the common compassionate Christian sense, as only
'kind' and 'loving' and NOT very punishing etc.). So if God is NOT all-merciful, all-benevolent, and all-good (in the previous sense),
then the above conclusion simply doesn't follow. If God is NOT all-merciful then the statements/commands in the Torah do NOT prove that the Torah is not authoritative; so then the Torah may very well be completely true, even in a literal sense.
At this point, there are, of course, many ways to go. One could say,
for example, the following: let's play with the idea that it is true
that all humans are created in the image of God. If we were to accept
some such premise, then one might also say that whatever abilities and
features ALL humans have are a result of God's grace. In other words,
if one really buys the idea that we all are created by God, then
everything we have, and everything we are, is by His grace; all of us are then little copies of Him in various ways, forms and degrees. So the fact that SOME men and women (for example some nice Christians) are kind and compassionate sometimes does not guarantee anything else than that God is kind and compassionate too, sometimes. It seems fairly clear that many other humans are NOT very compassionate or kind; there are many humans that are very brutal, very belligerent, very dangerous. And, in the current scenario, these humans must also be counted for. They are also created by God, who, in such a scenario, also would have a certain 'portion' of such abilities and features Himself.
I am well aware of that such a scenario (and there are many alternate
scenarios other than this one) may be extremely controversial and
unpalatable for those who share modern Christian values, or for those
who are proponents of a "peaceful" worldview. But if we are REALLY honest, I think we must search not only our personal feelings, but also be prepared to face all the "external" facts. We have to explain EVERYTHING that is happening in this world: all the misery, all the suffering, all the "why does bad things happen to good people". And, if we are not atheists, we have to explain all these things with God as a creator of some kind (the atheists would have to explain everything WITHOUT God as a creator). Otherwise, I think it is hard to be really satisfied, in an explanatory sense.
Of course, one could be of the opinion that one doesn't need to EXPLAIN even the most basic ongoings here on this planet, or why an all-merciful God should throw anyone into eternal hell, and that one should just have faith and pray and engage in devotional activities.
That's just fine too. But it's just that if one STARTS to think about
God and the human situation seriously, then one must, I think, be rather unsatisfied with the EXPLANATORY (in)abilities of a typical Christian "all-merciful" God scenario (although, of course, all-mercifulness is very attractive in terms of one's future state of affairs after death).
So to sum up, the existence of 'preposterous' or 'unpalatable' commands in the Torah, issued in a certain time and society, and being incompatible not only with modern secular societal values but also with modern Christian values, does NOT conclusively prove that the Torah is not Divinely authoritative. The Torah may very well be completely Divinely authoritative. And I am not even a Jew! ;O)
Best wishes, great discussion!!
Bo C. Klintberg
Editor/Author, Philosophical Plays
http://philosophicalplays.googlepages.com
To believe that one sacred text is inspired by God and another not is to again assert oneself as the only beholder of truth. It is, in fact, loudly professing one's ignorance. The interested seeker, if choosing to do so, would be surprised at how similar one sacred text is to anoother. They are in fact more similar than they are not.
Until we come to this realization we will continue to make each other wrong and make ourselves right, which leads to liscense to do whatever we choose to each other. Because after all WE HAVE IT RIGHT and THEY HAVE IT WRONG!
These Texts as with many Sacred Texts are written by people who have likes and Dislikes, and are IMHO a reflection of their times. The question one has to ask is what would be the point of writing such a rule book for Mankind, and then leaving it with a certain group of people who have no knowledge of other civilizations, within a world that they have not yet aware of?
How would this work for God and what is the benefit for such a set of rules and regulations? Would we not find the same rules elsewhere, within other civilizations? If one were to write a Policy Manual for an organization to standardize its practices, would you not make it global to the organization or would you just make relevant to a certain group of people within a region.
The point here is that the Pentateuch was written by people of their time who were trying to make sense and gain control of a world that they found themselves in. It is no more authoritative than any other sacred text. In fact, if these Sacred Texts were not so old, many of us would not pay any attention to them, they are only authoritative because we say they are or enough of us say that they are and then try to convert or force others to agree as well. This of course leads to many of our ills today.
At the end of the day, who gets to say what is authoritative and what is not? Is not God the Creator and the great lover of our souls much bigger than a set of texts that talk about what we can and cannot wear, eat, marry, etc…
Peace
Quotation from Cunningham Geikie DD, “The Life of Christ”
“…….There is much, besides, to which I can only allude in a word. He demands repentance from all, but never for a moment hints at any need of it for Himself. With all His matchless lowliness, He advances personal claims which, in a mere man, would be the very delirium of religious pride. He was divinely patient under every form of suffering,--a homeless life, hunger and thirst, craft and violence, meanness and pride, the taunts of enemies and betrayals of friends, ending in an ignominious death. Nothing of all this for a moment turned Him from His chosen path of love and pity. His last words, like His whole life, were a prayer for those who returned Him evil for good. His absolute superiority to everything narrow or local, so that He, a Jew, founds a religion in which all mankind are a common brotherhood, equal before God; the dignity, calmness, and self-possession before rulers, priests, and governors, which sets Him immeasurably above them; His freedom from superstition, in an age which was superstitious almost beyond example; His superiority to the merely external and ritual, in an age when rites and externals were the sum of religion; all these considerations, to mention no others, explain the mysterious attraction of His character, even when looked at only as that of an ideal Man.”………
I am always at a loss for words. I thank the Lord for men who can articulate so well. I underlined because it is Jesus who created the brotherhood of mankind, under one God, one Father but many children. Many fathers/gods does not produce one but many separate families so to speak.
Jesus acknowledged the value of women to a culture that did not. Jesus loved the slave and gave them the only way to true peace and contentment in a culture that did not value them as people. Nor did they value children. Jesus did not come to change the society of the day, He came to change hearts.
I am quoting from Cunningham Geikie again.
"....It was left to Christ to proclaim the brotherhood of all nations by revealing God as their common Father in Heaven, filled towards them with a father's love; by His commission to preach the Gospel to all; by His inviting all, without distinction, who laboured and were heavy laden, to come to Him, as the Saviour sent from God, for rest; by His receiving the woman of Samaria and her of Canaan as graciously as any others; by His making Himself the friend of publicans and sinners; ..by His equal sympathy with the slave, the beggar, and the ruler; by the whole bearing and spirit of His life. And above all by His picture of all nations gathered to judgment at the Great Day, with no distinction of race or rank, but simply as men. In this great principle of the essential equality of man, and his responsibility to God, the germs lay hid of grand truths imperfectly realized even yet. Thus it is to this we owe the conception of the rights of individual conscience as opposed to any outward authority. There was no dream of such a thing before Christ came. ....."
Dear Neale,
I chanced upon your book "Conversations With God (1)" yesterday evening and have been able to read a few pages of it. I have also visited your blog to learn more about you. I have been captivated by your narrative and writings, not simply by what you say but because my own consciousness and inner voice have been telling me similar things. I believe in the truth of what you say not simply because you say it but because my consciousness confirms to me they are true.
I have often found myself pondering the kind of questions you put to God and proposing to investigate them deeply when I can afford the time. Your book convinces me that I am not out of my mind in questioning some things accepted by many without question as orthodox truths - a mindset that is responsible for much misunderstanding and conflict in our world.
I unfortunatley had to return the book to the owner after a few hours yesterday so I am still limited in my ability to discuss the contents. I intend, however, to buy the three volumes of the book immediately and hope to communicate with you again.
Thank you for putting your experiences in writing. They have given me enormous encouragement.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.