I recently read this on a group chat: "The bible. I have read it about four times, a different version each time. and I keep thinking that THIS time, it will speak to me. IT DOESN'T. unbelievably boring fantasy."
People try to read the bible as if it were a modern book. It isn't. It isn't even "a" book. It is a book of books, many books, thousands of years old, written in a very different times by different people, from very different cultures who saw the world differently. And also written across hundreds of years, not all at once by one culture, so it is bound to be confusing if you are looking for commonality.
Here I should explain why I want to put a few things straight. I have an honours degree in biblical studies which involved reading it in the original languages, and the course was fascinating. It was actually called "The Bible as History and Literature", not theology as such. I no longer read the bible as a matter of course and it is no longer my guide for living, although I still retain much of the ideals taught, but I would not dismiss it for being what it is.
That person also said,"I think the fact that the bible has been written and rewritten each time, with a different connotation given to each story, with vague, subtle and not so subtle changes with each rendition that irritates me so much."
The problem with any literature is that reading is very subjective; we all read with our own agendas. Each translator has tried to make it relevant to to the time and readership for which it was being done. I'm not sure that ever works. Some years ago I helped an elderly man translate his Chinese poetry into English, and that was hard enough. It took us years of emailing back and forth to try to make his Chinese poems relevant to an American audience without losing the original meaning. But to be fair, the bottom line is that most of the translations of the bible don't vary much at all from the original. They just use different words to say much the same thing, although there are exceptions for the reasons stated.
The next complaint was: "The first and fourth time I tried, I really wanted to be a 'believer'. The last time, I had a lovely pastor explaining things to me, it took a year! I think I will never "get" it. I prefer the Qu'ran and the Torah"
From my own experience I would say wanting to believe something isn't really the point. The bible is a book of many books so it can't be read as if it was one book. As far as the Old Testament is concerned, some books are supposedly history, as it was understood at the time it was written, and should not be thought of as literally true. The people of those times did not have archaeologists to fall back on, they were using stories handed down verbally, which doesn't mean they were fables, but also may not have been strictly accurate. And again, as today, history is written by the victors, not the vanquished, who tell it from their own point of view. How true does that make it? It is someone's truth, sure, but whose?
Some of the Old Testament is poetry, some books are prophecy. They should not be taken literally. Even today poetry is not about literal truth. And prophecy is never a literal concept. Regarding the Torah, however, the five books attributed to Moses, are part of what the Old Testament of the Bible is. The Tenach - the Jewish scriptures - consists of the Torah (law), the Navi'im (prophets), and the Ketuvim (writings). So if this person enjoys reading the Torah that's at least part of the bible she can't just dismiss.
The New Testament, or the Christian section of the bible, is again not to be thought of as literally word for word true. We can't even be sure who the real authors were. At that time there was no such thing as copyright. It was common practice for people to write in the name of someone famous, to give their words weight. In other words, to sell books, as it were. This was not regarded as reprehensible, as it would be today. People knew about it, it wasn't done to deceive. So it's important to bear that in mind. Most biblical study is made up of "best guesses".
These writers were trying to promote the teaching of a rabbi of the time, Jesus or Yeshua, of Nazareth, who spoke only to the Jews. These teachings - not, incidentally, exclusive to Jesus, other rabbis were also saying similar things - were later incorporated into a new religion. It's not for me to say whether they were right or wrong. It was Paul who took the teaching of this Jewish sect to the Gentiles, and made it into what later became known at Christianity, which at that time encompassed both Jews and Gentiles and was known simply as "The Way". There are Messianic Jews today who believe Jesus was the Messiah, just as Christians do. I have met these people in Jerusalem, and found it all very interesting.
None of this is new. It has been known among scholars for a very long time, but rarely strays outside the walls of the university or biblical college. Most people never get to hear it. Most believers don't want to hear it. Most critics don't either. Ignorance is bliss, after all. "Don't confuse me with the facts" is the cry of both those for and against, they both wish to cling to what they believe to be "true". The truth can be uncomfortable, after all.
My point is this: don't look at the bible as a book with a single message, you won't find one. Even the Jewish theology varies over time. The authors all had an axe to grind, an agenda to put forward. There is much wisdom and truth embedded in there, but it should not be taken as literal in many cases. Priests and pastors will tell believers not to '"cherry pick" but to take it or leave it, wholesale. Often they then go on to try to make excuses for the inconsistencies, sometimes ludicrous in their inventiveness. They too have their agenda. They have their livelihood to protect apart from anything else.
But apart from all that, belief in a higher power needs to come from a personal experience, not from reading a book. If you read the bible, see it for what it is, and don't try to make it into something it isn't or dismiss it as fantasy, which it certainly isn't; those who wrote it believed that they were sharing something important. That way you may find something in it which believers of two thousand years, give or take, have found to ease their journey through life.
No comments:
Post a Comment