Warning! The following post is different from the vast majority of my postings. It is unabashed proselytism! If you can't accept - or at least tolerate - it, you need to find something else to read!
Some time back, I made the observation (in a private forum), that I had finally - now that I am too old to make the most profit from them - learned the things I needed to know in order to have a good life. Another person on the forum demanded that I share the secret. This was my reply.
The secret is... there is no secret! The knowledge is in the Holy Books... all of them.
Have you ever noticed that, even in the New Testament, the individuals recording important events don't agree on detail? The sequence and description of events that we are given depend largely upon the perceptions and biases of the observer, just as they do when a policeman interviews witnesses to a crime. Most often, if there are five credible, competent witnesses, there will still be six slightly different stories - but the core of truth will be present in all of them. This is the reason why there are four Gospels in the New Testament. Each author reports events according to his own witnessing characteristics.
Consider also that the Holy Bible itself was not delivered complete to the apostles by the Hand of God. Rather is a compendium (collection) of writings assembled together by committees of men, centuries after the last apostle passed on to Heaven: men who chose to include or reject specific items according to the prevailing religious or political pressures, or according to their own prejudices.
So it is that the Holy Bible contains the Word of God, but it cannot be the Word of God - simply because both the witnesses doing the reporting, and "authorities" assembling the documents were fallible men. The distinction is that the Book is a container, but it is not the object being contained. As a container, it can, and does, contain objects other than that for which it was created - because agencies other than God have added things to and/or taken things from the container. Those foreign objects can, and do, obfuscate the actual purpose of the container, and often masquerade as part or all of the true purpose.
To the true believer, this should neither be news nor at all alarming. The Old Testament teaches that the testimony of two men is enough to put a man to death, provided that those witnesses meet certain tests, so it is a no-brainer that the testimony of four credible, competent witnesses (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) is enough to establish the facts of Jesus' life. One does, however, need to consider the inevitable "spin doctoring" that may have resulted, simply because all men were (and remain) products of the culture in which they were raised.
Consider also that the Holy Bible itself was not delivered complete to the apostles by the Hand of God. Rather is a compendium (collection) of writings assembled together by committees of men, centuries after the last apostle passed on to Heaven: men who chose to include or reject specific items according to the prevailing religious or political pressures, or according to their own prejudices.
So it is that the Holy Bible contains the Word of God, but it cannot be the Word of God - simply because both the witnesses doing the reporting, and "authorities" assembling the documents were fallible men. The distinction is that the Book is a container, but it is not the object being contained. As a container, it can, and does, contain objects other than that for which it was created - because agencies other than God have added things to and/or taken things from the container. Those foreign objects can, and do, obfuscate the actual purpose of the container, and often masquerade as part or all of the true purpose.
To the true believer, this should neither be news nor at all alarming. The Old Testament teaches that the testimony of two men is enough to put a man to death, provided that those witnesses meet certain tests, so it is a no-brainer that the testimony of four credible, competent witnesses (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) is enough to establish the facts of Jesus' life. One does, however, need to consider the inevitable "spin doctoring" that may have resulted, simply because all men were (and remain) products of the culture in which they were raised.
By and large, the I AM has used human agents to communicate His will to the bulk of humanity. Do you think that He doesn't know full well that those human agents are susceptible to all of the same failings as all other humans? His message is there, but can we expect that every word they recorded is purely His message? That denies human nature, and the humanity of the authors. One only needs re-read the Old Testament to understand that the Saints and Prophets were men, just as we are men; i.e., they were human, like us.
Who am I to testify thusly? I am not a modern-day prophet or priest, nor I do not have "credentials" from a seminary, but in the congregations in which I grew up, such things were always suspect, anyway. Throughout the New Testament we are cautioned about false prophets and Christ-pretenders; and are those paper credentials actual testimony to one's authority in interpreting the Scriptures? Perhaps, but whose testimony? The authors of the Gospels and letters are long dead, and the internecine conflicts that have ravaged the Christianity since it became the State Religion of Rome (Emperor Constantine) create and propagate doubts concerning the purity and sanctity of organized religion as a whole. Those conflicts, generally the result of ecclesiastical intolerance toward independent thinking, have actually driven people away from Christ - and that is inexcusable.
Who am I to testify thusly? I am not a modern-day prophet or priest, nor I do not have "credentials" from a seminary, but in the congregations in which I grew up, such things were always suspect, anyway. Throughout the New Testament we are cautioned about false prophets and Christ-pretenders; and are those paper credentials actual testimony to one's authority in interpreting the Scriptures? Perhaps, but whose testimony? The authors of the Gospels and letters are long dead, and the internecine conflicts that have ravaged the Christianity since it became the State Religion of Rome (Emperor Constantine) create and propagate doubts concerning the purity and sanctity of organized religion as a whole. Those conflicts, generally the result of ecclesiastical intolerance toward independent thinking, have actually driven people away from Christ - and that is inexcusable.
For the most part, "credentials" are granted by organizations that have a vested interest in maintaining a particular status quo, and it is questionable whether the "witnesses" who validate them usually have actual personal knowledge concerning the individual about whom they are testifying. They often simply parrot what they are told by others, about the competencies of that individual.
So, I am nothing special, really; just an ordinary man whose "authority" to testify comes not from hearsay testimony, but from his own convictions concerning the Godhead, and the purpose for which Jesus came to earth, according to my reading and interpretation of the Bible as a whole. You are free to examine or ignore it; free to accept or challenge it; free to develop your own interpretations and testimony - or not. You have the same authority as I, as does anyone who wishes to put forth the effort.
So where does this leave us? How does one ascertain the Truth? To paraphrase the "hook" for that old series, The X-files: the Truth is in there, and I believe the most important components of the Truth are
The rest of the Truth was expressed by Jesus himself, under pressure from the Pharisees:
Some other of Jesus' teachings that are germane to this post:
So, in summary, the lessons that we discover (or remember) once we are too old to use it advantageously is that
When I began this diatribe, I mentioned that the knowledge is in the Holy Books (plural). The principles that I've discussed here are not unique to the Holy Bible, but are also contained in the authoritative Scriptures of many non-Judeo-Christian beliefs as well: A martyr comes forth (for us, he was called Jesus, for others, maybe he had another name) to give testimony concerning God's will (whatever Name one chooses to use for Him), and yields up his life in some manner, in order to make the points that men are to live in the comfort of His mercy, and that they are to be as kind to one another, as circumstances allow.
Malice is not sanctioned by any but Satan - the Accuser, the Liar (he can lie with provable facts!). Anger and fear are natural reactions to injury and insult; but they will pass, and then we need to forgive - not just for the benefit of the forgiven, but for the health of our own souls. This doesn't mean that we must expose ourselves to harm, or that we should fail to defend ourselves from attack. What it does mean, is that while we must meet immediate needs, as well as prepare for future defense, hate and malice are superfluous and self-damaging.
So, I am nothing special, really; just an ordinary man whose "authority" to testify comes not from hearsay testimony, but from his own convictions concerning the Godhead, and the purpose for which Jesus came to earth, according to my reading and interpretation of the Bible as a whole. You are free to examine or ignore it; free to accept or challenge it; free to develop your own interpretations and testimony - or not. You have the same authority as I, as does anyone who wishes to put forth the effort.
So where does this leave us? How does one ascertain the Truth? To paraphrase the "hook" for that old series, The X-files: the Truth is in there, and I believe the most important components of the Truth are
- Excepting only Jesus himself, no man, however much respect he may command among men, is worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven;
- The Law, given to the Hebrews through Moses, was intended to demonstrate the inadequacies of men - and did so very effectively; and
- Jesus was sent to fulfill the Law, and thus provide the Way for men to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
We are further assured, throughout the Old and New Testaments (for example, Isaiah 55: 1-3, and John 3:16) that any who seek God through His mercy will be welcomed."I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one goes to the Father except through me.
The rest of the Truth was expressed by Jesus himself, under pressure from the Pharisees:
It is very clear that Jesus intends for men to be kind to one another. Witnesses also report that in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said:"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments"
which we all should recognize as the Golden Rule."Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
Some other of Jesus' teachings that are germane to this post:
"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes?" - Matthew 6:25
Then Jesus said to his disciples: "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear" - Luke 12:22
"Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?" - Matthew 6:27
"When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say" - Luke 12:11
and finally, he to whom Jesus gave the key to the Gates of Heaven advises:"Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day [is] the evil thereof." - Matthew 6:34
or in street-speak, don't sweat the small stuff - with the corollary, it's all small stuff! (Don't worry! Be happy!)"Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you." - 1 Peter 5:7
So, in summary, the lessons that we discover (or remember) once we are too old to use it advantageously is that
- God loves us and sent Jesus to make possible our entrance into Heaven - all we have to do is ask;
- Accept the authority of the Golden Rule, and practice it; and
- Don't expend emotional energy with needless worry.
When I began this diatribe, I mentioned that the knowledge is in the Holy Books (plural). The principles that I've discussed here are not unique to the Holy Bible, but are also contained in the authoritative Scriptures of many non-Judeo-Christian beliefs as well: A martyr comes forth (for us, he was called Jesus, for others, maybe he had another name) to give testimony concerning God's will (whatever Name one chooses to use for Him), and yields up his life in some manner, in order to make the points that men are to live in the comfort of His mercy, and that they are to be as kind to one another, as circumstances allow.
Malice is not sanctioned by any but Satan - the Accuser, the Liar (he can lie with provable facts!). Anger and fear are natural reactions to injury and insult; but they will pass, and then we need to forgive - not just for the benefit of the forgiven, but for the health of our own souls. This doesn't mean that we must expose ourselves to harm, or that we should fail to defend ourselves from attack. What it does mean, is that while we must meet immediate needs, as well as prepare for future defense, hate and malice are superfluous and self-damaging.
So, if I were King - how would things be different? A King is by and large a secular leader, and although it has been tried many times in the past, no King, no matter how powerful, can dictate the contents of any man's heart. The best that he can do is influence their behaviors. With that in mind, if I were King, my focus concerning civil and criminal law would be the Golden Rule. By and large, our Bill of Rights serves as an implementation of the Golden Rule and because of that, I would enforce the provisions of the Bill of Rights. Civil law, on the other hand (as currently practiced) seems bent on violating the Golden Rule, as well as compromising the provisions of the Bill of Rights. My inclination at this point would be to repeal pretty much the entire body of civil law, and send a lot of lawyers and judges out to learn an honest trade.
Peace.
Mariner
earnestly enjoyed this, keep them coming.
ReplyDelete