As a child I was taught that everything should be based on the Holy Bible, the Word of God. In that tome were all the answers to all questions. No other questions existed. The Word was spiritual law, eternal and unchanging. It wasn't until much, much later that I realised that Jesus himself contradicted this unchanging law on a number of occasions. "The prophets said.......but I say unto you......." etc.. Interestingly, when the Church and certain groups of religious adherents [incidentally, not all Christians by any means] wish to lay down the law on various matters, it seems inevitable that they turn to Old Testament law. Jesus the wisdom teacher rarely or never comes into the picture.
But there is another meaning to the phrase, Word of God, and one which is of far greater value for the psycho-spiritual life. That Word is spoken of in the famous opening chapter of St. John's gospel:
In the beginning was the Word:
The Word was with God and the Word was God.
I say again, the Word was God, not some dysfunctional ego with divine aspirations. These words are not just idle, biblical jargon for the past but words of profound meaning relevant to modern times. The process of biblical exegesis [Midrash by ancient Judaic authorities] continues today and throws an exciting light on developing spiritual enlightenment. What a great pity it is that so many eyes, both Christian and otherwise [the religious do not have a monopoly on bigotry] still need to be opened; that there are so many who even lack the desire for that opening. Why run away from spiritual pain when the rewards are so great?
There is much here that I'm curious to know more about in due course: your other meaning for the Word; the opening of the eyes; how we can know who has the desire for that opening (do they have an inkling of it?); the (necessary?) part played by spiritual pain; the rewards.
ReplyDeleteI've a kind of discussion going on about these very things at "The Retreat". I tried emailing you, perhaps you've changed address. If interested please write to me here
Hello Vincent,
DeleteI did receive your email but am reluctant to become involved in more than I can manage. At present my time is being used to the full. Among other reasons, the time commitment required for my blog site was one of my considerations in deciding whether or not to return to blogging. But I will keep your offer in mind.
I relish YOUR biblical exegesis, Thomas. I fear that we in the U.S.A. have gone in the wrong direction in the past two years. Or perhaps it was always there, just not expressed, and now feels allowed to express itself. Loudly. Whatever, as they used to say in the 60's, it's a bad scene. It's good to hear from someone with a wiser view.
ReplyDeleteThank you Bruce. I am horrified at the way the world is moving at present. Somewhere, somehow, a wake-up call needs to be heard and listened to. I suspect the sad scene, as you express it, has always been there. It is that currently it feels it has been given permission to indulge itself. At least it is now out in the open. Your compliment is noted.
DeleteAs you know, Tom, I've been writing recently about my view of the G-word. I hesitate to say 'God' because so many of the interpretations of the meaning of that word are add odds with how I see it. While I find a great deal of the Bible inspirational, the picture the Old Testament paints of God, and the messages attributed to him, do not ring true for me. But you read what I wrote in my recent post so I won't repeat myself. For me it is the inner dialogue with the mystery that is G which is important. But I respect and am vey interested to hear your thoughts on The Word as it speaks to you.
ReplyDeleteHello Natalie,
DeleteI have, after much soul searching, to 'come out' about my orientation towards God. I will try to clarify my thoughts in that direction, but they will need to be given room to breathe if meaningful communication is to be gained. I agree with you completely that it is the inner dialogue with that mystery which is important.
Hi Tom,
ReplyDeleteIndeed the context of all of John’s gospel is underpinned by that opening statement. According to biblical scholar Daniel Wallace, ‘the Word was GOD’ is the authors reference to a Pre-existent Creator and ‘the word was with GOD’ is to present Jesus Christ in that same essence, but in his person - hood as the teacher.
So that there will be many who do not accept or believe in the divinity of Jesus. But whether an atheist, agnostic or believer who doesn’t accept the divinity part, the merit in seeking to understand that message remains as relevant today as when first penned to those ancient manuscripts. It may be helpful to view that by way of a friend listening to a message rather than ascribing moral directions.
Best wishes
Hi Lindsay,
DeleteI do so agree that the merit in seeking to understand the message remains as relevant today as it ever did. I will think further on your helpful comment.
Tom, as much as it pains me to consider the damage to me and others that religion has done in the world, I keep coming back to the writings in a search for meaning. I am sure that somewhere there should be evidence of the workings of the spirit in them. If I prod and poke enough they must yield up a spiritual truth. It might however be in the searching that meaning truly exists; the journey, not the destination.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that biblical scholars have always been involved in such a search by interpreting the word gives me hope.
Hi Halle,
DeleteI agree with your comment. I hope in my posts to further that search in the hope, even expectation perhaps [knock and it will be answered] that at least some truth will emerge.
I recently came across a remark Carl Jung made about heaven that I'm sure you must haove heard before.
ReplyDelete“No tree, it is said, can grow to heaven unless its roots reach down to hell.”
It's difficult, if not impossible, for many people to discover their darkness.
Jung was a very wise man indeed. I often wonder whether his wisdom came from his research with his patients, or from his own internal experiences. Surely, the latter?
Delete