CHAPTER THREE
GOD'S REVELATIONS TO MAN
-1-
Problems in Dealing With Revelations
Much of theology is based upon what
is referred to as God's Revelations. These most often take the form of Sacred
Writings of one sort or another. Theology often uses these writings to support
their conclusions; but of course, the claim of "the sacredness"
is actually in itself a theological conclusion. Many will even go so far as to
claim that their declared sacred writings are the very
written word of Almighty God.
Before defining Revelation, we
need to examine these claims because our definition goes beyond the present
exclusive suppositions of many faiths.
Too often, men dealing with
sacred writings cling to reasoning that just because an individual may be
inspired, their work becomes infallible in some way. But to say that any sacred
work is the written word of God is in reality almost blasphemous, for it
implies that a human being is as free from error as the Divine would be. In
truth, the hand of the Divine, penned not one word of any sacred scripture;
therefore, any declaration that written words (such as the Bible) are the written
word of God is in fact misleading. To say that any human being is infallible is
one of the most irresponsible things any theology can do. Such theological
arguments tend to assert that an individual has no right to question. This is a
dangerous premise in any school of thought, but it is particularly dangerous in
religious ideals, for it gives men the power to speak for God. Any history
book will show the danger of that most explicitly.
And not only do we have the
problem of humans writing these so-called written words of God, but these works
were compiled, translated, copied and then even declared sacred by men. To
complicate literal or infallible claims even more, these works were often
written in ancient languages that have been subjected to translations -
once again, by men.
Let us start with translations.
Very often words and phrases when translated take on different meanings. To
give an example:
... He [Jesus) insisted that it [the
(Michael
Grant, JESUS, IN HISTORIAN'S REVIEW OF THE GOSPELS, 1977, p45)
So, as we can see, while many
theologians and religions define repentance as atonement for sin, in all
probability Jesus may have
had something very different in the reality of his mind.
Bishop John Shelby Spong also gives us another example of how scripture could
in fact be mistranslated:
But before we can confront the Jesus of history, we have to move
from English to Greek (the language in which the New Testament was written), to
Aramaic. To move into Aramaic is to move into a world of oral tradition where
no written records exist. Did Jesus say, for instance, "Is it easier for a
camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the
(John Shelby Spong, RESCUING THE BIBLE
FROM FUNDAMENTALISM, c1991, p16)
We must also keep in mind that
for centuries these manuscripts were hand copied by monks, very often in
religious orders that had their own theological agenda foremost in their minds.
While the ancient scribes of the
Jewish faith were extremely faithful to the accuracy, the Christian Church did
not adhere to such rigid disciplines until much later.
In the ages before printing when all text were individually hand
written, it was extremely easy for the Copyists Working in the scriptoria to
misread or misquote as they wrote. Through generations of such errors,
mistakes, even of spelling or of punctuation, could slowly deform the words of
the text. Since ancient times it had been recognized that perfect copies of
sacred text were essential. Scribes copying the Jewish Bible were obligated
under the Holy Law to use only the finest materials for their work and perfect
exemplars from which to make their copy. BUT NO SUCH REGULATIONS HAD EVER BEEN
PRESSED UPON THE
(John Romer, TESTAMENT, Henry Holt and Company, 1988, p250)
Romer goes on to point out that, Cassiodorus took it upon himself
to purify the Latin Bible. He and his monks worked hard to iron out many of the
inconsistencies from the varying texts. They ended up using the Jerome text as
a guide and created what essentially became the basis of the European Bible known
as the Codex Grandior
Granted, this was a major effort
to clean up any corruption in the texts, but it was over five hundred years
before this effort was made. Even if we grant the most sincere effort made by
the monks, it would again almost certainly take a direct Divine intervention to
ensure that the Book would be free from any possible error. Or, in fact, be the
actual word of God.
Then in the 1600's, we get yet
another revision of the so-called word of God. King James who had his own
political agenda, namely the Divine Right of Kings, put yet another effort
forth to extract the actual word of God from the Bible. As a consequence, we
have yet another version of the Bible, which is also claimed to be the written
word of God.
In fact, if one walks into any
book store, or well equipped library, you will see many different versions of
the Bible: the Jerusalem, the King James, the New English, The Book, to name
just a few of the most common.
If we examine the contents of
these various Bibles, we will quickly realize that all of them cannot be the
written word of God, for there are differences, such as; the number of books,
or, in the translations of certain passages. So even if we were to concede to a
Bible being the written word of God, which one of them is the actual Word?
Responsibility also requires us
to consider that men were the ones who determined what went into this book to
begin with. Many Epistles, Gospels, and ancient religious texts were in fact
rejected because the content did not fit the orthodox beliefs of the period. Romer, once again says it nicely:
By the second century, there were MORE THAN A DOZEN GOSPELS
circulating, ALONG WITH A WHOLE LIBRARY OF OTHER TEXTS. These included letters
to Jesus to foreign kings, letters of Paul to Aristotle, histories of the
disciples and of many other characters in Jesus' life and times. And despite
the fact that THEY WERE ALL OUTLAWED LATER BY THE CHURCH, many of these
writings quietly survived in Christendom to become a source, a secret source,
of mystic Christian knowledge. Indeed, their influence upon Christian art and
literature is much greater than is generally realized.
(John Romer, TESTAMENT, Henry Holt & Company, 1988, p195)
So if there were all these texts
around, how did they find out what was the written word of God. Most often they just picked and chose that with which
they agreed, declaring heresy for that with which they did not agree. To be more blunt about it, if the word of God were in fact to
disagree with the assumptions of men, it would have never gotten into the book.
Let's just take the Gospels as
an example. If there were at least twelve in existence, why are there only four
in the Bible? What Divine method was used to determine that? Romer answers that for us:
As for the Gospels, Ireaeus [a second
century church leader] said that they were four in number; like the four zones
of the world, the four winds, the four divisions of man's estate, and the four
forms of the first living creatures - the Lion of Mark, - The Calf of Luke, the
man of Matthew, the Eagle of John. Irenaeus' defense
and definition of the canon of the Gospels soared like a hymn. AND AT A STROKE,
HE HAD DELINEATED THE SACRED BOOK OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
(ibid., p201)
The Bible, as we know it today, didn't
even have beginnings as a single sacred work until the second century. It was
only then that men had to sit in decision
as to what should be included in this so-called word of God. Here again, given
that religious biases and beliefs already existed among these men, it would
have taken a direct intervention on the part of the Divine to ensure that every
word in this book was inspired by God - and that every word that was omitted
was not in fact God's inspiration.
The next problem with scripture
being infallible has to do with the interpretation of this word of God. Even
the most literal interpretation of Scriptures requires that we make
assumptions, or take positions, which are often not clear in the text.
Let us take one of the most
common texts which is used to cite the Divinity of
Jesus:
Thomas said, "Lord, we do not know where you are going. So
how can we know the way?" Jesus replied, "I am the way, I am the
truth, and I am the life: No one comes to the Father except by me. If
you knew me, you would know my Father too. From now on, you do know Him; you
have seen Him.
Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the
Father and we will ask no more."
Jesus answered, "Have I been all this time with you, Philip,
and you still do not know me? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.
So then, how can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am
in the Father, and the Father in me? I AM NOT MYSELF THE SOURCE OF THE
WORDS I SPEAK TO YOU; IT IS THE FATHER WHO DWELLS IN ME DOING HIS OWN WORK.
Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else
accept the evidence of the DEEDS THEMSELVES…"
… "I will not leave you bereft; I am coming back to you. In
a little while the world will see me no longer, but you will see me; because I
live, then you will know that I AM IN MY FATHER, AND YOU ARE IN ME AND I IN YOU."
… "Anyone who loves me will heed what I say, then my Father
will love him and we will come to him and make our dwelling within him."
(John
14: 5-24)
At best, this whole passage
is ambiguous. Jesus never says he is God incarnate; actually; he never makes
this claim anywhere in the Gospels. It is the interpretations, which assert
this concept.
This passage could just as
easily be interpreted to mean that Jesus lived the way, the truth, and the life
that God intended. And as we can see by the closing, Jesus implied that the
Father could dwell within the disciples without making any distinction from the
Father dwelling in him. In fact, Jesus flatly says, he "is not the
source of his words or deeds." Might Jesus have meant that we should
strive to live our lives according to the way God intended them to be lived, as
he was doing? Could he possibly be saying that we as individuals are obligated to
help one another, to love one another, to show compassion and concern for one
another - just as he showed it? Is there anything in this passage, or any other
in the Gospels, where Jesus asks us to worship him?
Bishop Spong
cites yet another wonderful example of the problems of interpreting these
sacred works and it has to do with the social realities of the stories when
they were written:
'The issue of homosexuality is another reality in sexual thinking
and practice that places pressure on Holy Scripture. Once again, this prejudice
is so deep, so widely assumed to be self-evident that all the major churches
have in the past simply quoted the Bible to justify their continued oppression
and rejection of gay and lesbian persons. THE
In the biblical world of male values, the humiliation of a male
was best achieved by making the males act like women in the sex act. To act
like a woman, to be a passive participant in coitus, was thought to be
insulting to the dignity of the male. This, far more than homosexuality, was
the underlying theme of the
The story goes on to say that
(John
Shelby Spong RESCUING THE BIBLE FROM FUNDAMENTALISM
Harper Collins, 1991, p7)
This just illustrates, that
if we are to interpret, especially in a literal fashion, then we must be able
to think and interpret like the people for which the story was written. Such is
not possible in our world that is so far removed from theirs.
And we need to address one more
problem surrounding the idea of infallible revelation; which is,
the potential and ability of men to manipulate the interpretation to fit their
own selfish agenda or beliefs.
Let us just look at the
contention of Christianity that Jesus is mankind's salvation. If we were to
accept that, to which form of Christianity do we adhere? If we think about it,
we can find a Christian Church that fits almost any personal agenda. There are
liberal Christian faiths, conservative Christian faiths, moderate and extremes
in all categories. There are Christian faiths, which might emphasize the deeds
we do, and others the beliefs we hold. There are Christian faiths that express
themselves in rituals and sacraments, while others claim that one need only
live according to their interpretations of the Bible. Which of these is the
true "Way, Truth and Life" which represents the reality of Jesus'
teachings? So once again, if we were to accept a book such as the Bible as the
Word of God, just what interpretation of that Word is the correct one?
We also need to recognize here that
in recent times there have been many men claiming to be of God who have been
exposed as being fraudulent faith
healers, or sex offenders, or
exploiters of the faithful. Very often, the mainstream churches are plagued by
less than honest individuals, and are often more concerned about their finances
than the messages of Christ. So once again, we are forced to accept that a
direct act of Divine intervention took place to ensure the pure integrity of
the interpretation of the Word of God; but God offers His church no protection
from unscrupulous ministers?
So, let us recapitulate the
faith that we would need to believe that the Bible is the inerrant, infallible
or written word of God. We need to except that every author of every book was
free of making any error in conveying what God was saying to him or her. We
need to accept that God ensured the same freedom from error to the scribes who
copied these books for thousands of years. We need to believe that the men
who compiled the books were also Divinely inspired
and were also free from making any error. Moreover, the translators, at least
those who managed to translate the so-called actual written word of God would
have had to have been free from error. Then we have to accept that God has
infallibly led us to the actual translation that is Her
written word. In addition, when we begin to interpret, or have someone
interpret for us the meaning of many of the obscure passages, we once again
must accept that these individuals can be as free from error as God Himself is!
It would do well to point out
here, that these same criteria we have applied to the Bible are all applicable
in some way to any sacred writing - of any faith that claims those writings to
be infallible or the word of Almighty God.
These are just some of the
problems we have in dealing with revelation. A responsible theology cannot
ignore them, nor can it assert its authority based upon any scripture it had a
hand in determining.
So, does this mean there is no reliable
inspiration? Does it mean that Sacred Writings are useless? Does it mean the
Bible has no value?
The answer to all these
questions is no. God's inspiration is with us, as we shall try to explain in
this chapter. The Bible, as well as many other sacred inspirations, can be
useful and meaningful tools in the lives of individuals as well as being a
powerful motivator to solve many of the social/economic issues we face today.
It all really depends if we are truly seeking the guidance of God's Inspiration;
or settling for the rhetoric of men. It depends on whether we want to listen to
the Inspiration of God; or turn God's will into ours! It depends on if we are
willing to take personal responsibility to implement the inspiration; or if we
are just looking for magical answers to our problems.
The
first thing the responsible theology will examine in regards to its use of
revelation is the consequences of the teaching. If spiritual guidance doesn't
lead to equality, brotherhood, tolerance, and a positive effect on the
individual as well as the society it serves; or if the guidance leads to
stagnation, denial of scientific reality, or avoidance of personal
responsibility - then, its use of revelation is not responsible and therefore
must be flawed. In our Western Christian society, it is amazing how Jesus is
worshipped in our churches every Sunday, and his Gospel preached from their
pulpits, and yet, our society is devoid of the primary message contained in
those Gospels. It would seem that we have gone astray somewhere with our
theologies, as they are failing to have real impact in the everyday lives of
people.
God's Inspiration, God's
revelation, would be there first and foremost to help us in the reality of the
world in which we live. It is doubtful, to say the least, that God would allow
men to use Her Inspiration to dictate to other men the way they should live and
think. It is also doubtful, that God would allow any man the ability to speak
for Him; nor is it likely, She intended that her words
be used for one man to sit in judgement of another.
To help us deal with our lives
in a useful way can be the only cornerstone of God's Revelation to Man. It
should be applicable, usable, and realistic in the reality of our everyday
lives.
As we shall demonstrate, revelation
is God's inspiration to man and it can take many forms. It is of the past, but
it is also of the present, and it will always be there in the future. It may
change in presentation, content from one generation to the next; but the
messages remain constant and its usefulness becomes apparent.
But it becomes the use and
application of that inspiration which makes it truth! And, truth just might be
different for one individual than for another. This is why revelation can not
be God's edict that one man upholds over another. Instead, it is more personal,
more relative - His help and guidance as we move through this life. Her
revelations are not about other worlds, or lives to come; they are about life
in the reality of our world with our very human problems and the daily trials
that we face.
God's revelations are not His
edicts or Her laws, but a guide we might use to
establish responsible ethics that would help us to equalize and make our
societies run more harmoniously.
Thus, the first problem
responsible theology must overcome is: its approach toward God's Inspiration.
We must always recognize that while God may be perfection; human beings are far
from it. To think God would free any human being from the potential to err,
even theologians, is a foolish, arrogant and self-serving premise that is not
the least bit responsible to God or to one's fellow human being. To cite any
human endeavor as the "word" of God is an insult to the Creative
Intelligence.
As with all approaches to God
from the human perspective, theology must recognize its own limitations. It
must concede its ability to make mistakes and establish criteria to help it
correct those mistakes and be capable of change when those same mistakes are
made. This is not to say it should be fearful of taking positions, but simply
that it should be aware that those positions could be flawed.
One of the simplest tests we can
have in examining our belief structures is to examine its effect upon our
lives, our interrelationships with others, and its affects in the everyday
realities of our societies. There is something wrong with religious attitudes
that spew the immorality of homosexuality; while they ignore a free market that
puts people out of work for the sake of profit alone. Religious attitudes that
see the poor as parasites deserving only very limited help, and yet, ignore the
opulence of the most advantaged. These disparities would seem to be missing a
lot of the message contained in inspiration. Faiths that build grand houses of
worship while children suffer and starve seem to be missing the potential of
the real inspiration of God! Religions that ignore environmental consciousness
are in fact ignoring the concept that God is the Creator, for that alone should
make one environmentally conscious.
So if theology is to be
responsible, it needs to examine the positions of its religious suppositions to
ensure that they have the most useful and beneficial affect upon individuals
and society as a whole. In today's world, there are many tools we can use to help
us gauge this aspect of our beliefs - and theology should embrace them instead
of condemning them. Psychology, Sociology, History, Science, Philosophy: are
all part of truth and reality - and they are part of God's continuing
revelation as well as man's ability to discover himself. To ignore these things
is irresponsible.
NEXT CHAPTER-2-Arriving at the Truth
Please feel free to email us with your comments, sign our
Guest Book or post your opinion on our Message Board.