everyone counts

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

words words words

I only have 30 minutes to write this. I promised Pastor Art he could get back on the computer at 12:35, after I posted my entry for the day. I’ve been lying in bed composing it. Staying in bed until noon is a sure fire symptom of clinical depression, especially for me, the early riser. I think I remember cursing the rooster at about 5:30.
Anyway, my topic for the day is WORDS.
Way back when Pastor Art (temple corners) and I were newborn Christians and our main source of spiritual nourishment was Christian Radio (Chuck Smith, Chuck Swindoll, James MacAurthur, Don Fransico and Keith Green), we were often confused by conflicting teaching and apparent contradictions. I was a Roman Catholic turned Witch then Born Again. He was a Junky turned Pagan then Born Again, so our minds were pretty messed up. But God in His Mercy and Wisdom led us to good teachers and godly mentors, through of all places, a United Methodist Church. We’ve shared about that on this site as well as on “Gateway of the Rock”.
One of the problems we ran into, being United Methodist, was that although our pastor was Born Again, and our mentors were Spirit Filled, the denomination its self was very liberal, and some of the people we rubbed shoulders with during denominational functions were very New Age. Coming out of the Occult, both of us were very aware of this problem, of the lies that were creeping in. One such lie was concerning the feminine side of God, the idea that God was both Father and Mother. And one of the arguments was that the Greek word for father which was used in the Bible could mean either parent.
The United Methodist Denomination, especially in the east, was striving to totally rewrite
Christianity in a gender neutral manner, beginning with their hymnal - liturgy. It was at that point Pastor Art decided he needed to learn the original languages, Greek and Hebrew. He needed to know what it really said, what it really meant. While he was earning his bachelors degree in Religion and Philosophy he took every Greek and Hebrew class he could. He found Hebrew easier than most because he is dyslexic and reading from right to left seemed natural to him. For his advanced Greek class he translated the book of Romans, chapters 1 to 11, and he got the only A in the class. Our library is filled with dictionaries and lexicons. I sometimes resort to good old Strongs Concordance, but he says that’s just kids stuff.
WORDS. LOGOS. What do they all mean? They are powerful. They can cause great pain. They can be manipulated, twisted, misused. Remember what James says. Yet, we are told that In The Beginning was the WORD.
I’ve been reading, and participating in some rather intense debates here in blog land.
The words here have been filled with great emotion and great conviction. Some have been cynical (I tend to be cynical at times). Some have been down right cruel.
Many have been using the Holy Words of God to “prove” their points and demonstrate their knowledge and credibility. So I started thinking about the Bible as we have it in our hands. Originally written in very ancient and precise languages. Every pastor knows how many Greek words there are for love. Which word was Jesus using when he asked Peter
“do you love me?” I’ve heard several sermons on that one.
But the question I’ve been asking is who were the people who translated the Bible from Greek and Hebrew into Latin, and into German, and into English??? Did they have a hidden agenda, a bias? I think I’m going to miss my 12:34 dead line, but I am almost done with this. I believe that the doctrine of Divine Election has been distorted because the men who translated the scriptures into the common language and who wrote many of the commentaries used today were anti Semitic. The elect, the chosen were and still are the Jews. And take a look at 1 Samuel 2:25
“ If one man sins against another, God will mediate for him, but if a man sins against the LORD who can intercede for him. But they would not listen to the voice of their father for the Lord desired to put them to death.” Wow, what a case for predestination. The sons did not have a choice. But when I asked good old Pastor Art to look that up, we discovered that the word translated as FOR could also mean therefore, or so. Which would change the whole meaning of that sentence from a case of predestination to a case of cause and effect, free will, free choice resulting in severe punishment.
Lately, I read on a friend’s blog, that it was Luther who decided to remove what we call the Apocrypha from the Bible. Pastor Art and I are looking into that one. So far it seems that at the time of the Apostles, most Jews accepted those books as part of the Holy Scriptures and that they would fall under the 2Tim.2:16 “all Scripture“.
Ok, so I’m ten minutes past my dead line, and I guess writing this has been therapeutic, better than whining and panicking. I really don’t know where I’m going with all this.
On the way home from worship practice a familiar song was playing. One that has been ringing in my ears and speaking to my heart for quite a while.
“Every blessing you pour out, I’ll turn back in praise.
When the darkness closes in, still I will say…Blessed be the name of the Lord
You give and take away, You give and take away, my heart will choose to say
Blessed be your Holy Name!.”
I was going to ask the worship team to pray for us, for me, my husband, and my prodigal son. My prodigal son who is on his way home…so tie a yellow ribbon round the old oak tree, its been three long years. But who won’t be able to come home if our landlord forces us to move, which is what I believe is going to happen, no matter how hard any of us prays…and I didn’t ask the team to pray. I’d just start crying. Big baby that I am.
So let me focus on heady stuff. Let me debate with theologians and write words about the WORD.
Oh no, I just heard Pastor Art sigh. The computer clock says 12:55. I think I’ll go clean out the closet. Even if we don’t have to move it will be good to get rid of some junk.
Well friends, I guess I’ll stop rambling. Blessings and Blog On!

14 comments:

Chris P. said...

The apocrypha appeared in the original King James translation,many years after Luther.
A question I would have is, should we toss our modern translations as they seem to contradict? Also if someone doesn't know the original Greek and Hebrew, can he not understand the Scriptures? I thought the Holy Spirit is the translator.
There are some who are not trying to prove their agenda, but approach the Scriptures for what they say.
Just a few thoughts.

Chris said...

Don't you suppose that there ARE in fact contradictions in the Bible, and errors... but that the underlying message, that which is truly "God breathed" is truthful? After all, God did not write the Bible, people did... many over many centuries.

I think the Bible teaches us what we need to know. The contradictions can thus be ignored as unimportant facts, but not used to discredit the Bible itself. I know many "Bible critics" who try to prove that Christianity is false by these contraditions that are truly there. The mistake many Christians make is in allowing themselves to fall into this snare: That they get into a tit-for-tat argument over details that overlook the underlying spiritual meanings of the passages in question.

I think the Bible has deep spiritual truths about God and God's relation to humankind, and each person's role in attaining and nurturing human relationships. But I think it's a mistake to waste too much time trying to prove that these contradictions are, in fact, not contradictions. They are. But it's okay.

By the way, this is my first visit to your blog. Very interesting! I look forward to reading more.

Arthur Brokop II said...

welcome chris,
you had me going for a minute because at first i thought you were chris p. and I know he would never suggest that there were infact contradictions in the Bible
(i was reading your comment on my email and not this site so i didn't see the picture)
as far as contradictions - nope
i don't think there are any,
however, there are apparent contradictions that either lead a reader to just shut the book and say this is nonsense or search deeper for the explaination. or sometimes, they may just let a teacher explain them away, and move on.
sometimes, i have found, that people who have been taught that certain concepts are true, or who have come to certain conclusions on their own, have a real hard time reconciling some of these apparent contradictions. Thats when you start to hear things like,
well, what that really means is...
kind of like when saul has the witch of endor cojur up the spirit of samuel. that can't really mean that witches can conjur up the ghosts of people who have died, can it?

Chris said...

Hi MaryEllen -- Yeah, I guess we disagree on the "inerrancy" of the Bible in the literal sense, but not in the spiritual sense. I'm not saying there is nothing literally believable, of course, just that there are parts that, when someone tries to reconcile the apparent contradiction, it doesn't stand the test of reason. Regardless of this, though, the danger lies only in the way people tend to focus on differences rather than similarities, and underlying deep meaning. God intended the Bible to reach out to many different types of people. It is certainly no surprise to me that such a diversely written book contains some contradictions of minor points. But I guess you could say my perspective is "progressive evangelical" rather than "conservative protestant" or "fundamentalist" -- just so you know where I"m coming from.

One point I meant to make was actually a response to Chris P -- that it certainly is not required for each person to learn Greek and Hebrew and, in a real sense, become a "theologian" in order to understand the Bible. We all accept so much of what is in the Bible based on the authority of others. That is okay, though. We just have to be wary and alert. Following Jack Van Impe, for example, is quite decidedly the wrong path to understanding the true nature of God, and completely misses everything the Bible is about. (you can tell, I'm no fan of Mr. Impe).

My approach has been this. Read the Bible both spiritually (the Holy Spirit always sends a message to me through Scripture -- It's amazing, really), and academically (using a good concordance and study-bible translation that is based on credible academicians).

So, when the Methodists (I'm not one, by the way -- they're too conservative and hipocritical around here) want to translate the Bible and Hymnal and replace "He" with "God" I have no problem with that. If they replace "He" with "He/She" I do have a problem with that. In the first case, it's a more true depiction of God as the Creator, who is without gender in the human sense (we are not literally created in the image of God in every sense of shape and form). So, replacing a pronoun with a proper noun is really a way of being more specific, which I think is fine. However, replacing "He" with "He/She/It" is silly, as it retains the gender-importance, but makes it vague. That just creates confusion. God is no more "she" than God is "he" -- God is God, that's all that we need to know.

So, I'm defending the Methodists, in a way, because I know that too often, the male pronoun is used for God in a way to degrade the relative importance of females in our society. If they really think changing the pronoun will bring about better treatment of gender, though... they're barking up the wrong tree. If they're seeking to be more true to God, I think that's fine. The Bible, and Biblical thought, is constantly evolving, and has been changing continuously throughout history. I would hate to think that God laid down the Bible and expected spiritual revelation through humanity to never improve on its early translations.

oops... sorry for rambling in your comments. I just got on a roll.

Again, I like your blog! Thanks.

Chris P. said...

Chris
Maryellen is right.,
I would never say that the Bible contradicts itself because it doesn't. As for authorship, sorry, it is God's very Word.

What is the difference between spiritual and academic?
Romans 12 says to be transformed by the renewing of your "mind". It also says in the previous verse to present ourselves as living sacrifices as that is our reasonable act of service. Now the words translated as "reasonable" and "service" are translated in some versions as ;
be transformed by the renewing of your mind as that is your "spiritual" act of "worship".
The word used as reasonable and spiritual is the same Greek word "logikos" and the Greek word
"latreia" is translated as service or worship. The understanding comes both spiritually and academically as for the believer there is no difference. The
"literal" and the "spiritual" cannot be divided. I do not see the dichotomy re: the scriptures that you do. There is no "tension" between the two. Of course I would not know about this had I not found the God given reconciliation between the text and its study. The Hebrews have a proverb that study is the highest form of worship.
Amen!

Arthur Brokop II said...

hummm, what am i going to do with two chris's.
just kidding guys, you are more than welcome on my site...i like getting comments.
I've done a lot of studying on this god language subject.
I don't buy the statement that male pronouns were used to degrade
the relative importance of females, at least not in the Holy Bible. In the original languages, the nouns may be gender neutral, but the artilces specifically designate gender. I don't think you need to be able to understand the orginal languages, but a good
concordance doesn't hurt.
But I do really appreicate you comments Chris, blog on

Chris said...

Chris, I don't quite follow you, but I get the point you're trying to make. That the Bible is the literal word of God, and I think this is not true. It is the inspired word of God, which is quite another thing entirely. The Muslims believe the Q'uran is the literal word of God, but most Christians don't believe the Holy Bible is entirely literal. Not to say that taking it entirely literally misses all its value... certainly a literal interpretation is better than no interpretation at all! I'm just not sure how you can prove what you're saying. There are many Christian teachings that are not literally in the Bible, and yet are widely believed based on centuries of prayerful consideration of the underlying intent of the scriptures. So, taking it all literally would seem to me an impossible task.

That would be like saying the Earth was literally formed in six calendar days, and that Eve was literally formed from the rib of a guy named Adam. I think believing these things doesn't necessarily hurt anyone, but I don't believe them to be literally true.

Yeah, anyway, like I said, Christians are a varied bunch, and we don't always (or often) agree on things 100%. I'm not sure how we got into this, Chris P, but I hope you didn't take any offense. We're all brothers and sisters in Christ.

MaryEllen, yes, after thinking more about it, I also don't think the purpose of using male pronouns for God was intentionally meant to undermine the feminine half, but it may only be literary convention. The contextual lens through which the Bible was written was that of the authors themselves, though inspired by God. So, there are many things that the Bible could not possibly describe, because the authors simply didn't have the foresight or knowledge at the time (space travel, abortion, AIDS, archaeology, astrophysics, feminism, etc.). Sort of a digression, but again it gets to this point of "who" wrote the Bible, and how they were to put into their words what they were inspired by God to write.

Having said all this (and I am rambling again... sorry), I think we can all understand when we call God a "He" it doesn't literally mean a male person, because we should know better than to assign Gender as such. It's sort of pointless. It's almost as if the Methodists are trying to preemp prejudice, or sexism -- which should actually be done through thoughtful interpretation, rather than re-translation. So, I think the whole thing is quite silly. I usually don't use the pronouns for God, because I think it's more acurrate my way, but I'm not going to shame anyone for doing otherwise. It's not really that important.

But it does beg the question (and it took a while to get here, so thanks for hanging in there): do you believe that God is both masculine and feminine? This has nothing to do with "new age" mysticism or any such spacey thinking. It's an honest question. Many consider the Holy Spirit to be God's feminine personality (or I should say personhood) in the trinity.

Arthur Brokop II said...

see, i do believe that the earth was created in 6 literal days, etc.
but i think i also trust the Holy Spirit enough to know that when people are truly seeking the truth, He will reveal the truth to them, at the rate and to the extent that is best for them. He knows our hearts. I'll step back a little here...God bless both Chris's...Jesus is the common ground here. Blessed be His Holy Name!

Jerine said...

what is Pastor Art? A pastor or what? i dont really get it

Arthur Brokop II said...

Kamwei - see the posting above entitled Good Morning.
Chris and Chris, forgive me if I don't continue our discussion for a while. Yesterday this computer ate my brain. It was a good diversion...but today I just want to spend time in the word - and cleaning out my closets.

Anonymous said...

Good discussion here.

Maryellen, I recognize that question from 1 Samuel :)

I love your question about the "agenda" of the translators of the bible. I would add, did the authors of the bible have any kind of agenda? I would argue that they did.

Does that mean the Bible isn't inspired or authoritative, because it's written (and translated) by men with agendas? I don't think so. I think it makes the Bible that much more amazing.

But that's just me.

Oh, I want to write so much more, but I'm at work and should get back to making phone calls.

I wrote a post yesterday that has very similar themes. I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks!

Arthur Brokop II said...

Chris, as for the feminen side of God...coming out of witchcraft, i tried to ascribe to the Holy Spirit the role of "goddess", but it really didn't work for me.
I think its really interesting in proverbs where Wisdom which in places sound an awful lot like Christ is presented as feminin (why can't I spell that word today?) The UM women tried to make a whole ritual and teaching using the wisdom verses of proverbs - the word for wisdom being Sophia.That didn't work either, it just turned into goddess worship.
God does describe himself as a mother bird at times...I think that is one of the "mysteries" that we will find out when we get there (are we there yet?)
Mo, I don't think the authors of the Bible had an agedna. They may have had certain Biases, but I think the Holy Spirit was able to keep that more or less in check.
I see where the four gospels were written with four different audiences in mind. And obviously, the epistals were written to definite churches...yet through the Holy Spirit, these specific messages can speak through the ages into our lives. Amazing huh?

Chris P. said...

Mo

If the Scripture is inspired and authoritative, or as Paul said, literally breathed out by God, then it contains His agenda only.
The awesome thing is, how throughout history, the Lord preserved the Word through man's best efforts to destroy it, i.e. the Roman church (the dark ages),
and all the countless heresies that existed from the time of the apostles.

Now that's amazing, and that is God!

Arthur Brokop II said...

Chris p. what about the apocrypha?
Mo, I got a few good ideas from your post and for Monk-in-trainings comments. That will probably be the subject of my next entry.