The bible I was taught as a child is simplistic. The bible I knew as a young adult is dualistic. The bible I hold as an adult is still dualistic and simplistic.
And always duel-istic.
Dualistic AND duelistic. It seems you can’t have one without the other.
I have no need for the bible to be fact or “right” any longer. But nor do I NOT have to believe in “God” (or whatever name you prefer). Because that is still dualistic and duelistic.
I wonder if this is really what any “beneficent god” wishes (predatory self-centred gods excepted)? And if we could not have our bible (or whatever sacred text), would we be believers? Would (name your One) be worth the fighting and killing and dying?
I know that some wonderful people worry about me and my soul when I write like this. I wonder if others think I am going to the dark side (and steer well clear). I thank you all – you are all very kind.
It’s just that – much like the tale of “The Emperor’s Clothes” – I have come to a point where I see this “dualistic” bible/sacred text we have evolved (and made factual – but not really – but it is really) just like that “no mention no clothes” tale. Something we dare not admit.
And it really is not just the bible.
I see the same thing with other religious and sacred writings. Because all faiths seem to revere (make experts) those who can memorise texts. Just NOT like film geeks who gain kudos by reciting chunks of film scripts – and so NOT like we swoon over children who can name every capital of the world – and NOT like we can take a memory course to memorise anything and everything … So just why this memorising of sacred texts?
When we can use a smartphone.
My children do. In the middle of a conversation they go all “smartphone”. Because there we all are – all chatting away about something or nothing. And, as happens in conversation, someone ventures an opinion … a thought … an idea … And (as happens nowadays) some are always checking their phones. Which I learned includes “going smartphone” (as I call it).
Because as the conversation continues, someone will say “that is wrong“. That, whatever “that” was, is actually ”a, b, and (usually a conversation-ending) “c””. The “going smartphone” wins every time. Which means conversation (and connecting with each other) loses out. Right is might. And right we must all be.
“Going SmartPhone”: the immediate search of a word or phrase (of conversation) in the WWW of wisdom. It is also – recently – referred to as “fact-checking”. Except our children have been doing it for ages. It’s just I never knew. I thought I was just talking to children who are more opinionated than me.
But try asking why the results from the “WWW of wisdom” are correct … and the answer is always: “Because they are.” Which is why I have come to call those who do it with bibles: “bible smartphoners”. Because the answer is always: “Because the bible says.”
Except google and the bible say different. Because what comes back is “stuff”. And the “going smartphone” always requires one to ignore some results and select in others, even to try a different search phrase if the results “aren’t right”.
Which, in the case of the bible, is like throwing out twenty-one consonants and claiming vowels as the whole (and correct) alphabet (bible). I see that still happening – just in a more “kindly” way (usually).
Which leaves me with a growing curiosity.
The biblical Chosen People and their long trek before entering the Promised Land … I was taught to say this is fact. Because the bible says so.
So what about this … “Kadesh Barnea, Gaza, & The Exodus”, The Superstitious Naked Ape (given to me by another)
Please click the link and have a read – I will still be here when you get back.
After reading that post my curiosity is this:
What does needing to be right change in me (and you)? And what does needing the bible to be all right (or all wrong) change in all of us? Because one thing the bible (and all sacred texts) has taught me is this:
Love does not need (“predatory self-centred stuff” some call love, excluded)
So just why do we believers need the bible to be all right?