Ξ August 27th, 2008 | → 4 Comments | ∇ Life |
I can always count on Dr. Richard Beck, of Experimental Theology, to make me think way beyond my own capabilities. Dr. Beck has provided a link to a friend’s new blog, Metaponderance. The author of the blog, Tracy Witham posted a great article on truth. This post was centered around the famous "scene" in the trial of Jesus when Pilate asked Jesus who he was/what his mission was. Jesus answered:
“‘For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.’ Pilate Asked him, ‘What is truth?’”
Mr. Witham then discusses Nietzsche’s famous quote about this scene. He wrote that it is the “annihilation” of the New Testament. Reduced to its components, the exchange contains (1) Jesus’ portentous claim to have come “into the world to testify to the truth” followed by (2) Pilate’s request for Jesus to testify to the meaning of truth; then (3) silence.
In Concerning Truth and Falsehood in an Extramoral Sense, Nietzsche identifies the "truth":
"Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions, worn out metaphors now impotent to stir the senses, coins which have lost their faces and are considered now as metal rather than currency"
Is this the "truth" of which Jesus spoke? Nietzsche disparaged metaphysical truths—views of truth that attempt to connect it to realities beyond the mundane world. This is not to say that Nietzsche denied ordinary truths of a kind that everyone is familiar with. The meaningfulness of Jesus’ grand “truth claim” is crucial to us. For if a man speaks of having come “into the world to testify to the truth,” an explanation is needed.
What explanation can Christianity offer us today? What is our definition of "truth". What truly is the "truth" which Jesus came to testify to? For too long, many of us who once and maybe still call ourselves Christian have not really comprehended the "true" meaning to which Jesus spoke.
*Here is a link to Tracy Witham’s post: http://metaponderance.blogspot.com/
*Many thanks to Tracy and to Dr. Beck. Much of this post was taken directly from Tracy Witham’s post and is not of my own thinking. I’m just not intelligent enough for this. Thank God some people are. They make us think. They stretch us beyond our own bounds.
Ξ August 25th, 2008 | → 15 Comments | ∇ Life |
For most of man’s history, his concept of time has been linear. There is past, present, and future, usually represented on a line, a line on which the past begins to the left, the present in the middle, and the future moves to the right. We move along that line from left to right as our lives progress. But what if time is not linear? What if the past, present, and future all operate in this moment (another post for another time). It would explain a lot about memories and prophecy. Every once in a while, we get a glimpse of the past through a memory or a collective memory. Just as frequently, we may get a glimpse of the future if we are especially receptive to the operation of time. Maybe time isn’t linear. But, more than that, maybe time has as a component part, stacked options, so that time isn’t linear, but also vertical. There would be different paths which our lives may follow depending on the choices we make every moment of every day. If true, we are not tied (fated) to a particular outcome. Any of a number of possibilities are there for us to choose.
Ancient prophets, such as Isaiah, seems to be telling us exactly that. The discovery of the "Scroll of Isaiah", the most complete version of this Old Testament book of prophecy in a cave near Qumran, has provided us with an accurate picture of the "stacked options" idea. Many Biblical prophecies follow a clear pattern: descriptions of catastrophe are immediately followed by a vision of life, joy, and possibility." There are options for the listeners. Not just one inevitable outcome, but an option or even a series of options. So the question is, what did the prophet Isaiah see and how did he see it? I can’t satisfactorally answer that question. The Bible seems tell us that the typical Old Testament prophet had visions of futures. Yes, futures, with a S. I am not sure if we all can do the same, but I know few of us openly exhibit that ability. If we try to see the prophecies from a different perspective, perhaps they can lead us to a conclusion about time, a nonlinear time, where options for our future exists, every moment of every day we live. I don’t believe in fate. Do you?
More, later…."The Isaiah Effect"
Ξ August 21st, 2008 | → 0 Comments | ∇ Life |
On this day of your life, dear friend, I believe God wants you to know…
. …that nothing good is ever created by deception.
Not even the smallest untruth, not even the most
well-intended "white lie," will produce benefit in the
long run. So tell your truth as soon as you know it.
Yes, yes, I know…."But then…but then…" So you’ll
have to decide which of the "But then’s" you want.
There will always be a "But then." Yet shall it be one
you endure, or one you create?
If it’s control you want, telling the truth puts you in
total control. Ever think of that?
*Thanks to Neale Donald Walsch
Ξ August 14th, 2008 | → 2 Comments | ∇ Life |
What does that mean? How do we interpret that phrase? What are the implications of these words? The reason I ask is because I believe the implications reach beyond our "religious" beliefs about the deity. Love is a human emotion as well as an emotion which we have ascribed to deity. Therefore, I believe that all human beings express love in the way they have been taught, the way they view love in the world, consciously or unconsciously. So, the phrase "God is love" becomes very important to our own interpersonal relationships. What were we told about God’s love? I was basically told that God is love, God loves us and accepts us, IF………………You know what that does, don’t you? That makes God’s love CONDITIONAL. So, God is love if, or God is love, but.. The ultimate outcome is in doubt. What comes after the IF? What comes after the BUT? Well, That all depends. It depends on what we do. God loves us but will retreat or withdraw from us depending on whether we do the right things. And, believe me, it is plural, things! Most of us have at least one good friend who we can depend on, but, ever so infrequently, that friend may disappoint us. But, we’re talking God here. If we can’t depend on God, who can we depend on?
Can you remember the first time when you decided to tell another special human being, "I love you"? I can. That reminds me of a "Seinfeld" episode where George decides to tell a girlfriend that he loves her. Jerry tries to discourage him unless he is very, very sure that he’ll get the return, "I love you too." When we humans do tell another that we love them, we immediately begin to worry whether or not we will hear it back. Even if we do hear it back, we worry that someday we might lose that love. And, why is this the case? It is because of the implication that God may withdraw love from us if we don’t perform correctly.
As you can see, the religious implications reach deep into our interpersonal relations. We base our love relationships, of all kinds, based on what we see of love in the world and the love of God as we see it. It seems that our ideas of God’s love have come from our experience of love in the world and vice-versa. Since our ideas of love in the world are primarily fear-based, why would our ideas of God’s love be any different. It seems to me that when religious ideas about God were being developed eons ago, man looked to worldly love as his model. Not a good idea! Once these religious concepts of what God is like became doctrine, then, the reverse began to be the rule. We as human beings began to say, "if God is like this (withdraws his love based on our doings), then everyone is like this. If we fear God will withdraw his love, we will fear another human will do the same thing.
This fear-based reality dominates our experience of love. In fact, it creates it. We not only receive love that is conditional, we also view ourselves giving love in the same way. Deep within us we know this is not the way it should be. This cannot be the way God really is. What does "God is love" mean to you?
Ξ August 7th, 2008 | → 5 Comments | ∇ Life |
In this post, I will attempt to give a review of the National Geographic program presented about the Qur’an. For many of you, this may be an introduction to the sacred book of Islam. For others, it will be nothing more than a review. My purpose here is not to specifically inform you about the Koran itself. However, that may well happen. My real purpose here is to show those who have lived their lives in a culture dominated by another sacred book, the Bible, a way to compare the two revered texts. Most of the people who navigate their way to this and similar blogs, are looking for alternate ways of thinking about the sacred, the divine, the spiritual. If you are one of these people, what I am asking you to do is to read this well-crafted account by Nat Geo, and compare what you find here with what you have found in your own journey and experience with religion, specifically Christianity. I believe you will be astounded by the similarities between histories of the two texts. I know I was. Look specifically at the beliefs about the text itself, the establishment of a clergy and its role, the divisions which arose in the faith, the faithful’s view of the rest of the world, and the role of women. Do not be judgmental, be observant and make mental notes of similarities and differences.This post is longer than the usual, but please "stick it out". I hope that this post gives you a new viewpoint from which to see the people of a religion which numbers at least one billion souls.
This story is about a cross section of Muslims living according to their varied interpretation of the complex and seemingly contradictory spiritual guide, the Qur’an. According to tradition, the guide was revealed to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel, first in a cave in the desert of Arabia, then, over a period of 23 years, until Muhammad’s death in 632 CE. It was an oral revelation, since Muhammad was illiterate. After each session with the angel, he would repeat the message to literate members of his family who would write it down. It was not until 20 years after his death that all the various messages were brought together for the first time in one book. It is generally believed that by 650 CE, the "final" Qur’an was "set in stone". Orthodox Muslims believe that in the original classical Arabic, the Qur’an is the perfect, unchanging, word of God.
The Qur’an is made up of just over 6,000 verses, about 1/5th of those in the Bible, with no obvious chronology. It is a series of revelations within a complex narrative structure. It is not a moralizing book, not sermons, not a science book, but a book of parameters, guidelines for the Muslim follower.
With well over one billion followers all over the world, there is a unity but at the same time a profound difference of opinion on various topics including: the status of women, attitudes toward peace and violence, and punishment and forgiveness. As an example, some Muslim countries deny an education to girls, deny women the right to vote, and segregate women from men. In other Muslim countries women lead political parties and are heads of state. In some Islamic states, executions are carried out in public, in others, the death penalty has been done away with completely.
There are striking differences in forms of worship and belief. Shi’a Muslims pray to specific persons (saints), including Alli, the murdered son-in-law of Muhammad. Some Shi’a communities in Turkey emphasize a message of peace and harmony between Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Here men and women worship together, some sing, some dance in worship. Other Muslims (Sunnis) consider this form of worship, including the image of Alli, as sacrilege. Sunnis primarily believe worship to be the establishment of a personal relationship to Allah (God). Probably the most striking contrast within Islam is the treatment of women.
The Qur’an tells the believer to consult his/her heart on controversial issues within the faith. It constantly is enjoining the believer to reflect, to question, to understand, to use the mental faculties, and to use the heart.
Jesus is mentioned frequently in the Qur’an, actually, more times than Muhammad. He is, of course, not seen as the "son of God", but a prophet on an equal with Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad. The Qur’an describes Muslims, Jews, and Christians as "People of the Book" (the Bible), saying there is no "compulsion" in religion. At the same time, Muslims are warned not to follow the "errant" views of Christians and Jews and do not make them your friends. There appears to be tolerance and intolerance in equal measure.
Many believers see the Qur’an as a "supermarket" of verses from which to "pick and choose" what serves your purpose best. You can work for peace or declare war on an enemy using particular verses from the Qur’an. Moderate Muslims have verses which support them and radicals can find other verses which support their goals. There appears to be a Qur’an for peace and a Qur’an for war. This is well illustrated by Islamic history.
Muslim societies were known to be open and tolerant toward dissident Christians and Jews who fled persecution in their own lands, when the Muslims were in a position of dominance. But when threatened by external enemies or internal disruption, the impulse was to close in and take a very different message from the Qur’an. For many modern-day Muslims, they are now living in such a time.
Today, there are peacemakers and terrorists within Islam. Both go to the Qur’an for support for each one’s causes. In verse after verse, the Qur’an specifically forbids suicide for any reason, but many extremist Muslims feel they are so "outgunned" that suicide is their only available weapon. Today, the message of peace is being drowned out by the message of years of exploitation by western imperial powers (Britain, France, US, and of course Israel). The extremist Muslim clerics have the stage today. This is a message that is well received in many Islamic countries where there is a perception of lost Muslim glories of years gone by, and of lost lives at the hands of western imperialists.
Compare to the Catholic vs Protestant Divide
One awkward fact stands starkly apparent. In many periods of history, more Muslims died at the hands of other Muslims than at the hands of Christians and Jews. Since the death of the Prophet, 1500 years ago, the two main factions, the Sunnis and the Shi’as have been sharply divided as to who should lead the faith. Sunnis make up around 85% of the Muslim total while the Shi’as, about 10-15% The most prominent of the Shi’as was Alli, son-in-law of the Prophet. This group believes that Alli and the Imams who followed him, were chosen by God to lead the Muslim communities. Down through history, Imam after Imam from this minority group, were murdered. These murdered Imams have achieved what Roman Catholics would perceive as sainthood status in the Shi’a world. One of these "saints", Al-Rizah is prayed to like a Christian saint would be. The Shi’as believe that to reach God, they must go through the saintly Imams first. They are their intermediaries. Qom, in Iran, is like a Muslim Vatican City.
Most Sunnis agree that the Qur’an is against a formal clergy. In fact, that was one of the main complaints against Christians and Jews. They had too formal a clergy that had basically highjacked the two religions. The Sunnis say there are no intermediaries required, no need for an intercessor. Man has the absolute right to pray to and connect to the divine.
One important movement in Islam rises above these divisions in the faith, embracing followers of both traditions; The Sufis. Hundreds of millions of Muslims are Sufis, who believe that the Qur’an speaks directly to their hearts. they are the "mystics" of Islam, the metaphysical Muslims. They believe the Qur’an is simple, the daily life stories of man. They believe their relationship with God is direct, without need of clergy. But above all, it is a relationship of all-consuming love. Theirs is a meditation-like desire to repeat the name of God to achieve the relationship with God. One of the most recognized subgroups of the Sufis are the Mevlevy of Turkey, better known in the West as the Whirling Dervishes, who express their love to God in a meditation-like state achieved by dancing in circles (whirling) accompanied by music.
Saudi Arabia and Iran
The Muslims of Saudi Arabia have their own clergy known as the Wahabi. The dominant message here is a form of very conservative Wahabi Islam, which represents a very, very small percentage of Islam. The Wahabis believe in a strict, narrow, sectarian, divisive, rigid, extremist interpretation of the Qur’an, based on control of the most holy sites (Mecca & Medina) and petroleum dollars. They, unfortunately have been able to exert control over much of international Islam. This is often seen as a tremendous tragedy for all Muslims. The Wahabis have given rise to the Taliban. Osama Bin Laden was raised in the Wahabist faith. 15 of the 19 terrorists of 9/11 were of Saudi origin. Over the last twenty or so years, US dollars used to purchase Saudi oil have been used by the Wahabis to propagate their version of Islam all over the world. Development of Islamic states over the world have tremendously influenced the Wahabist agenda. Wealthy Saudi Arabia has been instrumental in pushing the Muslim world toward fundamentalism and an intolerant reading of the Qur’an.
The only two Islamic states who are concerned enough to use their resources to promote a vision of Islam, internationally, are Saudi Arabia and Iran, neither of which represents a mainstream, classical, inclusive version of Islam with which most Muslims are familar. While being on opposite ends of the faith, both nations have one thing in common. Both have a priestly caste contrary to the Qur’anic principle of forging a direct relationship to God. This priestly caste has adopted religion as a profession, unlike the early years of Islam, and has a vested interest in obtaining a large following of believers. They will use every tool, the media of every kind to monopolize the religion of the Muslim people. This is contrary to the essence of Islam.The extremist regimes in Iran and in Saudi Arabia stray far from the teachings of the Qur’an when it comes to punishment for crimes against religion (the state). The Qur’an calls for mercy and forgiveness for the "criminal" who is repentant. The Qur’an is clear that no one should be convicted of a particular crime without conclusive proof of guilt. This is certainly not the practice of those regimes. Sharia Law, personal and family law, is a merciful and forgiving system if applied as the Qur’an intended it to be. If the Qur’an is so clear about the principles of justice, how are any differences possible?
The Word of God
The Qur’an is written in a form of classical Arabic which is often difficult for even highly educated speakers of Arabic to understand. For most Muslims, Arabic is not their first language, and no translation, it is said, can capture the full meaning of the original. As a result, the Imam or preacher becomes the intermediary between the Qur’an and the message his followers receive. The message can be tailored to fit the time and place. Over the centuries, interpretations and additions have filled thousands of volumes. These are the scholarly commentaries and the Hadith, the collected sayings and deeds of the Prophet. Some of the harshest punishments in Sharia Law are found in these collections, not in the Qur’an. These volumes were written and collected 250-350 years after the death of Muhammad. Many of the volumes are said by some Muslim scholars to be forged or fabricated and are therefore called into question. Unfortunately, many Muslims consider the Hadith to be co-equal with the Qur’an. The Qur’an itself clearly states that it is the pinnacle, that nothing else can be at its level. The Qur’an is subject to change and distortion if not in its original Arabic, then certainly when it is translated into other languages. The largest printing press for the production of Arabic Qur’ans and translations into all other languages, is located in Saudi Arabia. Here they are printed at a low cost or free. Need I say more? It is clearly evident that the text has been altered, and augmented by the religious establishment there. The insertions and alterations which the Saudi press has made is clearly an attempt to justify warfare against the infidel, saying that the Qur’an is the perfect model for warfare. To suggest to a Muslim that things have been added or that the text has been altered is especially contentious. Unlike Christians and Jews who believe their sacred texts were written by men inspired by God, Muslims believe the Qur’an to be the exact word of God as dictated to the Prophet. This distinction means that critical analysis of the sacred Qur’an becomes an extremely sensitive issue when applied to the Qur’an and compounded when some of those scholars making the attempt are western, often non-Muslims. The question Muslims ask is, are they really in a position to shed new light on the sacred text and its origins?
The "Nag Hammadi" of Islam
A cache of parchments was discovered in 1972 in a roof area of the Great Mosque of Sana’a, in Yemen, when it was undergoing a major restoration. These parchments are now at the center of a great debate which centers on the accuracy of the currently accepted Cairo version of the Qur’an. A German Qur’an scholar immediately recognized the importance of these documents and began a in-depth study of them. He then brought the results to the attention of the rest of the world. These documents are dated to the 7th or 8th century, possibly, only 70 years after the death of the Prophet. Many of the parchments differ widely from the accepted Cairo version. This seems to suggest that the text is not as stable and unchanging as it is claimed to be. Muslim scholars today argue that every word of the Qur’an has been perfectly preserved through the "oral" tradition. The written Qur’an, however, shows variation. The parchments of Sana’a appear to be the "Nag Hammadi" documents of the Islamic world. Forensic examination of the parchments revealed earlier text underneath the visible text. The earlier text had been washed off and new text written over it. Although the hidden text revealed no contradictory meanings, the words had been changed and the verses and whole chapters rearranged. This seems to suggest that the Qur’an was and is not a single entity, a single document fixed in time by 650 CE as is generally believed by Muslims. It well may have been developed much, much later.
Hidden Meanings
Any variations in the Qur’an, whether they be word meanings or chapter arrangements are very controversial in the Muslim world. Another Qur’an scholar from Germany, says the 1/4th to 1/5th of the Qur’an contains words which have been misunderstood or words which don’t make sense. This is because Arabic was in its infancy when the Qur’an was first written down. The common language, both written and cultural, of the people of the area where it was first written down was Syrio-Aramaic. There were, however, many other languages spoken by those native to the area. In the 10th century, the most respected commentator of the Qur’an openly acknowledged the presence of foreign words in the text. At least seven different languages are represented in the Qur’an. These foreign words are open to debate as to their clear, concise meanings. Many have several meanings, depending on how they are used. These discrepancies have resulted in a lot of ill feelings. This research is, of course, very controversial in the Islamic world, even in part of the western world. There is support among some Islamic scholars who now make their homes in the West. They call upon Muslims to heed the call of the Qur’an to examine everything to see if it meets the test. They believe that Muslims should not fear this kind of research since it does not threaten the basic tenets and beliefs of the faith.
In Conclusion
Concerning the true meaning of the text of the Qur’an, it is not just a matter of who is interpreting the text, sometimes, there is a selective reading of it, ignoring, for instance, the firm injunction to forgive any wrongdoer who repents. There are also those countries or areas who claim approval for ancient, pre-Islamic, cultural practices which have no basis in the Qur’an. But there are verses, particularly those referring to women, which are controversial at best. Yet for every reference which seems to suggest their inferior status, there are others calling for mutual respect and equality. That is the paradox and the challenge of the Qur’an. It has two audiences, the immediate, 7th century patriarchal, tribal audience and then it has the ultimate audience; the Muslim of this generation, the 21st century and any Muslim in the future. It, therefore, speaks two languges to two sets of believers. How Muslims interpret the message contained in the Qur’an will affect all Muslims and in turn all mankind.
I hope you "stuck it out" and read the entire post. If you did, I thank you with all my heart. This post has touched me deeply and I feel it needs to BE……..
Stumble it!
