A White Wolf Examines Religious Texts

In the progression of this particular article, I am going to primarily address the Bible. I do so because that is the original book I assessed in my journey. I do this also because this is a book that many of my readers are familiar with. I implore you, however, to apply what I am saying to all religious texts, for this truly is my intent. The rules would apply to all such texts the same, and to think I am attacking only one would be to miss the point of that which I am saying and the conclusions that I came to. That being said, please don't just assume I am going to tell you that the book is worthless and throw it away. That couldn't be further from my perception of this situation. Lets get on with addressing the concepts that the Bible presents.

The Bible is supposed to be an inspired text. It is known as the word of God. Within which you found the laws, rules, warnings and lessons that God intended for mankind. In times of a crisis of faith, or a question of dogma, this is supposed to be the text that we go to in order to assess what is right and wrong.

Presuming this is true, let us address where it came from. How did we get our hands on such a valuable tome? One day, when we were lost, did God take a wander through the squalor in which we lived and hand over a gleaming binding between which could be found, in his own writing, the lessons that would change our lives forever? No. It was written by man. No matter what arguments and clarifications you plan on throwing out, lets get it clear out there that none of your beliefs indicate otherwise. Man put pen to paper to record the words. That is all I am saying.

But, many say, the men were inspired when they wrote this. They were merely the instruments used to record God's word. Fine. For the moment, I will say I believe you. Lets go with that. The answer? Hardly, it is merely the catalyst for the next question. (Funny how frequently that happens.)

Let us define how they were inspired. Inspiration is too vague to leave it at that, as we would be left with very disparate results on the validity of the Bible. Women have "inspired" poetry merely by walking down the streets. I am sure none would argue that those were not by default the woman's words in the poem, or even in conjunction with what her personal opinions would be. This isn't the type of inspiration that supposedly led to the Bible though. Those authors were inspired by the Holy Spirit. This is different. These folks were actually told what to write.

How were they told? Did they take shorthand while God dictated his words to them? I say he didn't. It wouldn't matter if he did, so my opinion stands for this continuation. I will, hopefully, point out how this is a minor point as this moves on. The alternative, and more believable possibility was that God spoke into the hearts of these men, he gave them a revelation, and they struggled to make that revelation understandable to us. Why more believable? Because this is how the Goddess speaks to us. She speaks to our heart, she teaches us the same lessons as she teaches our neighbors, but using our own hearts as translators, helps us to better understand.

Would this make the Bible, written out as it was by the men, based on their understandings, worthless to the rest of us? No. For She can just as easily open our hearts and hers in the translation of what we read. Remember, you aren't called upon to worship the Bible, but rather the God therein. It is the gateway, not the god. It is the modern Ark. (Read covenant, not Noah)

It does illustrate something, though. That you must read with your heart, not your head. Why? Because the words chosen may not have been the best. The context may have changed. No matter which scripture you read, you need her to explain what she really meant. It is a rare opportunity to read a book side by side with the author and allow them to explain. Seize it. This particular author is pretty talented.

Now here is where some of you are going to get your panties in a twist: One of the most important reasons to read alongside the author, is it allows the author the opportunity to point out the parts that are wrong.

Yep. I said it. There are parts in the bible that aren't just misinterpreted, but almost completely wrong. It was bound to happen when ghost written by a mere human. I will illustrate, however, one of the primary areas in which each of these texts have errors. It is in the area of the elapsing of time. God's word is eternal. Right? Not completely.

We tell our young children a lot of things that won't apply to their entire lives. We tell them not to go near the stove, while fully expecting that one day they will feed themselves. We tell them to never step out into the street without holding an adult's hands, knowing that one day the buddy system will no longer be incorporated. Similarly, some of the mandates given in the scriptures has become outdated based on the growth of the human race. You don't buy into this? Had a pork chop lately? Look back at Leviticus and see how mindful you are to the absolutes.

How then do we know which holds true and which doesn't? Conversation with the author. Does this provide for an absolute that a society can point to? Unfortunately not. Then again, you know faith by nature is not provable by science. If it was, it wouldn't be faith, it would be proof.

The last of my significant questions was why the conversation and the lessons stopped. Did God write his autobiography and then retire? Did he not only stop talking but stop writing as well?

I maintain the answer is no. The Bible, or whichever text you point to, wasn't supposed to be the last, and truly isn't. Case in point? Compare Paul's letters to Christian bloggers. What's the difference? Some are very faulty. So were many of Paul's contemporaries. Still many of you can point to those today, contemporaries of yours, who you would judge right on the money. Why aren't their sermons in the Bible?

I suppose I will leave it on one last inflammatory question. What makes the inspired nature of the writings in any of these holy texts any different than what appears here on this blog in italics? I was once asked why I speak for her. Would those of you who asked pose the same question to those authors of your religious text? Don't get me wrong, I have never considered myself anything but an average human being when I have translated those, but how much greater do you think those authors thought themselves?

Perhaps, then, the word is in fact living, and still moving and interacting with all of us, not collecting dust in a hallowed place on our bookshelf.