the bible tool of organised religion (subjective post)

[notanothermonday]

I will preface this by stating that I have yet to do enough research to support what is stated in this post. I am looking for some imput as to what people here have to say. Critical or agreeable.

I am not so sure that I am willing to dismiss the bible as an artifact of organised religion.
I tend to look at the first book of Genesis and what is stated within that book.

As we are all aware it speaks to creation by God. Nowhere in this book is there a definition of God that falls within the context of what organised religion is so willing to espouse as the truth of what God is or how God appears.

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

So what can this mean?
We have this ambiguous entity called God. God has often been seen as some sentient being perched on a cloud (thank you DaVinci and other artists) pointing "his" finger and making things happen. Not having ever seen God I can not attest to a specific gender or "his" ability to sit upon clouds and point fingers, that I am not even sure God has.

So then what is God? In my best estimations, or what I believe, God is a force which we cannot as of yet explain. An illustration:
I would agree with scientific theory that says at some point atoms came together in the fashion described in the "big bang" theory. However, I am left with the question where did the atoms come from? Where did space come from? What is the origin of space? What was the force behind this "big bang"?

So, "God created the heaven and the earth" Space something ethereal created by something we are unable to fully grasp or explain which is represented by the word heaven in this sentence. Earth a physical manifestation or at least the potential for physical manifestation, so I would say earth represents the physical.

"And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep" The physical earth as we know it has yet to develop, and as of yet there is no comprehension of this earth or manifestation of this earth. The light has yet to break upon it revealing its nature.

This next line is curious:
"And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." What waters are being referred to here. We have no earth as you and I perceive the meaning of earth and we have multiple waters at that. The waters in my best attempt represent purity of some sort. Waters are cleansing, they are cooling and are represented as a truth in so much as they are essential to life. I would say that they are the representation of life in this first passage.

Within this passage we see the whole nature of the bible. It is the primer with which the bible is intended to be read. In almost all of the rest of the bible we are dealing with "man", male and female, physical form. Not the image of God, while that existed prior to the fall of mans consciousness, but an assumed form. This assumed form has managed to muddy the waters due to a fall from a position of responsibility to keep the waters clean. This fall is due to "mans" rebuking of God as I have defined it above. It is in essence the rebuking of the force that was at the beginning of all things, the unknown. It is the assumption that man is like God and can wield the power of creation because he is aware of everything and knows as much as God because he is as God.

Religion has exemplified this rebuke of God, closing its doors to the unknown and fully relying upon Human interpretation. Oblivious to the fact that it still has not figured it out yet especially when it comes to the first passage in Genesis. When we read the rest of the book without any openness to what the first passage eludes to we are lost at sea muddying the waters.
I understand that my understanding of this first passage is still incomplete and it is why I have as of yet to read the entire work of the bible. I have read many books in the bible. However, this one captivates my attention due to the fact that my conscious understanding of it has changed over the years since I first read it and will continue to change as I come into a place of greater knowledge.

Okay, so that is a mouth full. I have opened myself up to you. I wish to hear what any or all of you have to say so that I may breakthrough any chains with which I am being held back in my understanding of our existance here.

Thank you for listening and any responses that come due to this posting.

 

[Mark7]

Write your own bible, as the C's have said the universe, (multi-verse),
is within us all :)

 

[the rabbit]

Well you could always start here and come back with your thoughts on the bible then :)
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho1.htm

 

[ark]

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

Now, look, this is a nonsense. In the beginning of WHAT? Did God created also Himself and his spirit? And how God himself got created? From what? He is eternal? And how eternity got created? This first nonsense, so often rightly criticized by the atheists and vigorously defended by theologians, is designed to put people asleep, so they will not think, they will not question. And it works.

P.S. Of course dedicated atheists have their own sins, but that is a subject of its own.

 

[dant]

Um, notanothermonday:

I wanted to add: WHO wrote Genesis, the many other books, cobbled
together the bible for that matter and WHO is the REAL author/originator
of such varied and often times, conflicting stories? How is it possible, without
true historical references, that we can independently check the veracity of
the story as it was written, and from it's original form - directly from the
infinite creator?

Lost to antiquity, they say?

This conflict continues today as it always has, with no real answer in sight,
and it will never end, for as long as the PTB continues to control it and us.
We will never get the real data/facts, not in in this 3d level, because the
'veil' is cleverly hidden, OSIT

The Genesis statement you provided, opens with EARTH in the center of
attention, - in ABSENCE of everything else, and it is like jumping into a
middle of a (very long) story, with many details and "facts" left out.

It essence - it is very, very vague story, it mostly appeals to our human senses,
and allows us to formulate our own interpretation as to how we might relate
to these stories, providing that we accept the pre-programmed logic beforehand,
guiding us as it were, swaying us into the narrator's controlled way of teachings.

Did you ever notice, how the "prophets" open by saying: "Thus says the LORD...",
pre-staging the drama, calling to us into accepting, verbatim and without question,
the programed message to be delivered, which we willing receive, hook, line, and
sinker and with our own free will?

And do you think it is necessary for the universal God to spend "7 days"
focusing on earth alone, in this infinite universe, to take the time teaching
us, when all in nature is already provided for us, leaving it up to our own
free will, to chose or not to chose our own destiny?

The genesis statement opens with a gambit, appealing to us as it were,
to set the trap concerning our free will, OSIT. It is designed to snare a willing
dupe, sets the stage for our early programming, designed to make us a subservient
people, enticing you to give up your free will. It is designed to take advantage of our
ignorance, allowing others to place themselves over you, and to insert you into their
control structures, at a level according to your class.

OSIT.

 

[notanothermonday]

I do agree with much of what is written here and I do not proclaim that I have vast knowldege of who wrote the Bible, nor do I have understanding to what their motivations are. I also understand our need to investigate the bible with objectivity and scientific integrity. I want us to also be able to step out of the box on this subject.
We are using a linnear thought process when looking at what the Bible says in this first book. I want us to unshakle our minds and lets look at the possible meaning of what is being said.

Ark I know you question the use of the word beginning and I will not argue with you that there is no such thing as a time where we can measure a "beginning"
There has always been something in fact there has always been "God" however we should choose to define that word, we may even choose not to use the word "God" and instead refer to "God" as conscience or as i mentioned in the previous post as an unexplained force, the unknown.

I am aware that the adminstrators of this site have defined or explained these things in different terms but can you see where I may be heading with this? If not please ask so that I may try and clarify what I am saying. If you do understand where I am going do you see flaw in my thought process?

I am not trying to head down the path of monotheism or organised religion nor do I refute what Laura has written about the inconsistencies of the bible. I am investigating these inconsistencies and am becoming aware of the issues faced when reading the bible.

I am only seeking greater understanding of how we may transcend the faults of the modern language in finding meaning in what is written in this book. We have words that we can try and ad meaning to but what are words but vibrations. We may not understand what is being said due to a lack of really knowing the language in which these may have been originally written. Language the way language is spoken has changed remarkably, as we are aware, over time. In fact my language American English does not even come close to using the full range of the voice when being spoken. This is a serious issue when thinking about how Hindi is spoken and how the part of the mouth or throat that the word is spoken from changes the meaning of words and consequently the vibratory essence of the word.

So maybe what I need to do is to ask question.
Is there a place here that Laura or Ark or anyone has addressed words and the vibratory essence of words?

Words are an instrument much like a horn, it is how we express ourselves (possibly spirit) through these instruments that give them their power. What makes John Coltrane such a powerful and moving Saxophone player? Was it his skill?
Sure a lot of guys have skill but are not nearly as good.
Was it his practicing and playing so much?
Yes, but a lot of guys practice as much as he did.
Was it his passion and his ability to center himself with this instrument?
This is the key, the saxophone was not seperate from him it was his voice, his tool that he used to express his true self.
So it is with words.

Once again I thank you for your attention to this post and the space to investigate my thoughts with you.

 

[ark]

I am only seeking greater understanding of how we may transcend the faults of the modern language in finding meaning in what is written in this book.

You are making an assumption here that there is a meaning in this book. But what if there is no other meaning than to teach people how NOT to think? So, you should ask yourself this question first.

It is ok if you make assumptions, state them explicitly, and then see where these assumptions lead you.
Now you agree that the first thing about the Earth and the beginning is a nonsense. Then, please, go sentence by sentence and see if you can discover ANYTHING of relevance, anything that gives you testable knowledge, that makes you a more complete (rather than less complete) human being. And you reject absurd and nonsense and call it by such names.

Is there a place here that Laura or Ark or anyone has addressed words and the vibratory essence of words?

What do you mean? You are communicating now using words that are typed in. And they carry the message. Vibrations is a different subject, they do not have to be associated with words. Do you think that if you say OOOOHHHMMMM rather than UUUUHHHHMMMM - you word will make the rock to move?

Once again I thank you for your attention to this post and the space to investigate my thoughts with you.

You are welcome. And do not feel offended when someone disagrees with you or asks pertinent questions. There is no other way of getting to the truth.

 

[vinny]

notanothermonday,
if you are interested in others' attempts to analyse the bible in a more objective manner, you might find this book a great read:
'The Lost Gospel: The Book of Q and Christian Origins' by Burton L Mack.

It is primarily about the analyses that lead to several historical 'layers' being dicovered in the new testament texts, with the top layers being newer and so obscuring the older layers beneath. This work led to hypotheses about a very different early Christian timeline involving many changes in the information we now see. I found it a thoughful illustration of how information can be twisted and manipulated and used in order to set a particular agenda, to steer people's understanding, and ALSO how it may be possible with work to detect those manipulations, and so have the potential to re-discover some valuable truth.