 |
| Analogies sometimes fit closely, other times they fit loosely |
Translation is an issue that people who scrutinize the Bible spend time on. Important changes happen when ancient words from one language are put into the terms of another language many generations later. Some words have important shape, texture, and reverberation (connotation) that may be lost in the new language; or rather, the new language may unintentionally add its own characteristics that were not present in the original language. But before the text is fitted into a new "set of clothes" there is the imperfect way that a raw experience is captured in words. Just as God is infinite and cannot really be contained by just one name (at least 99 names are spoken of the Creator), so it is with some meanings and experiences that come to us in verbal form. The very act of articulating something in song, poetry, narrative, parable, or historical recounting runs the risk of adding unwanted overtones or the opposite, incompletely conveying the full depth of meaning. And even when the original text and the translated one are tailor-fitted, there is no accounting for the readership. Each person brings their own collection of images, meanings, associations to the words they hear or read, partly from personal history; partly from historical moment; partly from culture of the community they belong to. There will be some readers who take a literal interpretation of all words given on the page, but others will favor a looser reading to allow wider application and poetic value. This same imperfect grasp of a subject takes place at the level of analogies, too: sometimes shining a spotlight on a quality of likeness but incidentally leaving other important qualities unlit.
"God is Love" presents a foundation for people to relate to the Creator, and for the Creator's basis of relationship with his/her creatures. In one way of thinking, "God is love" is the sum total of the Christian message; all else is just added detail. The language of English has just this one word, 'love', to fit into all kinds of settings (parent-child, friend-friend, husband-wife, patriotic feelings, favorite foods and experiences, etc). Ancient Greek has at least six different terms that fit the differing kinds of love: Eros, Storge, Ludus, Pragma, Mania, and Agape. People eager to "know" God (English with just one word; other languages with one that means 'know facts' and another that means 'know a person or place') often start by remembering that "God is love." But can a mortal creature even embrace an immortal one of infinite dimension? Does "knowing God" mean just making contact with the Great I Am, rather than to encompass the vastness within the best of one's ability and the size of one's heart? And during the course of spiritual development and maturity does one's "knowing God" get deeper? wider? more integral or intimate in connectedness? Analogies might shed light; but then again, analogies might misrepresent by putting emphasis in one place at the expense of another.
"Knowing God is like wading or even swimming in the ocean" could be one way to express the vastness that one can be immersed in: size, saltiness, tidal action, undertow, changing weather and season, shifting light in a 24 hour cycle, and the diverse creatures from animal and plant kingdoms at mega and nano scales. A person can know the ocean (i.e. God) in some important ways, and feel connected, too. But so much about the relationship and the nature of the ocean is left out: mid-ocean phenomena, long-distance currents, migratory patterns, deepest ocean life and geological processes, and so on. The more years one spends on the ocean shore, the more that one has the opportunity to observe patterns and behaviors, reflect, meditate, and interact with it. This corresponds to the expanding knowledge of God that may be possible; never getting to the entirety, but nevertheless gaining incrementally more experience and closer embrace.
"Like a child you can enter the kingdom of God" or as the King James Version (Matthew 18) says, "Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven." Thinking about children's way of being in the world more closely, the first condition is sense of security to create conditions of trust. Then there is relatively low self-consciousness and relatively high curiosity. From this lesson about being like a child, it seems that the precondition to know God is trust and safety/security; that the relationship is unassailable and will not be broken. On that basis love (of God; from God) can grow. No matter how much Bible study, self-mortification, spiritual exercising, and uninterrupted worshiping that one does, this very first step to know God is the single-most important: you must "show up" and "be present" for a relationship with God to form and then thrive.
"Gravity is a weak force but it pervades everything, just like God's presence." Short-term forces, distractions, cravings can overcome this inexorable but weak force of nature. But that power is always present, working its force if only one pays attention: sun or rain, night or day, in times of joy or sorrow, that force is ever-present.
"Seeking a righteous life to minimize sinful straying is like sailing a boat: the wind may shift directions and you must respond in order to stay the course." To enter "the narrow gate" that Jesus points to, a person must take care to minimize sins that lead off the main road into dead ends. The sailboat image works because of the dynamic interplay of wind conditions and the vigilant steering on the rudder. But whereas the sailor strives to arrive at a destination, for Christians there really is no final knowing of God; no final destination. Merely to be in motion, on the lake, and steering with vigilance is the goal.
In the end the scriptures are one of the main sources to get to know God's ways, God's creation, and God's love. Mystical or direct experience of God is another (chancing upon a burning bush is well documented, too). At the same time the very same texts can be an obstacle since some will cling to the letter of the page and not hear the larger voice and what is communicated between the lines. Owing to the way that society changes along with the meanings associated with certain keywords and figures of speech, as well as the habits (and abilities) of reading, some harm can come from insisting on one's own interpretation of a passage. But "like looking in a rear-view mirror" it sometimes is possible for a section of the Bible to point toward a larger meaning that goes beyond the mere surface description that lies right in front of you on the page. For example, God's steadfastness can be seen in a story, nevermind the particulars of names and events that happen to be recorded.
Thomas Jefferson tried to discard all except direction quotations of Jesus (like today's "red-letter Bible") to bring himself closer to knowing God. But depending on what translation that he worked from (very likely the King James Version) the same properties inherent in moving from one language (and century) to another language and century remain in the strips of pages that he assembled. Therefore, there is greater merit in discerning what the text shows about God's being than there is in splitting hairs when it comes to one word compared to another, for instance. Playing with analogies can be revelatory and even a purposeful intellectual or emotional exercise, but this powerful tool can be used well or can be misused. So "handle with care" should be printed as a warning on the side of the package.
