God Beyond Religion: Spiritual Discernment and Scripture

This is probably one of the most important things I have ever written with respect to freeing oneself from the toxic influence of orthodox dogma, especially evangelical orthodoxy. What I mean by evangelical orthodoxy is the dogma that most evangelicals agree on. An example would be the inerrancy of scripture, and that it is a rule book for all faith and practice. This idea is summed up nicely in a bumper sticker of a few years back when bumpers were chrome and not part of the body of the car. The bumper sticker I am referring to is “God said it! I believe it! That settles it!”

So, let me share with you something God allegedly said based on this view:

Exo 21:7-11  “When a man sells his daughter as a concubine, she is not to leave as the male slaves do.  (8)  If she is displeasing to her master, who chose her for himself, then he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners because he has acted treacherously toward her.  (9)  Or if he chooses her for his son, he must deal with her according to the customary treatment of daughters.  (10)  If he takes an additional wife, he must not reduce the food, clothing, or marital rights of the first wife.  (11)  And if he does not do these three things for her, she may leave free of charge, without any payment.”

The above passage is the instructions to sell one’s daughter as a sex slave. Did God say that? I doubt it very much. Today if a man would sell his daughter as a sex slave and got caught, he would simply go to jail and rightly so. You may say well, that was old covenant. I would say yes, I agree, but how do you know what to accept of the old covenant and what to reject? If you are alone, and if you look into your mirror, and IF YOU ARE HONEST, you will admit that it is all of the things you have been taught at church. In other words, it is based on doctrine and dogma. BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF! What I am saying here is true.

If our cultural and societal norms can progress to the place where we know that having concubines is not an acceptable thing, certainly selling one’s daughter as a concubine is not acceptable, then how could anyone ever think that God would sanction such a practice. Of course, if you’re honest you cannot. There are many more examples in both the Old and New Testaments but this one is so glaring that it was the one I chose for an example. I think that we can all rest assured that God did not say what is found in Exodus 21:7-11 ever.

The legitimate question becomes how can one discern what is revelation from source and what are cultural ideas based on cultural norms? I would not even rule out that Exodus 21:7-11 is not progressive for the cultural norms of the times. It probably would have been. My point is that it was not an edict from the creative source of the universe. To answer the question above, the first thing one must do is use the discernment of the indwelling Logos. If we are created in God’s image, and I believe we are, then we are creative consciousness and that is via the indwelling divine logos. Since the logos is the offspring of God, by virtue of being conscious agents we are the offspring of consciousness.

Quite frankly, the only thing we have in common with God is consciousness. It is by virtue of us being conscious agents that we are in the image of God. What is God’s consciousness? It is the Logos, the Tao, it is God’s Word. God’s Word is God’s offspring. The message of Jesus among other things was that he was God’s consciousness in human flesh. However, he taught that we too are just like him. We also are God’s consciousness in human flesh. It is through our consciousness that we receive mystical understanding and revelation. God consciousness is our discernment. Peter claimed in the Acts of the Apostles, that God’s consciousness, which is also God’s Spirit was poured out on all flesh. So, the answer to the question above, about understanding what mystical revelation from the source is and what is human cultural input is by using God consciousness.

Interestingly enough, God Consciousness is likewise Christ Consciousness. Christ Consciousness is the source of all mystical revelation and illumination. Perhaps I can give you some illumination of a verse in Revelation.

Rev 19:10  “Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, "You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your comrades who hold the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

Yes indeed, it is the testimony of Jesus that explains the Word became flesh and dwelt in humanity. Subsequently, Jesus said that the Word indwells the rest of humanity as well. “As he is in the world so are we!” John tells us that the Word was in the world but was not recognized. He says the Word came to his own kind but was not received. However, John also states that there was those who received him. Those who were given the power to become the offspring of God. Who were they? They were all of the mystics and seers over the millennia. Each of us now has access to the indwelling Christ. That is true whether or not one has heard of or believed in Jesus of Nazareth. That indwelling Word is the source of our discernment.

 

 

God Beyond Religion: The real history of the Greek word Logos

 "en arche en ho logos" "In the beginning was the word." John 1:1a

The above sentence was penned by the apostle John between 69CE and 100CE. I give that range because there are plausible reasons for the dates given by scholars. This is not about the dating of the Gospel According to John, This is about the origin and use of the Greek word logos as it relates to creation., and orthodoxy has done a great disservice to the concept. However, if you ever read anything I write that should not be surprising because orthodoxy has done a great disservice to Christ and Jesus of Nazareth.

I was taught in seminary, and in all approved books for those with the evangelical focus, John’s gospel, and first century Christianity in general was the source for the spiritual understanding of Logos (the Word.) Absolutely nothing could be farther from the truth. With that statement let’s begin to look at the history and development of the Greek word logos.

First of all, one should not limit the concept to just Greek thought. So, let’s look at the definition from Strong’s Greek dictionary to get the Greek definition. “From G3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (that is, Christ): - account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.” It can be seen that the meaning and use is broad, but at the base focus of it all is consciousness. Thayer defines it this way. 2) its use as respect to the MIND alone “2a) reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating 2b) account, i.e. regard, consideration 2c) account, i.e. reckoning, score 2d) account, i.e. answer or explanation in reference to judgment 2e) relation, i.e. with whom as judge we stand in relation 2e1) reason would 2f) reason, cause, ground” This is Thayer’s second definition but it is basic to the meaning and use of the term over the millennia.

It is fair to say that the definition of Logos is consciousness, conscious thought, and action initiated by consciousness. Thus, the Logos of God is god consciousness. So was the apostle John the originator of the doctrine of the Logos? Absolutely not. The doctrine of the Logos was developed by a Jewish Philosopher named Philo of Alexandria. He lived between 20 BCE and 40 CE. He was therefore a contemporary of Jesus, John, and Paul. He had studied Greek Philosophy and discovered the Logos there and set out in his writings to amalgamate the Greek Logos with the Hebrew concept of God and the Hebrew scriptures. He originated the idea that Logos was the creative aspect of God a mediator between God and humanity, and that it was the son of God for his time. I say for his time as it was actually much more ancient a concept, but he brought the idea to the first century Judeo-Christian world. I realize that evangelical theologians will get their back up on this claim, but without valid reason because the facts are inescapable. Philo wrote, lived, and died before John wrote John 1:1, and his elaboration on the Logos is extensive.

However, as I stated earlier the concept is ancient. It goes all the way back to the Egyptians and the Babylonians. Of course Logos is a Greek word so it goes back to the ancient Greek philosophers, but the concept of God, the source, having a word that was the creator, and his son goes all the way back to Thoth in Egypt. Here’s where it gets a little tangled. Pythagoras the Greek Philosopher, metaphysicist, and mathematician traveled to Egypt, studied their teachings and brought them back to Greece. The teachings of Thoth got turned into the teachings of the Greek God Hermes, and became known as Hermes Trismegistus, which means the thrice great Hermes. It was recorded in the Corpus Hermeticus. However, with the translation of the hieroglyphics it was discovered that the teaching was found on the pyramids in Saqqara Egypt and date back to 3,000 BCE.

Here is an excerpt from the Hermetica. “Who are you?' I asked. 'I am the Way-Guide, the Supreme Mind, the thoughts of Atum the One-God. I am with you — always and everywhere. I know your desires. Make your questions conscious, and they will be answered.' 'Show me the nature of Reality. Bless me with Knowledge of Atum,' I begged. Suddenly everything changed before me. Reality was opened out in a moment. I saw the boundless view. All became dissolved in Light — united within one joyous Love. Yet the Light cast a shadow, grim and terrible, which, passing downwards, became like restless water, chaotically tossing forth spume like smoke. And I heard an unspeakable lament — an inarticulate cry of separation. The Light then uttered a Word, which calmed the chaotic waters. My Guide asked: 'Do you understand the secrets of this vision? I am that Light — the Mind of God, which exists before the chaotic dark waters of potentiality. My calming Word is the Son of God — the idea of beautiful order; the harmony of all things with all things. Primal Mind is parent of the Word, just as, in your own experience, your human mind gives birth to speech. They cannot be divided, one from the other, for life is the union of Mind and Word”. ~ Freke, Tim. The Hermetica: The Lost Wisdom of the Pharaohs (pp. 32-34). Tim Freke Publications. Kindle Edition.  

It is not surprising that all of the ancient Greek Philosophers wrote about the Word, Logos being the divine seed and the creative source of God. It was written about by Heraclitus, Plato, the Stoics and from them was picked up by Philo of Alexandria.

However, it was also a concept that was explored and explained in eastern thought as well. For example, here is an excerpt from the Tao Te Ching (pronounced dao de ching.) “The Tao that can be understood is not the eternal, cosmic Tao, just as an idea that can be expressed in words  is not the infinite idea.  And yet this ineffable Tao is the source of all spirit and matter;  expressing itself, it is the mother of all created things.”  ~Lao Tzu. Tao Te Ching . Ancient Renewal. Kindle Edition. You can see two things here. First, the Tao is the creative source of all things, and second, when Lao Tzu writes expressing itself he is speaking of the word which is equal to the Logos in Greek. The Online Encyclopedia of Philosophy states that the idea of the Logos/word is also found in Hindu and Buddhist religions.

I hope I am making it clear that the concept of the Logos is indeed ancient, ubiquitous, and syncretistic. It fits nicely within my view of eclectic spirituality. It for certain is not exclusive and original within Christianity. It is far more broad in scope than that.

God Beyond Religion: Christian Dogma Misrepresented Grace... My Rant!

 The first mention of grace is in the Old Testament Book of Genesis. It is correct in all of the new translations. It simply reads, Gen 6:8  “But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.” There is NOTHING in the definition of grace/favor that even hints of UNMERITED!!!!! Christian doctrine added the meaning of unmerited to uphold and support worm theology and the subsequent fall of humanity into depravity. There is no qualification in Genesis 6:8. It simply states that Noah found favor. I know, I know, you are thinking that in the narrative God went on to drown the rest of humanity. Can’t argue against that, but it is simply a narrative of a story and not the point of this rant!

I use this verse because of the revered doctrine of first mention. The same evangelicals that insist on grace being unmerited favor demand that first mention be applied to a word as it continues on through the biblical narrative. That being the case, the story of Noah suggests that God’s favor toward Noah was merited by Noah himself.

Let’s continue with the concept of first mention. What is the first mention of humanity? Gen 1:27-31  “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.  (28)  God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."  (29)  Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.  (30)  And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.  (31)  God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.” Yes indeed, the first mention of humanity is found in the above passage and guess what? God said it was VERY GOOD! Does very good support worm theology? No, very good supports imputed righteousness from the beginning!

I know, now you are asking about Genesis chapters two and three. What about the story of Adam and Eve? Weren’t they our first parents? The Adam and Eve narrative is an allegory. It is meant to explain the pathology of humanity, which is the ability to judge good and evil coupled with death. Death initiated the survival instinct out of necessity, and the knowledge of good and evil allowed one to judge themselves right and the other wrong in their pursuit of survival. It is a pathology that can be overcome by means of understanding grace, favor.

All humanity was created in the image of God, the Imago Dei. That is, conscious creative agents. By virtue of that we are eternal. To be created in one’s image is to be a child of the creator. The characteristics of the child is the same as the characteristics of the parent. If the parent is eternal, then the child is eternal. So then, the gospel of grace is the good news that favor is upon humans as a result of their familial connection to the creative source. This explains the message and mission of Jesus of Nazareth. He taught that he was God consciousness incarnate and went on to teach that we too are God consciousness incarnate. He proved that he was indeed eternal in nature by his death, burial, and resurrection. He demonstrated once and for all time that all humanity had as a birthright God’s favor, or in other words grace.

Christian dogma has misrepresented so much, it angers me and therefore the need for this rant!

God Beyond Religion: Partakers of the divine nature

 2Pe 1:4a  "by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature.”

As we enter the age of Aquarius we await and will see a dramatic shift in humanity. We are now beginning to see the first fruits of the new age, but the old age is still wielding influence. The characteristics of the new age will be advancement in technology, especially electricity and humanity will become more humane. It is an age of freedom and will help us accept our divinity and our humanity and amalgamate the two. We are both human and divine. If we have the Imago-Dei, and I believe we do then we are human and divine. First of all, let us look at the definition of divine. Divine is of, from, or like God. But what about God? What is the definition of God? According to the dictionary, God is the creator and supreme ruler of the universe. My definition is that God is simply, the first cause, the creative source of all that exists.

So, what do I see as the first cause and creative source of all that exists? I see it as universal consciousness or thought. So then, when I think of the Imago-Dei, I think of being conscious agents. When one refers to God’s image bearers, they are referring to conscious agents. The way in which we partake of the divine nature is by virtue of our consciousness. Our consciousness is but a point of consciousness in the collective consciousness, or in other words, the divine field of consciousness.

The above quoted verse from the second epistle of Peter states that we have been given exceedingly great and precious promises, through which we participate in the divine nature. What are those promises? Simply that we are the incarnation of the divine Logos, or the divine expression of consciousness. Jesus claimed to be the Logos incarnate but went on to teach at we too are the incarnate Logos also. The apostle John was inspired to write that as Jesus, was in the world so are we. That means that if Jesus was the incarnate Logos, if Jesus was the offspring of God so are we.

Spirit, consciousness is what God is and corporeal material reality is what God does. Stated another way, God is spirit and flesh. Spirit is indicative of consciousness, and flesh is indicative of the corporeal and material. While it is a mystery to me, it also resonates that what God does is sacred geometry. If you are not familiar with sacred geometry here is a great introductory source Sacred Geometry. Sacred geometry explains how the source created a three-dimensional reality and I am quite certain that it can explain all of the various dimensions.

The fact is that we are in the Source, and the Source is in us, and by virtue of that we are partakers of the divine nature. We are each conscious agents within the field of divine consciousness. This field of consciousness is also the unified field of quantum physics. It is the field of morphic resonance in biology. It is the field that produces the stream of collective consciousness and is the source of all creativity and revelation. This field is the source of all mystical understandings and has been such from the beginning of time.

It is important to recognize that it is available to all. It is not exclusively for one group and does not accompany only one dogmatic principle or belief system. When it was announced that the spirit would be poured out on all flesh, it signified that over time all flesh would become enlightened to their divine nature and their connection to the divine field of consciousness.

God Beyond Religion: How the Internet and Social-Media Aided People to Deconstruct and Reconstruct their Faith

I personally have participated in social media groups since 1998. My first venture into it was being a member of Yahoo Groups. The name of my ministry was New Wineskin Fellowship and one day back in 98 searching it online, I found a New Wineskin Yahoo Group that was made up of house church folk. After that, I joined others and even started a group with the purpose of rediscovering the Apostles Doctrine, called Acts 2:42. The New Wineskin group did not question doctrine as much as it questioned structure and practice. I had felt for a long time that the dogma, doctrine was not correct. That was my reason for starting the Acts 2:42 group.

The idea first came to me from a passage in 2 Thessalonians. 2Th 2:15  “So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.” That verse resonated with my spirit, and I said to myself, of course, they were taught in greater detail by word of mouth, and the epistles were supplemental. The word-of-mouth teaching would have been clearer as they were there in person to ask the apostles questions about anything that seemed confusing.

In reality, the entire Christian scripture was confusing to me because it seemed so contradictory. During the height of my evangelical days, like every other “good” believer I did not question the contradictory aspects and basically ignored them but that was truly dishonest. I was not being honest with myself. The confusion came from reading the synoptic gospels as opposed to the letters of Paul. The glaring problem I encountered was the obvious conflict of law and grace. But, to further exacerbate the problem, Paul himself was inconsistent with his teaching of law and grace. Anyone who will not admit that there is an obviously glaring contradiction with law and grace is simply not being honest and I will not take that back as it is simply truth. Many have unsuccessfully tried but always failed to properly synchronize law and grace on the basis of what is written. The bottom line is that this contradiction results from the doctrine of inerrancy and infallibility of scripture. It comes from giving equal weight to everything written as if it were a perfect edict from God.

Even when I was teaching seminary, the kinds of questions I allude to here were never asked. This is where the internet and social media come into play. Sitting behind a computer screen or phone screen, speaking with someone you don’t see on a regular basis makes a safer environment to ask the difficult questions. In the beginning, like the New Wineskins Yahoo Group, one still got a lot of pushback and accusations from varying from the evangelical party line, and I must admit with a wry smile on my face it led to some very heated debates. I, however, did not shy away from them and rather enjoyed them I would say. But over time, more and more people grew bolder and bolder about the questions and minds were changed, and dogma was changed. Likely not with the person one was debating but over time, things that made sense would be assimilated later on.

Slowly, more and more people adopted ideas that were heretical to the evangelical crowd, and with the addition of Facebook and twitter, more groups formed to offer a safe place to question, ask questions, and declare new conclusions. As the result of this several new movements of thought arose and people were discarding old dogma for something that made more sense to them based on what they read, heard, and experienced. I benefited from this because over time I became bolder and bolder expressing my questions and new conclusions. I have resolved the law grace situation one hundred percent for me, but that is a topic for a different time. The main thing is that I want to acknowledge and even celebrate what the internet and social media has helped accomplish and I am confident that it will only continue to grow.

I am quite sure that I arrived at syncretistic and eclectic spirituality as the result of the freedom offered by the internet.

 

God Beyond Religion: The Importance of Grace in Deconstruction

 In my view, it is beyond doubt that evangelical Christianity and orthodox Christianity suffer from gross error. As I view people who were once evangelical who begin deconstruction, this is often the path of the journey. The first step is to move into what can be called the grace movement. From there they reject Paul and become what one could call red letter Christians, that is, they adopt only the words of Jesus. From there the final stage is to reject Christianity out of hand. Many simply no longer follow Jesus or think that being a Christ follower is important. This stems from an either-or view of scripture. Either, the bible is the word of God, or it is not valuable in any way shape or form and has no mystical revelation in it.

However, insofar as I know, the bible is the only source for understanding divine grace. I don’t think that it is over simplistic to say that the good news, or the gospel can be summed up in the concept of divine grace. The New Testament concept of grace is divine favor. It is the concept that one need not fear divine retribution. Luke recorded in the Acts of the Apostles the following: Acts 20:24  “But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.” Divine grace is indeed the good news.

Now let’s look at another factor that could seem either-or to a deconstructing Christian. Either the Penal Substitution Atonement is correct, and grace is needed, or grace is unnecessary. Divine grace serves a much greater purpose than remedying penal substitutionary atonement. Divine grace believed, creates a heart of love. Divine grace is a natural attribute of a God that is love. It is important to realize that this fact is only clearly stated in the Christian bible. If one throws the bible away, one can speculate that God is love and therefore gives divine grace, but with the Christian scripture one knows that because it is in writing. Further, if one rids themselves of the current acceptable scriptural lens a lot of mystical revelation from source can be found amongst the culturally motivated input.

I am not suggesting that there is a slippery slope that one slides down if one rejects the bible and Christianity. I am saying that one cannot understand the fullness of the love of God without the concept of divine grace. It is best stated by Paul in 1 Cor 13:5 saying that it keeps no record of wrongs. One can say that “keeps no record of wrongs” is only found in some translations. This is true, but looking at the Greek word logizomai, one finds that it means reckon. So, it is really saying love does not reckon wrongs. This is important because it shows the fact of divine grace, and it is divine grace that provokes love and grace within the individual.

There are of course differing concepts of the atonement that have been accepted over the two millennia of Christianity. If one adopts a Christus Victor view of atonement, that is that Jesus Christ was victorious over death and the accuser, one has the foundation for being transformed into supernatural love. The victory over death is the assurance of eternal life, and the victory over the accuser is the assurance that any and all accusations, whether from oneself or others including the concept of a Satan, has no deleterious effect. In other words, we are eternal beings that are loved by the creative source and are actually family. Another mystical revelation of the New Testament is that we are partakers of the divine nature. This stems from the fact that we are created in the image of God. God is a conscious creative spirit. This makes us conscious creative spirits as well. Jesus certainly taught this according to the apostle John.

Yes, there is misogyny in the bible. It is even in the New Testament. Yes, the bible suggests that slavery is acceptable. Yes, the Old Testament portrays God as a vindictive violent personage. All of this is undeniably true. However, the prophet Joel mystically prophesied that the Christ Spirit would be poured out on all flesh. This was proclaimed to be a reality by Peter at Pentecost. This means that all of us innately have the spirit and the spiritual discernment to be able to distinguish between what is mystical revelation and what is the cultural input of humans. All one has to do is ask how it lines up with love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, gentleness, and self-control. This is a great yardstick, and one must also realize that grace always trumps judgment.

Yes, the important mystical message that Christianity has to offer is grace and love. While it is not that often practiced by a ton of Christ followers, it is very plainly there in the Christian scripture for those who can discern.

 

God Beyond Religion: The Hard Problem of Christian Scripture

 Let me begin with this. I love the Christian Scripture. I am not hating on the scripture. I am deeply questioning what orthodoxy has taught about scripture over the last 2000 years, and I am troubled by the canonization process, the motivation for it, and some of the literature that was eliminated from it. I believe that the preponderance of the evidence in the New Testament suggest that spiritual discernment should over-ride scriptural assertions and therein lies the hard problem of scripture. I will also address the Pauline pastoral passages that have been used to develop a doctrine of scripture that I believe to be erroneous. And, I think far too much credence has been given apostolic succession and the early church fathers with respect to this problem.

I think that the hard problem with Christian scripture is every bit as difficult as the hard problem of consciousness. Yet, until it is solved, it will simply drive more and more people away from being a follower of Jesus Christ. For some that is fine, but I am writing this to those who cannot deny the beneficial relationship they have with the Christ and see following his teaching as a viable way of life. When I say follow his teaching, I am not referring to evangelical or orthodox dogma. I am referring to parts of the Sermon on the Mount, his teaching on loving one another, his insistence that we are in God and that God is in us. I am referring to the teaching of the Logos, the Word, and its development over the millennia beginning with Egyptian Hermeticism. I am referring to all the mystical revelation that Paul received with respect to love, the fruit of the spirit, and the new humanity. And finally, but in no way exhaustively, I am referring to his teaching that each of us are divine and human.

While I am no longer sure that Christianity in its broad sense is profitable for humanity, I am certain that being a follower of Jesus Christ and acknowledging everything that goes along with the cosmic Christ and Christ consciousness is viable and beneficial for those who have been born into western civilization. While it could be of benefit to others, it is certainly not a must for everyone. Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism have already sullied the name of Christianity with its inflexible insistence on exclusivity.

What is the hard problem of Christian scripture? It is its misuse and miss interpretation. Jesus told the Jews in John’s gospel that they were searching the scripture to find life and that was the wrong reason. His claim was that the purpose of the scripture was to explain that life was found only in him, their Messiah. If we switch over into Greek culture and the Greek language, it would be that the purpose of scripture was to find life by finding “the Christ.” So, in Jesus’ view, the purpose of scripture was to find Christ consciousness. The Talmud backs this up by saying, “Every prophet only prophesied for the days of the Messiah;” (~Cohen, Abraham. Everyman's Talmud (p. 477). BN Publishing. Kindle Edition.)  

It is a hard problem because Jesus also said that to find and understand Christ consciousness, one would need the comforter or the spirit. It is the comforter or the spirit that would guide one into all truth. The one thing that Jesus did not say is search the scripture for in them you will find an inerrant God given set of rules for faith and practice. That is nowhere in scripture. He did however show where it points to him in Luke chapter 24. This makes the hard problem a quandary. Does one follow the Spirit or does one follow the book? And, what if, God forbid, the voice of the Spirit of Christ tells you something that contradicts the book?

So, how did we arrive at the place where there is a hard problem of Christian scripture? Actually, it came about early on in Christianity. If not at the end of the first century, it most definitely came about very early in the second century. How so you ask? Well, there was early on a variety of Christianity’s, that developed a variety of Christian scripture. There was disagreement about what was and what was not Christian scripture. If one takes the time to familiarize oneself with the early heresies, one finds that there is much in some of them that makes sense and rings true. That is not to say that they had entire truth, but they had valid points of mystical, spiritual truth. In my view, the preponderance of the evidence in accepted scripture substantiates this.

Marcion of Sinope immediately comes to mind. While I do not accept everything written about his heresy, I rather like his take on Paul and some of the other earlier apostles. He thought Paul more right than the others. He only included ten of Paul’s letters in his canon, Yes, first and second Corinthians was in the group of ten, and no, I am not in favor of silencing women, accepting slavery, or excommunicating people but there is a lot of mystical revelation from the creative source in Paul’s work.

I haven’t mentioned the other heresies for the sake of brevity but suffice it to say that the variety in the first 200 years, points to a diversity that is far more eclectic, synchronistic, and inclusive. Again, I should point out that the Talmud shows that there was sometimes irreconcilable disagreement with the interpretation of the original Jewish canon amongst the rabbis.

Evangelical Christianity, and Orthodoxy for that matter, have tried to eliminate the hard problem of scripture by canonizing certain early Christian works and discarding others. They even went so far as to burn some of them, and we would not know what they said were it not for a serendipitous find in the mid twentieth century. The Nag Hammadi Library was found in 1945 and the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947.

Sola Scriptura Does Not Solve the Hard Problem:

Sola Scriptura does not solve the hard problem of scripture, it exacerbates it. Up until the Reformation, two things informed the church. The handed down apostles teaching and the scripture. Further, at the time of the Reformation, it was taught that salvation was only found in the church. The church held the keys to the kingdom and therefore were the sole arbiter of all things Christian. The original reformers were not claiming sola scriptura beyond salvation. The five sola’s of the reformation were faith alone, Christ alone, scripture alone, grace alone, to the glory of God alone, and this all simply related to salvation. The rest of the apostle’s teaching was accepted by the so-called Protestants. The Roman Catholic Church had the magisterium in addition to the scripture, and the Orthodox Church had the Patristic Fathers which is similar to the magisterium. The fact is that before the Reformation there was never a time when the scripture alone was sufficient. This coincides nicely with what Jesus said about what the comforter or the Spirit would do.

Paul’s pastoral epistles are the place where the doctrine of inerrancy and infallibility come into view. The problem is that they were quite likely not written by Paul. If by a slim chance they were written by Paul it was late in the first century and was written to force an adherence to the rule of a clerical class of presbyters. Still when one examines 2 Timothy 3:16 in context, one finds that even there, the scripture was only profitable in a redemptive way. Paul tells timothy that the scripture would make one wise unto salvation. It is undeniable that 2 Peter was written in the middle of the second century. While very likely by a disciple of Peter, who likely knew him, it was written at a later time when it had begun to be important to establish authority. It is unwise to use any of these passages to overthrow Jesus assertion that the comforter, the Spirit would be the one to guide into all truth.

So, the hard problem of scripture can only be solved by allowing the Spirit to guide one into all truth. This would not be as difficult as one thinks if the doctrines of sola scriptura and inerrancy were set aside. It would be possible to discern what is mystical revelation from God and what is merely cultural input by judging it by the definition of the fruit of the Spirit and love given by the apostle Paul. That alone should be the standard for judging if a message is from the source.