Daniel and the Bible
Sep 21, 1995 00:26 AM
by Brenda S. Tucker
>Because the Holy Spirit teaches me that which is truth. As for the Bible
>vs the other "holy" books...The foundation of the Holy Bible is the most valid.
>If you have studied its origin and its progression you can only conclude that
>the Bible is remarkable and unique.
I am so happy. I've just been looking at THE SECRET DOCTRINE which I am
able to search using the computer and have found a few ideas which may
interest you. It has to do with how the Bible has been so widely read,
written and re-written and contained so much that had to be considered
relevant to men from the birth of Jesus Christ until now. My idea is this.
The Bible was considered law and light to European man during the medieval
ages. Those people, though far from being blind and ignorant, did live their
lives with very little science.
In fact I have a 17th century article re an ancestor of mine who was
punished for practicing witchcraft when all that his activity mounted to was
stirring a pot of milk with "an iron rod" because for some unknown reason
the milk from cows in a certain area would not gell into cheese. This
constituted witchcraft in those days.
The point I am leading up to is that while science may indeed have been
considered perverted living by Christians and Bible worshippers, today
science conflicting with the Bible (if in fact it does) leaves everyone
unconcerned. What we learn from scientists is "in addition" to the teachings
which we believe and practice as found in the Bible.
>Inspired means "God Breathed". Not mans interpretation of what he cannot
>perceive. When I type "Thus says the LORD...." Who am I speaking of?
>ever notice that Moses came to Pharoah and said "The LORD says...." Did
>know Moses's God?
People who were entrusted with the Bible's usage during the Middle Ages were
certainly learning to live "brotherly," but there where many things which
the Bible did not teach. Theosophists who are trying to live their lives
through the study of religion, philosophy and science object to some of the
ideas in the Bible because they find more satisfactory expositions along
certain themes in other classic and religious literature. For instance,
physicists today are finding teachings in Buddhism which confirm current
scientific findings of today. If in fact, man had great learning available
to them down through the ages of Buddhist study, how was this not known to
western man? Blinders!! It could behoove modern man to penetrate eastern
studies for other available knowledge which could then be tested and verified.
>Truth IS. When we live a life of denial against the truth, we reap the rewards
>of denial. Prophets were sent by GOD for the specific purpose of getting us
>TO KNOW. We can know because Jesus did come, died, and resurrected. The
>scriptures make incredible prophetic claims and the scriptures teach
>of those claims. As a man wanting to KNOW, we are set before the Holy
>Scriptures with many claims and are left to our freewill to determine for
>ourselves what truth is. Amazingly enough once a true confession and belief
>is poured out from the one who wants to know God reveals Himself to the
>believer. This does not mean that man determines TRUTH. It means he
>has a choice to follow truth. Jesus said He was the Truth. So to know truth
>is to know Him.
>You are aware that Jews deny the New Testament. Are the Jews the ones
>to determine what is Holy? Jesus declared that the Old Testament was HIS
>word. And the New Tetsament is filled about the life of the one that claimed
>He was God. Has any other Man ever claimed to be God, provided evidence
>of his divinity and remained as a Man of Truth and a Great Teacher?
>>(7) Furthermore, how much do you know about other religions of the world?
>>About Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, etc? I would
>>suggest that you read a textbook on comparative world religion such as
>>*A History of the World's Religions*, 9th edition by David S. Noss and John
>>B. Noss of read *The Eliade Guide to World Religions* by Mircea Eliade, Ioan
>>P. Couliano and Hillary S. Wierner.
>I enjoy comparitive studies. Why do all major religions deal with Jesus?
>Many make claims that are contrary to first hand evidence as written
>in the New Testament which is the only valid history of Jesus of Nazareth.
>It is also interesting that ALL cults deal with Jesus. What they deal rarely
>aligns with known truth about Jesus. The reason is simple...an attempt to
>dillude the truth.
>Enough to know that to remove the real historic Jesus is to have no Jesus.
>And that Special revelation is not unique. The scriptures were written
>so that ALL may come to the knowledge of Jesus Christ.
The Bible is a certain key into the life of Jesus which helps all of us to
live more Christ-like, but its validity is in some ways objectionable
because of the difficult, somewhat ignorant times which man lived through
while holding the Bible dear to his heart. Today great learning is under
way in so many different fields that we should give ourselves access to the
ideas as they were presented and preserved historically.
For instance, there are some Egyptian manuscripts which were preserved
practically just as they existed during the dynasties. Do these offer any
teaching which we may find useful? Can we break the codes? If a text is
preserved in its pristine purity, can it be understood in a unique fashion
separate from a text such as the Bible which was in heavy use and
interpretation over the 2000 years since Jesus and even before Jesus?
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application