Can faith in the Bible replace faith in God?

Original question: Can faith in the Bible replace faith in God?

I think that is an interesting question.But before I answer the question further, I would like to say something about the word “faith”. In my view, “believing” in this context means that you have drawn a conclusion that you are not or barely investigating. That actually means that there is no possibility that you want to change your opinion on that conclusion. The strange thing is that many people say that you believe something if you do not have proof for it, or that you do not need proof for it, otherwise you would “know” it. In the Bible, “knowing” and “believing” are almost synonym used by Paul (have 11:1)-emphasis my: “The Faith now is the certainty of things one hopes, and the evidence of things that one does not see.” (Here is “certainty” synonymous with “sure know”.)

The difference between believing and (certainly) knowing is therefore actually arbitrary.For any evidence that you accept in support or as an argument for the truth of an assertion, such that you believe you know it, exactly that evidence is the measure of what you have not explored or will investigate.

Fixing a conclusion (“knowing”) is therefore identical with having a belief.

Now back to the question.So if you have been given new information that makes it difficult for you to believe in God, then that information can help you to believe the Bible.

I will try to explain that now.The Bible is not one book, and “Believing in the Bible” is also a very vague concept. It is not entirely clear what that means. What does it mean, for example, that you believe in the Bible, but that you do not believe that God created heaven and earth (Gen 1:1) because you do not believe in God?Does it mean that you do not believe some things in the Bible and other things?

However, it is possible that the information you get tells you something about the Bible that you first did not know, so you believe in the Bible, ie.The degree of trustworthiness of the Bible, increases.

For example, my research has shown that the Hebrew alphabet itself -the Hebrew letters -is the message of the Hebrew text. This message is hidden in all openness.One theory is that the stories in the Bible serve as a background against which the meaning of the Hebrew letters becomes clearer for those who have been consecrated in this secret.

Imagine that you already know of a creation story in a different language.Then, based on this and a little study, you can find out what the Hebrew words would mean, given that the story is a creation story. With that knowledge armed you can then try the meaning of the letters to “decipher”.This has already been done by Carlo Suar猫s in his book “The Cipher of Genesis.” See [Https://www.duversity.org/PDF/TH… for a short version of his thesis and some examples.

Nuthat you are armed with this knowledge, with the insight that the letters are what they propose, that they are the manifestation of energy transformations, this gives a completely different perspective on the value of the Hebrew text.The words in Hebrew are not intended to pass ideas , but to pass on experiences .Carlo Suar猫s calls it a projective language, and the Hebrew project is conscious, to exist and to live.

In that case, the Hebrew text is not a religious text that you can “believe”, but it becomes a meditative text that can transmit countless insights (experiences) in a projective language.So you learn from when you understand the language that way. The idea that you can translate this language is therefore not entirely correct. You do not find it strange that you cannot translate the 5th symphonie of Beethoven into Dutch? (Music writing is also a projective language.) The only way to “understand” that Symphonie is to listen to him (a form of experienced) if all music is actually played on the right instruments by skilled musicians.Each version is an “interpretation” of the Symphonie and your (listening) experience is the “translation” of that interpretation.

That way it is possible that you can “believe” in the Hebrew text, namely that it provides you with insights about the reality that you can experience, if you indeed learn to experience the “meaning” of the Hebrew letters in a proper way.I also wrote a book about it myself. “The End of Religion, The Beginning of Self”, inspired by Carlo Suar猫s ‘ book. For more information, see my Profile (Bruno Curfs).I just want to say, don’t throw the child away with the bathwater. In this case, the child is the Hebrew text (“The Bible”), and the bathwater is the religious interpretation of that text.

You don’t believe in a book anyway?You believe in God. Of the Bible, we know that it is a number of texts, a selection that a Roman emperor played well.

That being said: I don’t believe, but it seems to me that if you believe you are convinced of yourself, you know that you have it at the right end.Every search for proof means that you are not so confident of your faith. Faith therefore stands appart, and is not contrary to science.

Unfortunately, the search for a proof is a problem.The counterpart called Science does not provide evidence, but a theory that is as good as possible that is not contradicted by current knowledge. Science is looking for the truth and delivers very nice approaches, but keeps the door ajar because a smarter man can refine or replace the existing theory. It is therefore exciting to continue in the quest.

Leave a Reply