Why are the Sacred Texts so confusing?

Question

I was just listening to Prince Charles' speech and he said something along these lines and I partially quote
“It is not the sacred texts that are the cause of so much misery , it is the misinterpretation of the sacred texts”
While the sacred texts can be very confusing, I was just wondering whether it was done in purpose! Surely the sacred text could have been much simpler that could be more easily comprehended by the average Joe without the need for a minority of people to misinterpret it for their own advantage!

Answer 1

The sacred texts were written in other languages (other than english) and the english versions read are translations and translations of translations. Further, the meanings of words change over time and obscured references to people and places become more obfuscated. And lastly, by a simple reading of these texts it becomes obvious that there is much missing information....things that just do not convey information well when written, but must be passed down orally.

Without the oral component, and without learning the texts in the original language, one cannot get a firm grasp on what the texts are saying.

Answer 2

Assumptions are best left unsaid. What makes you think we don't think about what was written? Why do you assume that we don't know history, or about the Assyrians, the Egyptians, and the other histories that surround the middle east? Do you really think that we hand over our brains in blind faith and are left devoid of any intelligence? Your inference suggests you are hated already for taking the word of God up against you then you quote the words we've learned from the New Testament to defend yourself against any perceived attacks against the Christ or you. I have questioned a lot of what was spoken in the Old Testament and the New Testaments and the answers I've received as well as investigated on my own are sufficient answers. So how have you come to your conclusions that the books in the bible were written by kings and governments to control the people of the times? What do you have for evidence to make this statement. History? The books of the Bible? New Age propaganda? What? Are we no less intelligent than you? My spiritual ascent ...just what is that? Where are we to ascend to, and to what? Where did YOU get your information on any ascensions? What is your evidence of this confusion we suffer that hinders our ascension? Where is your source of information and how do you know it is valid. How do you know it is pure, or correct? Are the Jewish people and the Christian people so stupid we don't have the abities to see what is in front of us; or do you think we lack the wisdom to discern fact from fiction? It would be best if you were to go back to your spiritual studies and return with some concrete evidence and a viable source of information before you step on another man's or another woman's faith. You're not hated, you're just confused about what is taught in the bible. And no that isn't an assumption, it is an assesment of your statement. You have confused the word with the people who read the word. You have assumed you are hated and think we of a different faith are not capable of wisdom nor intelligent thought. That's confusion.

Answer 3

I remember the story of a man, seeking inspiration, who opened a Bible and read a verse. It said "Judas went out and hung himself". Thinking that was not a very good verse for inspiritation, he flipped to another page and read, "Go and do thou likewise".

The Bible is a collection of 66 books by over 40 authors on three different continents, written over a span of 1500-2000 years. It contains an on going revelation of who God is, each building on the parts before and foreshadowing the parts to come. It covers what is the most complex subject there is - the full truth about God. If it could all be summed up in three lines, God would have done that. But he is more complex and more vast and incrediable then that. That's why the scriptures run over 3.6 million words in length.

Because it is so complex, you can "prove" anything for it. All you have to do is take one or two lines out of the over 3.6 million words, present them out of context, and without any connection to the rest of the scriptures - and it can mean whatever you want.

Then add somebody who has an axe to grind, or a con to sell, and he will probably be able to find something in the scriptures to twist to his advantage. But then, people have been doing that for years with everything. "Historians" are always finding some obscure "fact" somewhere that they try to twist around to show that Washington was a dope smoker or Lincoln didn't want to free the slaves - but that does not invalid all the truth of history. Just because someone manages to "twist" the law and get off on a technicality, we don't throw out the entire law. If a scientist somewhere manages to "fudge" is data to prove a theory or get a grant, that does not prove all science is wrong. But let someone twist religion a little, and people are wanting to throw out the whole thing.

Most of scripture is right forward and simple enough that you can get the main point with just a read through. But at the same time so deep and rich that you can spend a lifetime digging out all the nuggets of truth, and still have barely scratched the surface.

I am reminded of Mark Twain's famous line, " It's not the parts of the Bible I don't understand that worry me, its the parts I do."

Answer 4

Jesus said the truth would set us free. Obviously many of the beliefs denominational Christians hold, and claim to have gotten from the Scriptures, are not true, because they conflict with one another, and truth cannot conflict with truth. If Jesus said the truth would set us free, and He came to free us from the bondage of sin, then He must have provided a way that we could know the truth with certainty. I don't mean the subjective "certainty" that each denomination feels about their own interpretations, compared to everyone else's interpretrations. I mean genuine, objective certainty.

We see that the Christian Church existed for over a thousand years without deviations from doctrinal belief. Oh, the occasional heresy would spring up and die out, but no-one was going off and founding denominational churches based on private interpretation of the Bible. Since this one Church was able to maintain doctrinal unity for a thousand years, without the formation of any conflicting denominations, and given that this same Church has continued in the same doctrinal unity for an additional thousand years, any rational person would have to assume that this Church is doing something right. What this Church is doing right is believing the words of its founder, Jesus Christ, who told His Church, "whatsoever you bind upon earth is bound in heaven". What this Church has been doing right for 2,000 years is believing the truth of the Bible, which says that this Church is "the pillar and foundation of truth". What this Church has NOT been doing is rejecting the God-given authority Christ placed within it, and looking elsewhere for authority; for elsewhere, there is no true authority. No authority to define doctrinal truth; no authority to interpret Scripture. And the fruit of that rejection is obvious - thousands of conflicting manmade denominations, unable to reach any consensus about what is truth and what is not. How different this ungodly situation is from the stated will of God, "that they all may be ONE, even as I and my heavenly Father are ONE".

Answer 5

Prince Charles would be the last one to interpret Sacred Text for me I'm afraid.

Answer 6

Those who have knowlege have power. The "sacred texts" are made difficult so that the average person can't read it so that the people are manipulated more easily. It's like knowing that you have rights but not knowing what they are.

Answer 7

The were written by ancient people based on the knowledge and superstitions of the individual writter without any regard for how the would be inturpreted in the future

Answer 8

Good question :)

I believe because they were written on a spiritual level they are alluding to things which cannot easily be grasped intellectually but ring true when we come to them in the right spirit.

When the time is right the meaning becomes clear.

Answer 9

I've struggled with that same question. Personally, I think God doesn't give you all the answers and remains allusive on purpose. If He was to provide absolute proof, there would be no sense to search for the truth through faith.
I think that's the point of all of this. That He is searching for a people that trust in Him and not themselves... to come to Him on His terms and not their own.

Answer 10

the Authentic texts are not confusing on their own.

its when people try to warp it into meaning what they want it to mean, the text "fights back" as such, by being so confusing.

if you take the core texts, with as little explanation, inteperetation, and as few layers of repeated translation as possible, and look at it with a honest, open mind, listening to what the text, and God, is trying to tell you, it shouldn't seem all that confusing at all.