In the Beginning

[jenjulian]

And now, before we close, we really must acknowledge that the thesis presented in this book is outrageous and, very likely, absurd. Certainly, theologians and other biblical scholars will find our interpretation of the Genesis story and of those passages of the Gospels we addressed to be pure nonsense. In fact, as I write these last words, I wonder if any readers will have stayed with me long enough to read them. Still, as those who have struggled along the spiritual path know far too well, and have the inner bruises to prove it, most often the answers that seem to make sense do not truly answer, and conversely those that seem the most ridiculous are in fact the very One. So, while we may have strayed far from the truth as we perceive it, we may also have stumbled closer to the Truth as It Is than we can yet realize.

I stayed to the end and I think this paragraph says so well what is hard to express. The fact that what makes sense to our intellect cannot be the Truth because our intellect isn't the tool for Knowing, it cannot give a true picture. I think this is why I have read, heard and found for myself that the Truth sound foolish when spoken and written. It makes 'sense' to the heart though and this is a different way of judging whether we are on the path to Truth or not. Knowing by the heart is not recognized, understood or valued by most and it is a way that takes years of developing.

I honor your inspired words from this book and I agree with another, you are a mystic of our time.
Namaste,
jen

[Ihavesayso]

I noted that there have been 223 viewers of your post regarding "In the Beginning," Jan. I sincerely hope that most, if not all of them, have read all seven chapters of Stefan's brilliant novelette.

I cannot recall enjoying so many "Ah's," or succumbing to so many outright bursts of laughter in agreement with the truth's revealed therein, since reading "Stranger In A Strange Land," ever so many decades ago.

Most assuredly, Stefan took his, "Lord, show me how it was," inspiration pill prior to penning this masterpiece! A copy should be in a prominent place on every thinker's bookshelf!

[Ihavesayso]

Duplicate of the above post.

[W4TVQ]

I agree: the book opened an entire new horizon for me. Even in my "evangelical fundamentalist Christian" phase, I could not make heads or tails of Genesis (at least the part that precedes the Abraham accounts): my response to it was, "Yeah, right." And I felt "guilty" for "not believing the Word of God," and all of that stuff that goes with being a wild-eyed fundamentalist.

Today with Stefan's help, augmented by readings in Langer, Cassirer and a few others, and a healthy understanding of contemporary scientific understanding, I can see that myth is even more true than "fact." Genesis as history is bunk: Genesis as myth is absoluely true. And, as Jesus said, when you know the truth, it sets you free.

Namaste
Art

[zoofence]

Thank you all for such nice words! I truly am grateful that ITB has spoken to you so clearly, and that you have said so.

While I am delighted to accept your applause (there remains a lot of life left in this graying ego), please remember that it is your own awareness that enables you to see and get the book's ideas. As I am certain will not surprise you, there have been others who, after reading the very same book, have come away with a very different reaction. In the end, it's the reader, not the book, that signifies.

As to what motivated ITB, as you have probably guessed, I was for years uncomfortable with the traditional explanations of the creation story in Genesis and of the "last supper" in the Gospels. It never made sense to me (1) that God would give birth to two babies, leave them alone in a snake-infested yard, and then punish them when they got bitten, or (2) that a teacher perfect in every way would urge a student to do something which was clearly contrary to both their interests, and then, for the rest of time, accept the public’s applause and allow the student to be condemned. As I sat in Sunday school classes hearing the traditional explanations, my little brain kept telling me, there is something terribly wrong with this picture. Eventually, when I grew out of Sunday school, I dismissed these questions, and went on about my life … until, that is, Krishnamurti’s Awakening of Intelligence fell into my hands followed by a lot of other similar stuff, and the walls around my life began to crumble.

Similarly, it was my inability to relate to the "downtown church" (to use Da Free John's great expression) version of Jesus that evolved into Take Off Your Shoes. Again, the man painted by my Sunday school teachers seemed to me to be such a wimp that I couldn’t understand why I would want to consider him a model for my own life.

[W4TVQ]

"Again, the man painted by my Sunday school teachers seemed to me to be such a wimp that I couldn’t understand why I would want to consider him a model for my own life."

I had a professor in seminary who was deeply offended by the wimpy portrayals of Jesus one sees so often. He called it the "Creeping Jesus Syndrome," and was always at pains to point out that a wimpy "sweet, precious Jesus" could not have functioned in the world he lived in, especially as a stonemason/carpenter, or intimidated a temple full of priests.

I think the "sweet Jesus" thing arises at least partly from the traditional picture of Jesus as "not one of us," "God over there as opposed to us over here." The extremely popular Hoffman portrayal, and the very popular RC "sacred heart" pictures, make me respond, "Eeeew, don't come any closer, please." But that's just me; I'm sure these things are helpful to those who like them.

Namaste
Art