Woe to them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! Isa 5:21

       Reading this verse reminds of a conversation I once had with a colleague who was willing to change beliefs about God after reading a book that appeared to make sense.  This person was about to change course in life away from seeking to have a relationship with God, because of someone’s theory.  We discussed that whatever relationship one may have with God is to be a personal one and not one based on a book on a bestseller list. This relationship should also not be so fragile as collapsing after reading a book.  We noted that with easy access to information someone’s theories can be evaluated, as we continue expanding our knowledge.  We agreed that as one seeks to know, one should test what was read and heard and our conversation continued.

       To the chagrin of the published theorist, there are a lot of theories for us to contemplate and or dismiss. Predicates, after all, buttress theories and assuming they are affirmed, then the theory is placed into a category of relative credibility along a likelihood spectrum of possible, plausible, and probable.  One’s assailed theory, for instance, of say, the historicity of a certain aspect of the scriptures, will continue as postulated (the Planck principle), with diminishing significance with each succeeding generation.  Reality through generations does not change, a theory does.  One’s perception of reality changes through generations. Similarly, someone who has a relationship with God sees reality and life differently from someone who does not have a relationship with God.  They each bear different life expectations. 

        Consequently, the Hebrew scriptures were not written to be relatable to one’s modern thinking averse to envisaging and embracing ever having a relationship with a god.  The scriptures are an account of a people’s history of their God-initiated relationship and what it is about. Other renditions appealing to be related is just cooption.  God revealed himself and attributes, desires, feelings, patience, and compassion, along with faithfulness to promises, to say the least.  Furthermore, the Hebrew scriptures were not written with scientific information that would otherwise be irrelevant to the recipients and unverifiable in the ancient time. What was pertinent, at the time for their walk with God and for all of humanity, was conveyed.  The modern expectation, of what one would have desired the scriptures to say that would fit one’s own conceptions or own desired belief construct, is incongruous to the purpose of the scriptures.  Scholars today looking to analyze the Torah scriptures are peering into someone’s diary, so-to-speak, and telling the reader, in their opinion, how wrong the diary’s details are.

         While God hides in the splendor of creation [Ps. 104:1], but cannot be known,[1] Egypt’s human-made pyramids’ materiality is observable, yet the mysteries about the pyramids boggle experts;[2] an intriguing example of theory’s dependent life despite advancements. We can all hypothesize as to the ‘how’ and hardly as to the ‘why’ and to the ‘who.’  All that we can surmise of the ancient past will be the conclusion of many theories laced together. As such, anyone’s educated guess over thousands of years of tangible objects withering away will count, including guesses from anyone’s scholarly consensus, or chosen peer review group. All the while, the purpose of things we find remains elusive to the most opinionated promoting a theory. ‘Woe to them that are wise in their own eyes, . . .’   A theory should not be followed but understood, while the word of God experienced.  

[1] Personal belief

[2] https://archive.archaeology.org/9909/abstracts/pyramids.html.