Quester wrote:No topical category exists for the stated name of the forum.
rv wrote:The nascent idea behind originating this Forum was to provide a venue for open discussion of topics covered in the YY volume, and more recently, by extension, the YY radio show.
There, I answered my own question. Or, more precisely, someone named rv (who no longer participates on this forum) did. I found what he wrote somewhere else on the forum (not in this thread). Apparently, he knows Yada personally, and thus would know the idea behind the forum and its purpose.
So, if in fact the forum was originally started for the purpose of providing an opportunity for people to discuss the book, that is all well and good. But I'm still disappointed at the lack of foresight that was required to
not include a category about a "relationship-based knowing" with Yahuwah. After all, the author himself (at least Yada -- there may be other authors?) claims to have such a functioning relationship. And it seems that such a "relationship-based knowing" was the overall point of the book, even if the book doesn't have a chapter specifically devoted to it (can't say, as I haven't yet read the whole book). Of course, if a "relational knowing"
wasn't the point of the book, then the book was mis-titled, and this forum, by extension, is mis-titled as well.
There seems to be a basic difference between impractical-, conceptual-, theoretical-, theological-type discussions and practical-, rubber-meets-the-road-type discussions.
In my experience most of the people having the first set of discussions are the introverts who live in their inner worlds of concepts and ideas (already naturally as a part of their pre-disposition / personality), and are thus most confortable engaging others in ways (and on topics) that allow them to draw on that natural strength and remain in that conceptual state of mind. Extraverts, on the other hand, usually can't last more than five minutes in such conversations. "Make it practical!" they call out. "How does this apply to my life?" "Translate what you are saying into something I can
do right now!"
Sometimes the introverts are able to translate their concepts to the real world, but more often than not, they aren't. Just look at most of christian doctrine (which was largely written by introverts, I'm sure), and how little practical application there is for most of it. Lots of "interesting" ideas, but not much that we need to actually
do anything about. We can just believe it (or not), and be done.
In my experience as someone between the two extremes, I could attentively (and enjoyably) listen to an hour-long sermon, but if at the end there wasn't a practical, take-home type of a conclusion, I would get very frustrated. Most of the five-hundred-plus sermons I heard growing up, were NOT practical in any shape or form, and did not have a take-home "moral of the story" at the end. They were just long monologues on ideas, spoken by men who didn't even know how to make them practical.
Yahushua's words, I find, are
very practical and even action-oriented (not all of them, but many of them). Yes, he spoke conceptually and in parables much of the time, but even still, I find practical advice embedded in what he said. "If anyone is going to build a tower, he should count the cost" (paraphrase). Yes, that was a concept that isn't clearly related to home or castle construction -- we'll need to think about it for a minute -- but it's got a practical point, and as soon as we figure out the context, we will be able to apply his advice. So much of the torah / tanakh is also very practical and action-oriented. And yet we somehow manage to talk
about it all, rather than
apply it to our lives.
There's a kind of learning that comes through experience. Try reading a comprehensive, encyclopaedia-type book all about the bicycle, without ever having ridden one yourself. Good, now proceed to instruct others on the finer points of bicycle-riding. Maybe include a few chapters in
your new book on specialty disciplines within the overall sport of bicycling, such as downhill mountain biking, single-speed track riding, multi-stage endurace racing. Great, now how much actual bicycle riding experience do you have? None. But you are uniquely qualified to write about bicycles, since you did read that initial book -- even studied it in depth. Or are you qualified at all?
That's how I feel about most people who talk about "God" (or Yahuwah). They haven't a clue what they are talking about, because they don't know him personally. They've only read about him in a book, and what they read was probably mis-translated and full of errors. I'm not saying that the guy who writes about bicycles after only having studied "the bicycling bible" isn't writing true things. Much of what he writes will be
technically true. But little of it will be
relationally true, since his writing isn't tempered by his own real-life experience of riding bicycles for twenty-five years.
We check the credentials of an author for most non-fiction books that we consider buying, but why don't we do this for authors of religious books? "So and so studied at the Grace Bible Cemetery" (seminary) -- oh really, how is that a qualification? There isn't a "get-to-know-God program" at the cemetery.
Christianity is like a book club. Everyone gets together to discuss the book that they all have in common, but very few (if any) of them have any clue what that book is actually about, and nearly all of them do not know the author/subject of that book. Those book club members who have read other books (besides scripture) on this same subject matter (books which were written by people who likewise did not know the author/subject of the scriptures they initially read), are elevated into positions of leadership. Because, having read more books than the rest of us, they of course have become greater experts (on someone/something they have never experienced themselves). In fact, just through the reading of all those books, they have somehow (magically?) developed a relationship with someone they've never even met. It's all too amazing for the real world. It must be a fairy tale.
If all we have is a learning that comes through book-reading, our knowledge is going to be limited. We know
about. We have read
about. We have learned
about. But we still have yet to experience. I'm certain there are people in the world who find a bicycle on the side of the road (or in their parents' garage), pick it up without any of the historical or comprehensive knowledge on how bicycles came to be, how they are designed, etc, and learn to ride it all by themselves, on their own, with no outside help. Sure, they lack a lot of really cool information on derailleur design or the history of inflatable rubber tires, but they are "out there doing it." And I've got to respect them for that.
Yes, I know a few people like this (who learned to ride, even before they had any book knowledge).
And no, there still doesn't seem to be a category on this forum specifically for talking about riding bicycles. And I brought up this point over one day ago -- how much time do people need? (just kidding)
If the topical categories on this forum accurately reflect the topics covered in the book that goes by the same name (Yada Yahweh) -- of which I can't be certain because I haven't yet read the whole book -- then the author(s) who set up the forum in the first place are to thank for that ommission (of no category in which to discuss riding bicycles), unless the book itself has no such chapter (or topic within it). Of course, if the book itself has no such chapter (or topic) having to do with an actual relationship with Yahuwah, then we have a bigger problem than a forum design oversight.
But since the forum is "user-driven," what I see being discussed on the forum is probably an accurate indication of what people themselves want to discuss. And if enough people had been talking about "Yada Yahweh, the relationship not the book," then the forum probably would have been updated to include the appropriate sub-forum for that discussion.
Whichever may be the case, I can't get around the simple fact that everyone here is
apparently only interested in talking about bicycle design, the future of bicycles, Yahuwah's disdain for skateboards, bicycles in world news, and which books written about bicycles are the most authoritative, accurate, or properly translated. Which is disappointing, because I would have thought "relationally knowing" might have something to do with an actual relationship. (sarcasm)
Of course, all those other bicycle-related topics have their own relative merits and
should be included in a comprehensive discussion on "all things Yahuwah" or "all things Scripture." But if I had to choose just one single topic, and was banned from discussing the others, I certainly wouldn't choose world news (which has the most posts).
Anyway, at this point I'm probably just talking to myself.
Q
Edit: I just realized that Yada does participate on this forum -- I think his handle is "Yada" and he has the power to change things... So, with this new realization (if I'm wrong, somebody please correct me!):
Administrator: please consider what I have written in this and previous posts (in this same thread). Between the four posts combined (#77, #85, #86, and this one, #87), I've made my case for a new topic / sub-forum.
Edited by user Saturday, September 18, 2010 6:55:58 PM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified