Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Concepts cast in rigid stone, holdover of a bygone era?

If God had given Moses the Ten Commandments in today's age, "flexible Wikipedia" might have been used, rather than "rigid stone."

"Cast in stone" is a phrase often used. One can say, "these plans are cast in stone."

Rigidity versus flexibility.

For some reason a lot of people think that God always goes the rigid route. Isn't that just another assumption?

Why wouldn't God use something like Wikipedia? Something which can be altered and updated constantly? Even altered by it's users? Like in a democracy.

Is that too flexible?

Framers of the US Constitution figured out a profound compromise between stability and flexibility. It's hard to amend the constitution, but it isn't impossible. There's even a system of courts to handle interpretation. Quite an ingenious concept. It's not mob rule, but it's not a total lock box either.

Maybe God wasn't quite as clever as the framers of our constitution? Back in the time of Moses, they hadn't even invented paper yet. Stone is a cumbersome medium of communication.

Is God dumb, or is it just people's assumption that a god would always have to write in stone?

People's thinking must be some holdover from the "Stone Age."

Then there's the concept of a law written on someone's heart. That goes way back also. An ancient idea of flexibility?

What is the heart? Some fuzzy concept? We know about the squishy heart that pumps blood.

What about the brain? Is that squishy also? A friend of mine once said he worked for a bureaucratic organization where the heads of the board of directors were filled with solid concrete.

More stuff to think about. If your brain isn't solidified yet.

No comments: