Scientific Reasons to Trust the Bible
In the past forty years or so, a new, more aggressive group has taken the reins of the atheist philosophy. This group have been called "new atheists", "strong atheists", etc., by the proponents of such heavily propagandized ideologies; and "militant atheists" and "extremists" by their opposition; which tends to range from those they call "old" or "weak" atheists, to unitarian universalists, to (especially,) Christians. It has only been in the past five years that these new atheists have begun to target Muslims as well; and, mainly, that's because of the amount of atheists who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, and the horrors of 9/11.
Scientific Reasons to Trust the Bible
However, many illogical, irrational, and abusive claims, of a propagandist nature, have been levied against Christians, Christianity, and the Bible (while one will note, by the way, that atheists rarely touch on the branch of Jews or Judaism; partially because many Jews have chosen to reject Judaism, and partially because they want to tread lightly straight through that minefield... Perhaps unfairly, many atheists are compared by perhaps-misinformed Christians to Nazis; most specifically, Adolf Hitler, whose religious beliefs are, somehow, still in dispute). It is my contention that many of these misinformed, deceptively dishonest, and downright monstrous accusations arise from misunderstandings about the Bible, God, Christ, Christianity, and Christians.
Hence, I herein attempt to address the most basic and leading matters, by which any and every religion may be judged... Even the alleged "non-religion" of atheism; which, according to many religious experts, could contain Confucianism and Buddhism as well.
Essentially, I intend to help the reader/viewer coming the topic from a scientific perspective. It is customary that, if something can be proven, it can be best proven scientifically. Indeed, it appears that empiricism - the foundation of true science, - and logic are the foundations of sound religious doctrine itself: concepts which, in most respects, are feasible. Hence, a brief introduction to the scientific recipe is in order...
Mainly, the scientific recipe is composed of six main parts:
~Make an observation,
~Ask a question,
~Construct a hypothesis,
~Do study &/ accomplish an experiment,
~Analyze data and draw a conclusion, and
~Report results (mainly, either or not your hypothesis was correct).
Furthermore, when it comes to study and experimentation, there are four standards that universally apply:
~All research, and recording of experiments, must be as strict as possible.
~All research, and experimentation, must be conducted as objectively as possible.
~When hypotheses are employed, all study and experimentation must be conducted with a healthy admission of skepticism.
~And, when conducting study or experimentation, the researcher/experimentor must be as open-minded as possible.
It's no secret that I am a nondenominational Christian. The quiz, still remains: can the accuracy, objectivity, skepticality and open-minded record of the Bible be shown with evidence of any kind?
Let's start with the scientific method.
~Make an observation.
Everybody makes observations. One could argue that the presume for having any of our five senses, is to make observations. Indeed, to me, the fact that we are capable of interacting with an outer cosmos is a monumental testament that there is some kind of deity (however, mostly, my perspectives will not be included in this discussion). The Bible is no exception: in fact, one could claim that the entire Bible is based on observations, as are any religious works. However, a excellent aspect of the Bible is the fact that, when compared to other religious tomes - and, even today, the occasional secular writing, - the tone of the entire compendium is one of unbiased, and even controversial material. Certainly, were it the work of a grand, deceptive conspiracy - or even a range of smaller conspiracies, - one would expect the work to be either improved over time - to keep up with human observations in the future, - or at least more favorable toward the people to whom the books were addressed. Furthermore, when any evidence has been found, it has unanimously supported the Biblical account. One would further expect inaccurate observations, or outright lies, to be disproven (and, if there is an alternative to the hypothesis, make no mistake: if it is contrary to the hypothesis, proving the alternative effectively disproves the hypothesis itself) by newly-discovered evidence. either the writers of the Bible were the most intelligent con-men on Earth; they were the least intelligent, and luckiest, men on Earth; or, they de facto recorded and commented on observed events. Perhaps the most convincing evidence of it's purity, is the fact that the contemporaries of the time - who would have been appalled at the descriptions of their ancestors, and would have lived when the proof was freshest and most abundant, - did not abandon these works. Why else would a mob of rebels allow one highly small minority to rule them, and keep damning documentation as their sacred texts?
~Ask a question.
Obviously, none of us were born with perfect clarity, or omniscience. There are as many questions as there are things that exist in the universe, on every level. The next quiz, would not be either or not the Bible answers questions; every book is written to write back some questions... Even hypothetical ones, which are answered in works of fiction. The real question, here, is either or not the questions are truly relevant; because the relevance of a quiz, will commonly indicate the utility of the answer. Since time immemorial, the Bible answers some of the most pressing questions that have haunted all men... Such as, "Why do we die", "What do we have to look send to", "What is right and wrong", "Is there life after death", etc. Clearly, the Bible is most de facto a book that answers the most pressing questions in our lives... And, it even answers questions that are practical; such as the quiz, of the easiest way to raise livestock, catch and kill wild game (including fish and birds), and deterrent medicine that our modern version has just recently realized.
~Construct a hypothesis.
The hypothesis is the presume we question: to get the answer, we exhaust all our intellect... Both personal, and public. Of course, wherever there is a question, there must be a hypothesis; otherwise, we inquisitive humans will incessantly and obssessively gad about, still searching for an write back to give. Even so, we can't remain lethargically satisfied with a mere "guesstimate": if the write back is wrong, not only will we look foolish, but we might inadvertently cause an error of epic proportions... Certainly, should such an event occur, tragic ones. For most questions, to which the write back can be known, time, trial, and error are the best ways to solve the puzzle. The Bible answers with many hypotheses, none of which have been conclusively or respectably disproven; and, in the provable hypotheses offered, the Bible has been proven true time and again.
~Do study &/ accomplish an experiment.
And here, we come to the major issue at-hand. The Bible has been tested, time and time again; and, every time the testable aspects of the Bible have been researched and experimented, the ensue reflects the statement of Dr. Donald DeYoung (Ph.D., physics): "When the Bible touches upon matters of science, it is entirely accurate." The Holy Bible: often disputed, never refuted; often questioned, never disproven; often calumniated, never logically deconstructed.
~Analyze data and draw a conclusion.
In one form or another, throughout history, the scientific recipe has been employed. It is so easy to use, even children can often be caught employing it. How many children do you know; who, at any age, can outline out the solutions to the cases in the "Encyclopedia Brown" series? Do you see my point? The popular, but scholastically dishonest opinion that has been propagated in educational institutions, is that the Bible is a contradictory work, written by a bunch of Bronze-age idiots. In fact, Bronze-age mathematics, which were used to create the pyramids, form the foundation of modern mathematics. Further, in a simplistic form, one could make the strict statement that the Bible illuminates advanced scientific principles; such as the principles of Relativity, innumerable amounts of stars in the "sky", and even hydrological cycles and formations. In fact, evidence suggests that the Egyptians and Babylonians were both nearly equally skilled in advanced methods of surgery. One must then quiz, either the data - gathered when the evidence was fresher and more abundant, - isn't Perhaps best than the data we have today... Thousands of years later, after all manner of geological and meteorological disasters... Not to mention the nihilistic forces of human invasion and war.
~Report results (mainly, either or not your hypothesis was correct).
And, with this, we come to the windup of that quantum of our dissertation, which pertains to the scientific method. Obviously, these results were all written down in the Bible. Some might ask the quiz, of either or not safe bet events of the Bible, imitated today, would yield the same results. However, the fact remains that these results were dependent upon the God of Israel directly intervening. Even so, there's no presume to believe that these things didn't happen.
Now, we get to the real issue: either or not the four standards of experimentation, or research, were truly met...
~All research, and recording of experiments, must be as strict as possible.
There is de facto no indication of deception; and, were there any inaccuracy in the Biblical record, one would expect revision. Hence, we are led to the windup that the study and experimentation was recorded honestly. Furthermore, in regard to those aspects of the Biblical record that can be proven, we see that many indications of accuracy have been proven; hence, the evidence for a quantum of lucidity in the record. Finally, we see that it is apparent that everyone, from Moses' generation of Israelites, to the Christians of John's era, believed the same ideas, based on a large and sudden record of eyewitnesses and references to extrabiblical works of the time... Hence, as any competent psychologist will tell you, we find no presume to presume psychological or psychiatric illness. Therefore, the data contained therein is accurate.
~All research, and experimentation, must be conducted as objectively as possible.
In the Bible, we have many records that would embarrass current and hereafter generations of Israelites, Jews, and Chrsitians. Were the Biblical record subjective, we would expect to find a redaction of these obnoxious passages. Instead, these obnoxious passages are nowhere redacted; and, in fact, many of them are a major tenet of Jewish and Christian faith... For example: Jonah was inside a giant fish, because he was disobedient to God; and Gideon was a cowardly skeptic. Were there even a hint of subjectivity, one would expect Moses to play himself up more, and even portray the Israelites in a more favorable light. Hence, we find that there is no evidence of subjectivity; rather, there is evidence of objectivity in the record.
~When hypotheses are employed, all study and experimentation must be conducted with a healthy admission of skepticism.
As earlier noted, many of the Biblical heroes were men who had a great deal of skepticism. To be counted among the faithful, they even had to defy their own skepticism. Still, it was all the time there; hence, skepticism was employed in each and every story.
~And, when conducting study or experimentation, the researcher/experimentor must be as open-minded as possible.
Finally, the Bible does address both specific claims, and normal ideas, in an open-minded manner. In Acts 17, when speaking to the philosophers of Athens, Paul mentions that these other gods and goddesses are not pure imagination: rather, the quiz, was either these depictions were rational and accurate. Furthermore, many of the heroes of the Bible came from, and were surrounded by, both pagan and atheist influences: Abraham was a Chaldean polytheist, until God called him; Gideon's father was apparently forced to worship Ba'al; the Israelites were freed from slavery in Egypt, where evidence suggests they would have worshipped Egyptian deities (most notably, Apophis, who was the god of cattle and herdsmen); being an Egyptian prince, Moses would have been raised to worship Ra, Isis and Osiris, among others; and many of the Jewish kings were raised amidst paganism in Judah and Israel, as were many of the prophets. Perhaps the best evidence of an open mind was Paul's open-minded approach: "There is now no longer rich or poor, male or female, Jew or Gentile, free or bond; but all are one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28)
Hence, the Holy Bible meets every scientific thorough necessary to be thought about trustworthy and accurate. Any other portrayal is either misinformed, deceptively exclusive of necessary facts, or useless propaganda. Were I you, if I came to the same conclusion, I would no longer waste my time with any of it.
share the Facebook Twitter Like Tweet. Can you share had me going Scientific Reasons to Trust the Bible.
No comments:
Post a Comment