ATIM Newsletter

Dr. Wysong's Blog -
HOLY BOOKS AND RELIGION VS GOD AND CONSCIENCE
PART II

On its face, the claim that the creator of the universe wrote a book is breathtaking. If it’s true, then every person on Earth should have such a book and be studying and obeying its every letter. If its not, then a lot of people are wasting a lot of time and committing a false accusation by attributing something to the creator that does not belong.

Many people, wanting the simplicity of written instructions about salvation, or simply acceding to religious ambiance, credentials, tradition, or what they were taught as a child are predisposed to believing in the Bible (or other holy books), and will take any kernel of proof as sufficient. Most cannot understand much of what they read, but read as a ritual, much like spinning a prayer wheel, counting beads, or chanting in Latin. That which cannot be understood is simply skimmed over as a divine mystery to be revealed in His due time. For these who have permitted such faith to stop the critical thinking process, reason is perverted to chase belief.

Others are more skeptical and feel a sense of duty to truth (God)—wherever that may lead. For example, Bible critics argue that it is impossible and hubristic to parse holy book writers who existed thousands of years ago in their own parlance. For example, since the Old Testament was written primarily in Hebrew that had no punctuation, interpretation is particularly difficult. In the sentence, “Woman without her man is nothing.” placing commas after woman, and her, results in an exactly opposite meaning than using no commas at all. In the first instance man is preeminent, in the second, woman is. A four line poem can be the subject of endless interpretations. How then can the 80,000 verses and 180,000 translated words in the 40 different English, and 1,400 non-English versions of the Bible not be? Varying words and interpretations are not the same as one axiomatic truth (God).

Further, there was no “Bible” deposited by God into the hands of Adam and Eve. The Bible is not really a cohesive “book,” but rather an assemblage of song stories passed down for generations. This creates the problem of oral transmission and memory prior to inditement. A sentence whispered through a class room will end up entirely unlike its beginning. As for memory, people have a hard enough time remembering what was said last week, much less hundreds or thousands of years ago. If you say that any problem with transmission and translation has been caused by religions and not the Bible itself, and that God carefully guided the integrity of the book, then you are left trying to explain the hundreds of different translations and the thousands of different religions that attempt to follow the same book. Each of these religions is atheistic with respect to all the others, i.e., they don’t believe in the God of other religions.

Various methods have been used to prove that the Bible was authored by God. Let’s briefly touch on each of these:

(1) Prophesy is commonly considered to be supernatural. Bible texts are cited that putatively have predicted some historical event. But retrospection (retrodiction) is uncertain because it permits orienting ancient words to fit history. Attempts to use the Bible in real time for prospective predictions, such as the thousands of attempts at predicting the end of the world, always fail. However, even if correct prophesies could be found in the Bible, the ability to foretell the future is not really a supernatural feat, since quantum reality is actually timeless, and people who claim no inspiration from God have been able to foretell the future. (See Solving The Big Questions As If Thinking Matters [BQ] for an explanation of how this can happen and has.)

(2) Some say that the Bible is prescient. But critics point out that it has provided no scientific revelation and instead is responsible for retarding knowledge and human welfare. Examples given would be such ideas as a flat and geocentric Earth that sets nested in an endless ocean, the doctrine that celestial bodies have to move in perfect circles, that it is heresy not to believe God hung the stars out in the heavens each evening, witchcraft, proscribing hygiene and surgery, blaming disease on the devil and sin, and condemning flight and outer space travel. Science does not fare well using prior religious commitment. Granted these ideas may have been due to wrong interpretations—religion speak rather than Bible speak—but then the question arises as to why interpretations have to enter the picture at all?

People of good heart always have and always will interpret the written word differently. That’s because words themselves are a human construct that artificially define pieces of reality. Since reality takes on the hues of each person’s life experience, words will always mean different things to different people. By its very nature, language is inexact and thus the use of it to define absolute truth (God) is doomed.

(3) For every claim that a mathematical code has been found in the Bible that is consistent, not explained by chance, or that cannot be found in other books, there are proofs to the contrary.

(4) It is commonly held that the Bible is necessary for man to be ethical, that it forms the basis for social order and the Constitution, and that it should be taught in schools to train children. Critics, however, point out that the book advocates genocide by (not of) the Jews, their intolerance and supremacism (they write a book that coincidentally claims they are God’s chosen race), and established laws such as killing people for picking up sticks on the Sabbath, stoning to death sons who disobey their parents, and penalties for not trimming beards properly…to name only a few.

(5) The Bible’s claim about itself that it is the word of God cannot really be considered a proof because any author of any book could make such a claim. For example the Koran makes the claim. If God is author of conflicting books, then he is contradictory, which is an oxymoron. This self attribution to inspiration also begs the question in that you cannot accept as a major premise the conclusion you need to prove.

(6) Testimony from experts is insufficient proof because experts can be found on every side of any argument.

Bible apologists and professional defenders of the faith have counterarguments to all of the above, critics do too. On and on the debate goes. One’s whole life can easily be consumed by trying to sort through this.

The point I wish to make here is that all this religious debate is so unnecessary. If one is brave enough to set aside the stock premise that a book is necessary to prove God and learn ethics, a whole new way to look at truth is opened up. And isn’t truth-reality-God, what we all should be looking for?

Although people commonly think that the only way to deal with the big questions is to become intellectually anesthetized with faith, in fact, no faith is required at all. Faith only need enter the picture when people start making claims about things they really have no idea about, such as what God says, what his personality is like, what he wants or doesn’t want, and how he is or isn’t guiding lives.

Our existence and the physical world provide unequivocal evidence of a higher intelligence. Reality/truth (the clear fingerprint of a creator) requires not faith, is not ambiguous, needs no translation, never contradicts itself, provides perfect prophesy (e.g., 2 plus 2 always equals 4, if I release something it will fall, etc.), is ethical, and is there for anyone on Earth to plainly see and experience. It needs no printing presses, clergy, scribes, polyglots, or interpreters. Nothing can provide a more clear, precise, provable, and incontrovertible definition of God than reality.