The Bible Is a Parable: A Middle Ground Between Science and Religion
When a man becomes a father, he gives of his genetic essence, a portion of all that he
is, to the child, through the mother. But the mother, the carrier of the burden, has
something to say about that which she carries. Being a chromosomal equal in the process
of conception, according to science, a c hild she conceives will carry only half of the sum
of what makes up the father. Many of the traits that make the father what he is will not be
expressed in the child. A son, being a sexual replication of the father, of necessity tends
to express more of the masculine traits that the father has offered than will a girl-child,
but there are exceptions.
So, what does this have to do with who Jesus is? Again, according to biblical sources
(or perhaps in part extra-biblical) his mother, Mary, had an unusual experience. She
testified to a visitation upon her body of an essence from God. She, a professed virginal
woman, betrothed to a man called Joseph, then carried to term a male-child, whom -she
had been instructed to name Jesus. |
Logic would strongly suggest that if God decided to appear in human form, that He
would have allowed Himself to abide by the genetic rules that He had set up for all of
mankind, even for all of life. Under those circumstances, the essence of God would have
been divided with the genetic essence of a woman. This female genetic essence would
have carried some unexpressed flavor of her father and to a lesser extent all the male line
of her father‘s family.
For God to have pushed this aside as an unimportant appendage in this special
situation argues against the special creation that the Bible tells us that we are in His eyes,
that allocated to us the power of choice between good and evil, right or wrong, belief and
If God had left a provable trace of his divinity within the re-creation of himself in
Jesus, the game would have been over. The first to discover that provable trace could
have argued that we had never had a choice, that God had only given the appearance of
granting this to us.
Once predestination could become a provable fact, the whole structure of history
would lurch in another and less predictable direction. Someone would be able to crow
that we really had always been the automatons that they‘d been trying to tell us that we
were. And instead of a special creation we would have had to see ourselves as only
another variation within the rest of the nature that God had created.
In science, it only takes one exception to disprove a rule. Then the rule must be
adjusted to accommodate this exception. And once the theory of c hoice is qualified, it can
no longer be called choice, it must be called something else to recognize this exception.
If this logic holds, then it tells us that Jesus can be seen to be a diminutive portion of
the essence of God, who must have, by genetic description, shared His essence with the
inherited traits of Man. Thus Jesus can be described as having less than the full essence
that is God.
But, one might argue, since the decision at the Council of N icaea in AD325, the
standard Christian belief states that God is a Triune God, made of three co-equal parts.
So isn‘t the assertion of an unequal Trinity a blasphemy against Christian belief?
Some would argue so, but I will offer a counter-argument.
The very existence of the Godly Trinity, as well as the eq uality of its parts had been a
hotly debated proposition over a long period of time in the early centuries of the Christian