The Bible Is a Parable: A Middle Ground Between Science and Religion
advantage can be seen to accrue to those who have that responsibility, then an additional
motive to support -things as they are | can be suspected.
As a faction grows, disagreements widen to the point of eventual separation into two
or more competing and antagonistic parts, each contending that their view is superior to
the others, or all others. Systems of belief by their nature don‘t seem to have the ability of
self-correction for reasons, some of which are listed above. This ability, while in theory
might be seen to enhance their viability and survivability, for obvious reasons breeds
Because the authority of those in charge, having been agreed upon by most, comes
from an entity so far superior to any and all of its members as to vitiate easy argument
challenging its correctness on any subject, any suggestion of change of any kind could be
characterized as questioning that higher authority directly.
But interpretations are human attempts at understanding experiences, messages,
visions, dreams, etc. put forth in a manner that might suggest differing understandings,
and possible alternate routes to that ultimate authority. But as the generations pass,
objection to change increases as the understanding of an original interpretation becomes
confused with eternal unchanging truth.
Experience teaches that systems which become static tend to die out with time, being
replaced by newer ones whose answers seem more complete, but again, only for a time.
Then these in turn are replaced by others, all of whom may be seen to have marched
down a similar road of stultifying changelessness. But change, no matter how
dogmatically it is resisted, does come, and history, including prehistory, is strewn with
the remains of belief systems that could not or would not accommodate themselves to an
ever-changing understanding of that sought-after Presence.
For all, who have felt responsible for their version of truth, resist the humbling
perception that all which has come to Man has come through the imperfect agency of
Man‘s intellect where misinterpretation can creep into even the primary experience.
Regarding the beginning of an understanding toward a perception of an -Ultimate
Authority, | in a previous chapter it was stated: -Against all the understanding derived
from his senses that should convince Man of his singularity, somehow he could never
feel totally alone in the world. Even understanding his felt need to believe in something
more able to control the raw forces of his environment, there were still times when he felt
led by something more than his own experience. Religion provided a form in which to
enclose that something. |
But the mistake, I feel, has come in the misunderstanding that all necessary
knowledge has come in one concise package.
Science, even though it has at its core an axiomatic belief that everything else is built
upon, is a different source of inquiry. Its propositions are frameworks that are meant to be
filled out with new discoveries.
They don‘t declare them to be true, only testable. It seeks to adjust to new
information and therefore its propositions are changeable, but as indicated in a fo llowing
set of paragraphs: -Still, because of the uncertainty within these testings, it [science]
offers no firm ground to build a system of belief upon, to explain those verities that seem
not to have changed over the ages, as well as the questions that s till have no apparent