“Beaten by an Atheist; healed by a Muse”; The background of the conversation

Posted: September 25, 2010 in Me and God, Me and people, Science, The Bible

This is a continuation from “Beaten by an Atheist; healed by a Muse”;

In the previous entry, I explained how I contributed with an idea in this Christian blog -which ended up in a place a I had not predicted.  Many topics were discussed and sub-discussed in multiple sub-threats. However, the dominant issue seemed to be that the original proponent of the question about surrendering, had a major problem with me using the phrase “the Bible is much more scientifically and historically accurate than any other sacred book”. In his opinion, since the Bible mentions miracles –which by definition are events that cannot be explained by science,  therefore, it is intellectually dishonest to call the Bible scientifically accurate. Interesting argument.

Just for the sake of background,

The back-and-forth of arguments. At first, I wasn’t sure if I should go down the route of arguing points about the validity of the Bible, the existence of God etc; it could be one of those meaningless discussions that The Bible warns us against. After all, if this guy is a critic wanting to just argue, what good would come out of it if we just argue? However, he seemed to want specific answers and, in my mind, it could have been one of those “be ready to present defense for the faith that is in you” type of moments. So, I answered as best as I could based on the things that I have learned and studied for the last 10 years and with the time I had available.

How do you know what you know? Another issue that comes into place here is that most people out there are not scientists or historians or constitutionalists or any other type of high degree of education (or first hand witness) on the great matters of life. Therefore, most of what most people know comes from other sources who heard it from other sources and so on. Most of us are in a very low  level of the ‘knowledge pyramid’. Because of this, we also take into consideration potential ‘contamination’ of the information with political convenience, special interests or biased elements which makes the information all the more potentially unreliable. Along with this, it is not surprise that a person would cite, accept and submit to sources of information that are agreeable to his/her personal affiliation or preferences

About me and my position (previously): The way I saw this argument at the point of the interchange is that based on what I had seen and heard and read through the years from several sources, including a wide variety of titles and degrees (PHD’s scientists, geologist, doctors, historians and theologians), there were a series of potential evidences that brought me to the conclusion that The Bible was inspired by God. It is not that any of these ‘evidences’ were 100% scientifically proven; as some of them could be explained as coincidences. But, so many coincidences leading to the one conclusion?; could they be coincidences? It is not either that these ‘evidences’ were unique to the Bible or to Christianity. As I have come to learn, some of these evidences or similar types are also used to support other beliefs, sacred books or just secular concepts in general; does that mean their book or god is also real? Does that mean that my explanations are less valid? May be, may be not.

About the person I was debating: As I mentioned, this all happened on a Christian blog. Who I initially thought to be just someone looking for answers, I discovered to be someone who I would describe as a seemingly highly educated scientist who was well versed on a variety of arguments against Christianity and the existence of God. Obviously he knew what he was talking about –perhaps his distance to the sources of knowledge was shorter than mine (as described in the previous paragraph). Nevertheless, the potential biases and preferences for the sources of information that he agreed with were evident as expected. Although I learned much from him, I still take his opinion carefully and filter it through similar and opposite arguments I have heard from equally or more qualified representatives of science and academic disciplines

Since I m already pass 1 page.. again, this story will continue and conclude in a next blog entry: where the conversation went from here and what I have come to conclude…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s