Are You Sure?

It is said that knowledge is power. I have long felt that humanity is a species of control freaks. In my observation, most human problems reflect some kind of struggle for power and control. If there is “original sin,” it may be the obsession over control.

In the Genesis account, Adam and Eve were tempted to eat the fruit of the tree of (wait for it) the knowledge of good and evil. “If I know the difference, then I can be in control of my destiny!” (which would make me “like God,” according to the tempter ~ Genesis 3:5).

Ancient cultures believed that to know the name of a person or a phenomenon was to have power over him/her/it. When Jesus confronted the possessed man in Gerasa (Mark 5), he asked the man—or more to the point, he asked the spirit that possessed the man, “What is your name?”

If a physician knows the name of a disease or condition, she has the ability (power) to treat it. There is a modicum of control over the malady.

All of the above is why precise terminology is so important in technological or theoretical disciplines. “Hand me that ‘whatchamacallit’” isn’t enough.

And yet, a growing population lives in distrust and denial of science or other established sources of knowledge or expertise if those sources contradict the foundations of its ideology and core values. So, we have flat-earthers and anti-vaxxers and multiple theories of economics and politics—and more than 41,000 Christian denominations globally. And each population claims its own knowledge as authoritative if not absolute.

There are more than 450 English translations of the Bible (Judeo/Christian Scriptures), around 50 still in print. There are thousands of ancient fragments, scrolls, and codices of the Bible in the original languages, some of the Dead Sea Scrolls date as far back as the third century BCE and some tiny silver scrolls containing fragments of priestly blessings from Numbers date to the sixth century BCE (we have none of the original manuscripts). And thus far we’ve considered only the English versions.

The full Bible has been translated into over 775 languages, the New Testament into over 1,798 languages, and portions of the Bible into another 1,433 languages, meaning at least some parts of the Bible have been translated into over 4,000 languages. And here’s the thing: none of them are identical! So, which one is the inspired Word of God?

And so, 41,000 Christian denominations exist because humans can’t agree on what is or isn’t known about the Bible. And each of those denominations claims a unique (and accurate) knowledge of the content and intentions of the Bible.

But it’s not knowledge that is the problem; it’s the way knowledge is assumed and then is used and abused and manipulated and even denied that sucks humanity into the self-destructive maelstrom, because control-freak humanity is not concerned about knowledge; it’s concerned about being right. Because being wrong is the unpardonable sin. An even bigger unpardonable sin is disagreeing with me because if you disagree with me (therefore, by definition, you’re wrong) you’ll go to hell. And I can’t be wrong, because if I’m wrong I’ll go to hell. It’s back to that temptation to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But knowledge is not the goal; knowledge is the tool for obtaining the goal of controlling one’s eternal destiny.

Science is the bogeyman in all this, because science doesn’t agree with some specific sectarian constructions of knowledge. Evidence, schmevidence! The Bible says…

Really? Which one?

In my observation, science does not contradict Scripture. Some scientists may contradict Scripture, just as biblical literalists contradict science; however, the contradictions usually are based on erroneous assumptions of each discipline for the other.

Bottom line: knowledge may be unattainable by humans if knowledge is understood as absolute fact or truth. Indeed, I have said many times that, while I believe in absolute truth, I don’t believe any human or any group of humans is capable of comprehending truth absolutely. And I distinguish between fact and truth. Truth is not dependent on facticity.

Whether the focus is science or religion, what is casually called fact, truth, or knowledge is ultimately a set of conclusions drawn from available evidence. And integrity demands that every piece of evidence be examined and evaluated and peer tested; and if new evidence becomes available, integrity demands that we examine, evaluate, and peer test it and if so indicated, adapt our conclusions accordingly.

The process just described is the essence of faith. And here’s the thing so many try to avoid: faith admits the possibility that I may be wrong. From that perspective, the opposite of faith is not doubt but knowledge (which I maintain is not humanly attainable in any pure or absolute form.)

But both science and religious faith have a remedy for the unlikely (sic) event that we are wrong. Science calls it research and testing. Religious faith calls it repentance, which means simply to turn or to change the way you think (linguistically it has no necessary association with remorse or groveling). Both are ongoing processes administered by fallible humans.

That’s the way it looks through the Flawed Glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim