Unexplainable: Yet Another Rant

I just got done reading a religious argument in my church pamphlet, the premise of which dealt with science vs. religion. In my opinion science is mans way to describe and understand his surroundings. The world is rationalized through logic and reason and then categorized and explained through this invention of man. What if the mind and all that man has created with it became the standard of measuring reality? There is so much that the mind cannot even understand and comprehend, what would be done with those unexplained or spiritual things?

Problems arise when people allow the mind to become the soul determining factor in measuring reality. The first and most obvious problem is that man does not and cannot understand everything. Our knowledge grows exponentially but there is always more and eventually we will reach a limit to things that can be explained through science. Theories and hypothesis are starts but for those that cannot be physically proven there is no hope. The mind works through logic but to explain things of God’s nature, things that surpass mans realities and abilities logic fails man. To understand God only faith and trust can provide any way to measure his reality. Allowing the mind to become the only measure of reality leaves no room for the unexplainable thus any room for God.

Logic and reason are powerful tools of the mind but they can only explain so much. What cannot be experienced by the senses cannot be explained by the mind. Logic can explain the invisible but only as well as it can reason for its existence. Logic allows man to explain the wind but the wind can be felt and its effects seen. The wind may be invisible but it is explainable. How can the mind reason God? God cannot be seen or felt; tasted or smelled, not even heard how then can the mind use reason to rationalize God. Only through faith something independent of the minds logic and reason; something that actually goes against the basis of understanding allows man to understand God.

The standard of measuring reality cannot be only the mind. There is too much that is missed and left out that the mind cannot grasp. It would be a mistake to base all of life in the logic and reason of the mind. The mind is not the soul answer to explaining reality.

Balance is the answer to trying to understand reality. Give material to science and the immaterial to religion. Create a world where the two can coexist harmoniously and then all things can be explained. If both the mind and faith can share in explaining reality more will be explained and less would be left to question if there was only one.

---

I felt compelled to post this simply because I was already working on track. Anyways just added this so please post and comment.

---

Is the Bible trustworthy? This is the question that William C. Placher addresses in “Is the bible true?” The goal of his essay is to say that the Bible is true without appealing to the fundamentalist or moderate side of the debate. Placher goes about this by providing examples, from other literary works, explaining misinterpretation in translation, and reasons that people do trust in the Bible.

Placher begins by providing us with two secondary truths that must be accepted if we accept that the bible is true. The first point is; if the Bible is true then what it means is true, and what it means is shaped by the genres in which it is written. The next secondary truth is; if we trust the Bible as truth then we must accept it as a guide for our lives and for our faith. As a guide for our lives it should shape our understanding of the world and our role in the world.

To understand the Bible it must be viewed as it was intended to be. To do this we must know and understand the genre in which it was written. All books are written in a genre that is specific to them if they are viewed out of context than the meaning and therefore the truth will be lost to that book. The other issue that Placher ties in with genre is the culture barrier. Different cultures not only have different languages but also have different concepts of social conditions. The difference in language obviously is affected during the translation. The different social views provide their own problems. The example Placher provides is that of slavery. He explains that the Jewish idea of slavery was that of an indentured servant; a temporary thing. The colonial American view and therefore most Americans view is that of a permanent ownership of one person over another. This misunderstanding can greatly affect how someone reads and interprets the Bible.

Placher finishes by providing reasons for putting trust into the Bible. First it is another test of faith. Also it consistently makes sense of the world. The most important reason for trusting the Bible is that Christians put their trust in God the source of the Bible.
To truly trust in the Bible a Christian must know the Bible. Christians must fully immerse themselves in the Bible knowing its language and its world. One verse should remind the reader of another and support it, so that there is always something to reference to. The problem with most people who read the Bible today is that they don’t truly know the Bible. Very few people put out the time and effort that it takes to understand such a complex book.
I agree that Knowing and trusting the Bible is a very difficult thing. No matter how much devotion a person could have to God to fully know the Bible seems to be an insurmountable goal. I believe this is why trust is so important with the Bible. Since very few If anyone has ever truly understood everything in the Bible, faith and trust become so important. This faith is what God appreciates and desires most.

Placher provides us with many reasons why people have trouble putting their trust in the Bible. For the most part these reasons are merely misunderstandings of the reading. So to understand and put trust in the Bible the reader must read deeper into the text and find the context and genre in which it is written. Plachers examples were very clear in explaining the reasons why people find it difficult to understand and trust the Bible.

I found Plachers reasoning in social and cultural misunderstandings the most helpful. When he explains the differences of the American view of slavery and the Jewish view of slavery he provided me with a difficulty that I had never heard before. The fact that there is not only the language barrier but also a cultural barrier to create misunderstandings provides even more problems in understanding the Bible.

I felt lead to believe there was more than just the two secondary claims. I feel that there is more to the arguments than is explained in this paper and that he just left the rest out. I feel that he did not provide a counter side to his opinions so the paper is somewhat one sided. Over all I like Plachers paper. He provided well thought out and helpful examples to support his thesis over a difficult subject.