She literally exploded

Its incredible for us Brits to read that Senator McCain’s chances of being elected to the most powerful position in the world is enhanced by taking on to his ticket a woman who believes that the universe was created in six days four thousand and some years ago.

The natural world – I assume God’s creation – screams that this cannot be true. All of our knowledge converges onto creation being the work of aeons, the unfolding of on-going processes that started billions of years ago and is unfolding still. Whether it be cosmology, geology, cell biology or upteen other ‘ologies’ the evidence is consistent and overpowering.

The answer I hear so often from the creationists is that all these ‘ologies’ are science, and science is to be distrusted. Well, that’s an easy answer: give the disease a name and you’ve cured it. Science is the process of codifying the facts: the process doesn’t alter the facts, only organise them in a way that we can understand them and relate one to another. You might as well say that when your local supermarket arranges its products in some sensible order on its shelves - fruit with fruit: dairy products with dairy products - they destroy both its flavour and it nutritional value.

Its not so much that Sarah Palin can believe against all the facts in a Mesopotamian creation myth, that’s silly but harmless, but that the fact that she does so points to the fact that she might reject the facts in favour of an ingrained belief set when, as the man said, she’s a heart-beat away from the Presidency.

I am more than willing to accept the bible as a holy book but not that its history. It is the basis of a philosophy that has seen the West through two millennia and it’s clear that the loss of this underlying morality has not improved matters.

To those who understand it as entirely factual and the font of our morality I ask for an explanation of the story in Judges 19 where a bunch of citizens found that one of their number had taken in a homosexual they would have their way with him but the God fearing master of the house offered them his virgin daughter in his place.

But they thought that distasteful and took his concubine instead. It seems that the rape of a concubine was acceptable.

The story is used to demonstrate God’s distaste for homosexuality, but it clearly supports a social order where some – the man and his daughter – have God given rights whereas the concubine – presumably a slave with little say in the matter – has none.

The problem is – and I can see this – that if you reject the creation as a myth, that the book of Judges immoral at least in part you have to draw a line somewhere and say “up to this point these are ancient myths, but from here on in it is fact”.

And if it is fact, what of “Revelations”? Hordes of End Timers, who proclaim the books to this point God given and entirely factual, start interpreting like mad and believe they have cracked the code.

I ask you, a book to be read as the literal truth has its final chapter in code!