What's This Really About, Anyway?

I'm supposed to be preparing myself for a rather interesting debate between myself and an accepted intellectual equal about the differences between faith and science. I can almost see the grimaces on the faces of those who are currently reading this, and I whole-heartedly understand why they are there. With any luck, this little debate will not branch down the normal path - when I'm involved, things rarely happen like they should. Many can attest to that.

Egotism aside, I am, obviously, debating the case for the side of faith, and why I believe that it's a valid worldview - for want of a better term - than that of... say... believing we evolved from monkeys.

Now, I could easily follow the path of the ignoramus, and make simple-minded arguments like "I don't come from no monkey because they ain't turnin' into humans over at the zoo!" or even "I know it's true because I have faith in the fact that it's true." or even the most ridiculous statement at all to make when finding yourself arguing the case of faith: "I know it's true because it's in the Bible, and the Bible is infallible."

Some of you reading this might think that these are solid answers, and ones that should be taken seriously. I assure you, this isn't the case. That's like explaining the taste of barbecue sauce to... say... a frog. Alternately, the other side of the case needs to see it as such, too, because otherwise, it isn't so much of a debate as it is a breakdown of communication reminiscent of days spent on the playground as a child - days that are, sadly, long gone.

"Bang! I got you!"
"Bang! No, I got you!"
"Nuh-uh! You missed!"
"I can't miss! I have eagle eyes!"
"Well, I'm invisible!"
"But I also have infrared!"

...

As you can see, this "conversation" is going nowhere, really fast. Seeing as how neither side is willing to give, nobody gets anywhere, and it becomes nothing more than a frustrating cycle of mental circle-jerking onto a cookie, where the one who gets the last word can make the other eat it.

All metaphorically speaking, mind.

I digress. The point that I will attempt to make in tonight's little debate is that having faith in a God that I know is there and loves me and guides me as much as I will let him is no different than having faith in a theory that states that human beings came to be from monkeys, or holding any other belief, for that matter.

You see, when someone comes to me and says something along the lines of "My belief is better than yours!" I tend to raise an eyebrow. I always have, honestly. It might just be the philosopher in me, or even my incessant need to play the devil's advocate, but either way it's looked at, I always ask them "Why?" If they cannot - or will not - give me reasons why it's better, then I cannot - and will not - take them seriously about anything. Ever.

All too often in this debate, we see two people talking down to each other, rather than using proper communication to properly discuss why it is that they believe what they do. Rather than speaking to each other as equals, they both go in half-cocked with their thumb on the pulse and their finger on the trigger, and nothing more than raised blood pressures gets accomplished.

My argument is that it is no more foolish for me to believe in a God that I don't physically see than it is for them to believe in evolution. The typical argument is that science has all the answers, and proves time and again that the belief in God is foolish. The other side - the one that I'm now arguing for - says that God has all the answers and they are in the Bible, and that what is written in the Bible is all that there ever is to know about life. I propose that both sides in this case aren't wrong, but they aren't right, either.

I am saying that the faith in a scientific theory is no different than the faith in an all-knowing, unconditionally caring creator. I say this because even though I know that there is a God and that He does exist and care about me and love me, I simply cannot explain it to someone who does not believe in that. There is no way for me to argue that faith in God is better than faith in science, because they don't want to hear it. Hence, my reasoning for playing the fence in this debate and making an attempt to offer a different point of view.

Honestly, if one reads the Bible - more specifically, the things that Christ Himself said - you will find nothing that goes against what modern science has taught us. Modern science has also taught us that certain things that the Bible says to do and not to do were really very good things to know back in the days when sewage systems weren't even a glimmer in the eye of whoever it was that invented them originally.

What you will find in His words, however, are multitudes of parables and messages that all say the same thing: love your brother as you would love yourself, and put God before all others. It's with this in mind that I approach this subject, and only with much consideration and trepidation am I finally sitting down with this friend of mine to present what it is that I have learned.

He believes in evolution, because he's never experienced God. I believe in God and have an unshakable faith in Him, because of the things that I have seen and experienced. I cannot hope to have him see things my way, because that cannot happen. I can see things his way, sure, but only because I've been in his shoes before. I'm familiar with that belief system, and I'm familiar with how to approach people coming from that point of view. Not saying I have the upper edge, here. Far from it. What I do have, however, is faith in the knowledge that I have at least tried to bring to him another point of view. Planting seeds, and all that.

I'll post the conversation after it happens. :)