The following is a guest post by OpenDiary blogger Atheist Under Ur Bed. This is part of an ongoing series that will be posted each Monday. You can read the introduction to this series by clicking here.

Hey, it’s Monday! Time once again for (yes – you guessed it!) Monday School! “The Cure For All Those Anti-Intellectual Viruses You Picked Up In Church Yesterday!”

YES! Exactly like a square peg and a round hole can be reconciled! You just need a big enough hammer and the will to use it.

Don’t have a hammer on you? Dedicated to rational reconciliation which doesn’t do violence to the mind? Then I’m afraid you’ve got at least two major problems: 1) Science and the Bible use two very different methods to understand the world; 2) Science and the Bible repeatedly describe that world in very different ways.

Both of these problems are HUGE, and the basic conflicts they describe seem not to allow for any reconciliation despite what a lot of people seem to think.

This week, let’s focus just on problem #1 and the many ways the scientific method differs from the ways of the Bible.

Consider:

1) Science doubts everything.

The Bible asserts that there are some things that we simply must not doubt (such as the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus).

2) Science and the logic which underpins it assert that nothing should be believed without adequate proof.

The Bible indicates that we ought to believe what it says without proof. (See Mark 8:12 and John 20:29 for two examples.) Bible believers try to shift the burden of proof onto those who would challenge the Bible’s claims. They fail to realize that if every belief and claim were to be accepted as true until it is proved false, an awful lot of nonsense would have to be believed – much of it contradictory and dangerous. There would be no easy way to resolve the innumerable problems which would arise, and much time would be wasted in the attempt.

3) Scientists observe.

They collect evidence. Hypotheses are drawn and tested. Tentative conclusions are made, submitted for peer review, debated, then tested and re-tested. Knowledge evolves. The Bible, in contrast, sets forth dogma. When that dogma conflicts with logic and observation, we are expected to believe the Bible instead of our eyes and common sense. For the fundamentalist Bible believer, evidence isn’t given an impartial evaluation but is accepted or rejected on the basis of whether or not it agrees with preconceived conclusions. Tentativeness is frowned upon while unwarranted confidence and certainty are praised. Knowledge and ethical standards remain frozen as they existed when the Bible was written.

4) Science values rationality and open-mindedness.

It teaches us that progress depends upon open debate between those holding different viewpoints. Evidence and ideas are to be judged on their merits and not on the basis of who happens to be putting them forth. The Bible, on the other hand, consistently relies upon fear mongering, name calling, brute force, and the threat of brute force to create and maintain belief. From Adam and Eve, through Moses and Pharaoh, down through the conquest of the Promised Land, the exhortations of the prophets, and the New Testament’s threats of Doomsday and Hell, the Bible is short on sound reasoning and long on physical and mental coercion. Instead of valuing other opinions, it warns those who believe in it to avoid those agents of the devil who don’t. (See Matt. 10:14-15; 1 Tim. 6:3-5; Titus 3:9-11; and 1 John 2:22.) The Bible even orders the slaughter of those who disagree (Luke 19:27). When believers in the dogma of the Bible have collided with those who hold other dogmas (or other interpretations of its own dogmas), interminable bloody conflicts such as exist in the Mideast and Northern Ireland have resulted.

5) Science values knowledge and believes the more we know, the better off we are.

The Bible is deeply suspicious of knowledge, at best. Its Adam and Eve were forbidden to learn about good and evil and punished for acquiring that knowledge. The builders of the Tower of Babel were similarly punished for overstepping their “proper” intellectual and technological bounds. Ecclesiastes 1:18 makes it explicit: “He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.” The Old Testament’s God ordered the Hebrews to destroy whole kingdoms lest knowledge of foreign religions corrupt them. In Matt. 11:25, Jesus thanks God for keeping knowledge of His ways from the wise and prudent. 1 Cor. 3:18-19 sums it up: “If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.”

Clearly, the Bible denies those who disagree with it the right to disagree. Because those who disagree have knowledge and reason on their side, the Bible is forced to attack knowledge itself as evil. In place of knowledge, it demands child-like trust. Instead of rewarding the wise, it rewards the ignorant, the passive, and the gullible. Is it really a coincidence that Jesus’s first disciples were ignorant fishermen? Can we ever forget that scientists from Copernicus to Galileo to Darwin had to fight the Christian churches in order to enlarge our knowledge of the world? Is it any wonder that Bible believers today remain among the most vociferous advocates of censorship?

6) Science and logic indicate that a calm impartiality is the state of mind most likely to lead us to the truth.

The Bible indicates that putting the fear of God into everyone is the best way to get them to the only truth that allegedly matters. It appeals to, inflames, and manipulates those emotions which psychologists and psychiatrists believe cloud our view of the truth and, at worst, can generate outright delusion.

7) Science and logic value careful organization, as well as clarity of thought and expression.

The Bible is often murky and obscure, and an unorganized mess. The indecipherable Book of Revelation reads like an insane rant. In Mark 4:11-12, Jesus actually says he speaks in parables so as to confuse those he doesn’t want saved.

8) Science and logic demand that belief conform to rationality.

Tertullian, Martin Luther, and other Bible believers have asserted just the opposite, choosing to believe in the Bible precisely because it is absurd. As 1 Cor. 4:10 puts it, “We are fools for Christ’s sake.” It is interesting that such believers themselves admit that the Bible is absurd. It is stunning to see such absurdity absurdly put forward as grounds for belief. Apparently it isn’t obvious and must be said again and again: If absurdity is grounds for belief, then anything may be believed. In their pursuit of the God of the Bible, such “thinkers” have ended up embracing utter chaos.

NEXT WEEK: A look at some of the very different things science and the Bible have to say about the world at large. Reserve your tickets NOW!