The extensive ranges of facts, interpretations and conclusions about almost everything with which mankind has to do are so far ranging that we often despair about finding the truth of a context for firm belief and guiding conduct. The matter is made even more complex in the changes of culture, circumstances, history, experience, emotions, nurture and biological influences. Preferred presumptions vary among individuals so to presuppose contradictions among them – sometimes to conflicting ends. To believe that peace is the best option among the related options for earth life will make a different person than one who assumes that periodic wars are inevitable. The first presumption deplores militarism in cost and participation. The second, even when deploring the context, supports preparation and participation. Mankind’s most important presupposition is related to a divine perception – either there is believed to be God related to the earth life, or there is not. Those who presume God interpret evidence differently than those who do not have faith in an involved divine being. That difference leads to conflict even when engaged in mutual interest in search for truth. Not all conflict is ugly and born of lack of concern, as is conflict between caring parents with an errant child. That concept is even carried over into law enforcement where the public expects the police to hold a concern in dealing with even fierce criminals. That feeling is so great in that the actions of legal personnel may be interpreted as more heinous than that of the guilty offender. This likely grows out of the saying of Jesus: to treat others as one wants to be treated – not as we are treated.
In reviewing substantive literature in many fields we find contradictions, even within the various sub-groups of those sharing the same basic presuppositions. The varieties are so numerous that a person needs to decide, somewhere in informal and formal educational patterns, the presuppositions on which he or she is going to have self-being. There will be changes as evidence asks change in commitment to the chosen assumption(s). Gaining balance the person proceeds as a pilgrim, to find the context and faith in which to live. Some of it has to be by faith in that the complexity, ignorance, and even the contrariness of earth-life itself need testing. Wise persons find the affirmatives of life – those that work, serve self and others, offer personal hope, courage, love, peace, health, and good conscience. Those not gaining something of the order will by accident gain some order, and by accident of omission lose some of it. Our contexts for life include separate parts of affirmatives and negatives. Even when identifying with a context in theory we are in poor, fair, good, excellent and superior stages of our professed ideals. This fractionalizing of our lives usually leads to some confusion, contradiction, disappointment, loss in living out what we believe to be that we want to be in self, relationships with others and with God.
To illustrate, I refer to an article by Andrew Lincoln, How Babies Were Made In Jesus’ Time, appearing in the Biblical Archaeology Review (11-12, 2014). The article follows historical procedure for a research piece, offering names, context, and documentation with bibliography. It explains the Virgin Birth of Mary in the light of the culture of the times so to identify persons with outstanding men and women of influence. We have quotes from Aristotle, and others of similar reputation, together with documents and references to Scripture to argue for understanding the humanity of Jesus that can’t be supported without information explaining the impregnation of Mary in the light of the meaning of the male and female to the generation of a fetus. The implication of the article is that without male sperm the humanity of Jesus may not be supportable. The whole concept of God as creator of mankind so to be the author of the generative factor in the formation of the body of Jesus though possible in the body of Adam, male and female, even in the uniqueness of Jesus, is disregarded. Does Andrew Lincoln believe in the immaculate conception? The implication is that God may do something special for the eminent person, but not for the ordinary. The author provides greatness to David in quoting David’s beliefs in God’s participation. The implication of the article may be that David’s birth equates with that of Jesus. The article appears to explain the virgin birth as a perception of persons, not a real event. We do not have the author’s presupposition. There is a great deal of literature written in neutral terms on vital matters. We recognize ideas from a stew of ideas. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020