The Bible has created a lot of stir throughout history, primarily over disputes over what it does and does not say. Jesus, for example, was crucified by religious authorities. Martin Luther had a similar intellectual battle with the Catholic authorities. Just as Jesus was a Jew, Luther was a Catholic.

The Deists and Atheists that founded America were quite skeptical of religious authority, but not of their own, of course.

We have in history a lot of seemingly similar but different events. Is there a way to make sense of it all? While it is easy for those without power to accuse those with power, and vice-versa, my feeling is that there is something else at play.

Ideas rule the world, not men. Thus an explanation should explain the role of ideas in these conflicts.

Let's face it, the idea of overthrowing the King is the oldest idea known to man. Americans act like the American Revolution was a watershed moment, but it really wasn't. It was the re-expression of an old idea, and the Constitution re-established all the privileges of a King, it just removed the claim of hereditary rule. It was hereditary rule that got heirs constantly killed. Overthrowing the Pope or Gerry Falwell or the local minister of a local church are all the same political event. The blind follow the blind, and the blind battle the blind, too.

Back to the Bible. Is there a simple explanation of all these stories, and of how it gets so wildly differently interpreted by different people? I believe there is. The Bible is 3 books in 1: It is Instruction, Description and Prediction.

It moves between these three forms constantly and effortlessly. It is critically important to keep these differences clear, otherwise people take description as instruction. For example, God says 'Do this (instruction) or this will happen (description.)' Then somebody reads the description (war) and says, 'See, God Approves of War!" They are, in effect, getting the exact opposite message that they should be getting. They are following the description rather than the instruction.

Prediction is very common. "If you do this, then this will happen." All the prophets are simply repeating what was said before. In effect, they are saying, 'Hey look at what you are doing to yourselves; it is just as the Bible foretold." Prophets didn't write the message, they just popularize a forgotten understanding of how to read the Bible properly. Jesus and Luther both did the same thing. Socrates, though pagan, also popularized virtue (not wisdom.) And he met the same fate as Jesus. People dislike to discover their lack of virtue, yet without this self-discovery no progress is possible. (Socrates was accused of 'corrupting the young,' which was to tell the children that their parents were not as wise and virtuous as the parents claimed themselves to be. All authority dislikes criticism.)

A simple example of confused virtue within the context of the Catholic Church is that the Bible encourages us to go forth and multiply, but priests do the exact opposite. The allegedly most virtuous of society are the least involved with the fruits of love. It is fine as a personal choice, but as a requirement it is faulty. Virtue is not found in systems, it is found in people.

We are encouraged to admit our sins and make amends with the people whom we have treated wrongly, but the Church hears confessions in secret and keeps sin quiet. Every congregation (all religions) describe themselves as saved and chosen for believing. Yet, the Bible makes quite clear that even the Devil believes in God. Believing is not a test of anything. We must also act virtuously.

The problem is that there is no definition of virtue. This is why ideas are so important. The misinterpretation of the Bible prevents a clear definition of virtue from being discussed, taught and acted upon. People believe they are being virtuous, when they are doing the exact opposite. (How God judges us for these self-inflicted errors is impossible to understand, but the warning to not judge others makes a lot of sense within this context. We are unique in the mistakes we make.)

Repentance and Liberty both presume a change in ones belief about oneself. In other words, the discovery that one was not as virtuous as one once believed. Humility crushes pride, and while the first reaction is fear and anger against the prophet/rebel, once one digests the message, one discovers oneself and is free. All of us carry some truth and falsehood within ourselves. I doubt it is even possible to grow directly from innocence to virtuous, but I hope it is for future generations. I know I did not.

What makes us like God is knowledge of right and wrong. When we apply this knowledge to ourselves, then we see the world in a new way. Ironically, we become more virtuous by recognizing our lack of virtue. Then we are free to choose who we shall be.

The Bible is full of stories of men and societies just like our own, all who have similarly struggled to understand the difference between instruction, description and prediction. The stories of our lives is all the same. We begin innocent and ignorant, but to choose virtue we must understand it first. That is why ideas rule the world, not men. Our definition of virtue, which we are taught and create on our own, is of great importance.

The Bible is a tool. Like any tool, it can build or destroy. It depends only on the hand that yields it.