Attempts at Honesty

Reflections on the interplay of the Bible and Culture

Home Archives for Christianity

Hypothesis, research and faith

Posted on Written by 9 Comments

According to Science Buddies, the steps to conducting scientific experiment are as follows:

  1. Ask a Question
  2. Do Background Research
  3. Construct a Hypothesis
  4. Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
  5. Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
  6. Communicate Your Results

Research

It seems to me that Christian thinkers follow much the same method. We ask questions about life and destiny, we do research, we draw some conclusions based on research, test our experience against our conclusions and communicate the results.

Those who argue that faith and science are incompatible would quibble with this. Thanks to The Poached Egg, I ran across the following definition of atheism from the American Atheist:

“Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity, which implies that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.”

The difference between Christian and atheist thinkers lies in what is allowed as evidence. If you are not open to the idea of God, nor are open to any supernatural explanation of the world, then you will not agree that the Christian world view provides an acceptable explanation of what we see.

However, if you are open to God being part of the explanation of what we see then I believe that an open examination of the evidence will bring you to the conclusion that faith is reasonable. You may still choose to disbelieve, but such an openness will allow for faith to be considered a reasonable response to the evidence.

Within the scientific community there are sometimes opposing theories interpreting a given set of data. Science is not monolithic on all topics; there is room for disagreement and interpretation. This indicates to me that there is a gap between what is certain and what is probable in the minds of the scientists.

Why then do those who consider science as antagonistic to faith not allow Christians to have similar gaps? We get criticized for not having sufficient evidence to prove the existence of God beyond doubt. We are not allowed gaps in our knowledge yet science has gaps. In my mind this is a double standard.

As with science, the existence of gaps in our knowledge does not invalidate what we do know to be true. If Jesus was right, we know how things will ultimately be resolved. As Paul reminds us in 1 Corinthians 13:12, “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully.” Until then, let’s act upon what we do know, while waiting for the gaps to be resolved.

May that resolution be soon!

Love – not busyness or programs

Posted on Written by 1 Comment

Man on treadmillSo much of church life in America is centered on busyness, programs and meetings, that it is possible to lose sight of what is really important. There is a danger of losing our focus. Paul tells us that our focus should be love.

Part of the danger is the great need that is within and without the church. People are becoming increasingly battered by life choices that are validated by the culture but prove to be damaging to the individual. There is much to do.

Yet the danger is that we take this on in our own strength and move ahead of God and without realizing it, supplant what God is trying to do.

In the opening verses of Philippians, Paul lets us know how he prayed for that church. In Phil. 1:9-11 Paul prays that the Philippians’ love might abound in knowledge and discernment. He did not pray for their busyness to abound. Nor did he pray for their programs to abound; he prayed for their love to abound.

He further qualifies this statement by praying specifically that the love would abound in knowledge and discernment. This is not a squishy, emotional love. Paul desires that the Philippians (and we) would have a love based on truth and good judgment. Our love must make the object be well not just feel well.

The purpose of this love is so that we might approve the things that are excellent, be sincere, not give offense and might be filled with the fruits of righteousness. Love is the basis on which all these things depend. Our love should work itself out in a life that is worth emulating.

I was reminded recently that it is very possible to be so busy doing good things that we miss out on opportunities to really convey love. When this happens, it is like being on a treadmill. A lot of activity takes place, but it doesn’t get you anywhere.

How many times have we had to have 20 second greetings in the church lobby because we have to rush to pick up a child, provide child care, cover the coffee ministry, the library ministry or some other activity? We have sign-ups and schedules and coverage charts which need to be updated and communicated. These are all good things, but the breathless activity often makes it difficult to deepen relationships.

I get the sense from the gospels that even though the needs surrounding Jesus were great, he still found time for teaching his disciples. He found time to share meals with tax collectors. He found time to be alone with his father.

Maybe we need to cut “ministries” rather than adding them. We certainly need a lot more love and perhaps a few less programs. Rather than rushing off to that “ministry” post, we should take the time to really minister to the person next to us in the pew. We could use a little less superficiality and a little more honesty.

Take a deep breath, relax and be real.

The rejection of a made-up God

Posted on Written by 1 Comment

If you are going to reject God, please be sure that you have an accurate understanding of who you are rejecting. Carol Hoenig’s article in the Huffington Post entitled Santorum Reminds Me Why I Wrote ‘Of Little Faith’, is an example of the rejection of a caricature of Christianity.

The God that Mrs. Hoenig has rejected appears to be a genie-in-a-bottle god who is supposed to do what we want if we display enough faith. This type of belief does not stand up because it will eventually be disappointed. God does not exist to do what I want; it is the other way round. This genie-in-a-bottle god is not the God of the Bible.

Whether they were taught to me or I misunderstood what was being taught, I absorbed many wrong ideas about God and Christianity while growing up in the Church. I do not think that I am alone in this and apparently Mrs. Hoenig’s experience is similar. The question I would ask of Mrs. Hoenig is that when she was studying the Bible on a regular basis, was she doing so to hear from God or was she studying to support her beliefs? There is a big difference between the two.

The Apostle Paul tells us in Romans 12:1-2 that we come to Scripture in need of transformation. Our minds and thinking are not aligned with reality about God and who we are before him. We have to make a choice when approaching Scripture to be open to what it is really saying or to only hear what supports our preconceptions. The theological words describing these two positions are exegesis (ex – out of) or eisegesis (eis – into). In other words, we can draw from Scripture what it means or we can read into it what we want it to say.

This is not a new problem. In his epistles, the Apostle Paul was dealing with those who distorted what he was saying. The Old Testament prophets offered correction to Israel’s misunderstanding and misapplication of the law. Jesus contended with the Pharisees who misinterpreted Scripture to the point that they did not recognize their Messiah when he appeared.

I am not shocked at Mrs. Hoenig’s reaction to what appears to be a feeble, man-centered pseudo-Christianity. When we want to prevent a disease, we inoculate a person with a weakened form of the disease so that immunity can be formed. Our Enemy is aware of this tactic and uses it in a spiritual sense all the time. What better way to prevent belief than to expose people to an inadequate, uninformed, feeble Christianity? Sadly, there are many in “ministry” that are willing accomplices in this tactic of Satan. As a result, the “Christianity” that many reject has very little to do with Jesus Christ.

G. K. Chesterton wrote, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.” Jesus tells us in Matthew 7:22-23 that many who purported to be speaking for God will be found to have been operating with no relationship with Jesus Christ. It is not surprising therefore that many who operate under the banner of Christianity are deceived and deceive others.

It is incumbent upon anyone who rejects Christianity to first understand who it is that he is rejecting. Sadly, most reject a caricature such as that presented by Carol Hoenig in the Huffington Post.

Please make an informed choice.

Beware the leaven . . . thoughts on contemplative prayer

Posted on Written by Leave a Comment

PhilospherThere has been some discussion lately about the danger of contemplative prayer in the Church. While I understand that some proponents of this practice lean heavily on eastern religious practice and error has crept in, I am concerned that an over-reaction is taking place.

There was one group that Jesus singled out in his warnings, the Jewish religious leaders. Jesus did not say “beware the leaven of the philosophers.” Nor did he warn us against the leaven of the false religions. He warned his disciples to “beware the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matthew 16:6). We have been warned against the leaven of the Orthodox, the Biblically correct, the ones who should have known better. Jesus warned us against smug confidence that we have all the answers.

Now I’m not saying that orthodoxy does not have value, it does. Nor am I saying that eastern religions provide adequate answers to life, they do not and we should be wary of anyone who wants to borrow from eastern religions. We do have an obligation to be sure that our belief and practice correspond to the revealed truth of the Bible.

What I am saying is that rather than decrying the wrong ways to pray, it is more profitable to teach the valid ones. Let us not have a knee-jerk reaction to error and throw out the good with the bad.

The good part of the discussion about contemplative prayer is the move to make prayer less transactional and more relational. Too often in the prayer meetings of my youth, prayer consisted of listing situations where God’s help was required with a good bit of advice for God on how he should handle those situations.

There is mystery in prayer that much of the doctrinally correct, Bible believing church has lost over the years. Say what you want, but Psalm 46:10 tells me that I need to spend more time listening and less time talking to God. Whether you call that contemplative prayer or not, I need to stop striving and listen.

My own experience is that when I take the time to ask God to instruct me he does. When I take the time to meditate on a verse and seek deeper understanding of what it is telling me, God is faithful and often provides the insight. When I focus my attention on God, as he has revealed himself to me in Scripture, then my prayer becomes less transactional and more relational. When I am in the right mindset to listen, God answers.

When a finite human interacts with an infinite God, there is bound to be mystery. When we, being bound by time and space, interact with a God who is outside time and everywhere, there is bound to be mystery. We cannot fully understand God, our vision is like the view in a foggy mirror (1 Corinthians 13:12). We cannot take the mystery out of prayer; prayer in its very nature is mysterious.

While we cannot remove the mystery, we can confront known error. But error can only be effectively confronted by replacing it with truth. If people are looking for relationship with God through prayer, we should encourage this with the focus being on the nature of God as he has revealed himself in Scripture.

Instead of spending time condemning contemplative prayer in its entirety, we need to do the hard work of understanding what practices which claim that title are wrong, but also which are right. Our response then is to jettison the wrong and embrace the right.

We don’t want to throw out the wheat along with the chaff.

Categories

Archives

Blogger Grid
Follow me on Blogarama