A Can of Worms

This blog is a can of worms because I am going to tell you how science is based in faith. But first, I need to share a little about what I believe:

It's no secret that I am a Christian. But you might not know that I haven't always been one. In fact, although I grew up in a loving Christian home and went to church, I didn't know Christ until late 2005, and I didn't take Him seriously in my life until January 1, 2006. That's when I became a Christ-follower. Directly before I learned about who Christ really is, I spent at least 7 years believing He didn't exist. I honestly thought Christianity was a crutch for those who didn't have the self-confidence to pick themselves up by the bootstraps and make things happen. I thought the Bible was written by man and therefore flawed. I thought that the ideas Christians had about loving your neighbor and being faithful in relationships were nice, but not dogmatic. I even thought that most major world religions believed the same basic thing and therefore, if any were true, all were somewhat true, and all roads led to heaven (if there was such a place). But the belief I held that gives insight into today's post is that I thought science was a much more intelligent lens to use when viewing the world, and for some reason, I thought science was stronger, more sound argument, than religious faith. I was wrong. It actually takes just as much, if not more, faith - FAITH - to believe in science than it does in Christ.

Why?  

The history of science is a history of ever-changing theories. The problem with accepting a theory because it proves the data set is that the data set is infinitely big.  More data will only allow for the elimination of finitely many hypotheses. This is the problem of under-determination - a problem that consistently arises because as long as I am finding finitely much data, that data ALWAYS underdetermines the theory. 

(derived from notes taken in a lecture by Dr. Douglas Blount, Ph.D. Philosophy, professor of Theology)

Need I say more? 

Science is based in theory. No scientist will deny this or be ashamed of it; it's how science works. But as stated above, the problem with science is that theories are based on data available at the time, and that available data is ever-changing, so theories, consequently, are ever-evolving. Speaking of evolution, the below comment was posted by a man I don't know on facebook to my claim that evolutionism and creationism are based on faith.

"Evolutionism has nothing whatsoever to do with faith. It's completely science based. And yes, it is a theory, though <I> don't believe creationism to be. In order for something to be a theory, it has to be able to be tested. Which evolution can. You can't really test what was written in any holy book."

Ray J. from Facebook

Uh....did he admit that evolutionism is a theory and then also say is has nothing to do with faith? Faith, by definition, is a "complete trust or confidence in someone or something" - ergo trusting in a theory is to have faith in it. It's the same idea as saying I have "faith" that my car will start or the chair will hold when I sit on it. Faith is based in experience and conviction, and science is built on the experiences of testing data and to support various theories, having convictions over the findings, and then altering those "proven" theories when the data changes or results differently when tested. Now, my response to Ray J. and others who scoffed at my claim (did they honestly think I wasn't preloaded with a solid argument to back my statement) - 

"Science is the most unstable system that exists. Science once proved that the world was flat, then it proved the world is round. It once proved that the sun revolved around the earth, and then it proved that the earth revolves around the sun. Then there's the most recent news that 'scientifically imperial evidence' that once proved the age of some moon rock, which was used to determine how old the moon is and how it formed, which is supposed to give us insight into how the earth was formed, was misdated and is now 'scientifically proven' to be much younger than they thought- throwing off their theories on rock formation and the age of the universe. Need I also mention the theories about relativity, the speed of light and that pesky little problem current science had with understanding the subatomic layer- which is completely chaotic and unpredictable- and any good scientist knows that order cannot possibly come out of chaos- oops! Science is based on the belief that man-made systems of math and physics are absolute and cannot be faulted. But the truth is that while science has done a fabulous job of helping make sense of what we see, it has done a poor job of explaining what we don't know. And with the ever-changing paradigm shifts and new revelations, the truth is that it actually takes more faith to believe whole-heartedly in science than it does in the truth that the world was created by a super-intelligent being that we learn about from the Bible. I am consistently AMAZED that intelligent human beings think it's somehow more incredible, logical and exciting to think that the entire world as we know it came from some amoeba, than to believe that there's a God who loves us and created us in his image to glorify Him. It's a sad testament to how scarred humans are by sin, and how scared we are to allow love, true Christly love, to lead us." Molly R (facebook)

And that, my friends, is where I leave you. I encourage you to respond, debate, agree, disagree, but have an opinion.

That crazy thing called grace

Recently I was asked how one becomes, or acts as, a "graceful parent". At first glance I thought this should be an easy question to answer: a graceful parent is one who loves their child in spite of what they do. But then, as I pondered the issue some more, I realized that being a graceful parent is much more complicated than loving unconditionally (which is a rather lofty charge in and of itself, I might add). Being a graceful parent is about learning the difference between justice, mercy and grace, and being able to administer each appropriately. In fact, I would go so far as to say that being graceful in ANY arena (friendships, marriages, partnerships, driving, eating out, getting on and off a plane), requires a full understanding of the similarities and differences in these three concepts and the artful dance of executing each principle effectively in action. So what are the differences?

Simply put, I think they can be defined in the following short explanations (which I have no doubt heard spoken by others before):

• Justice - getting what you deserve
• Mercy - not getting what you deserve
• Grace - getting better than what you do not deserve

But how do these play out? Let's take a common life example, a speeding ticket, to flesh this out a bit. You know the scene - you are exiting the highway going 65mph in a 45mph zone, talking on the cell phone, and before you know it you see flashing lights in your rear view. Before you've even confirmed the officer is pulling you over, you've already concocted your defense (didn't see the sign, going with the flow of traffic, not as fast as the other guy, etc, etc). But here's how the 3 ideals work out in this situation:

• The officer displays justice, and you get a speeding ticket.
• The officer displays mercy and lets you off with a warning.
• The officer displays grace by handing you a $100 bill to help cover the cost of your next ticket.

In each situation, the officer is acting within his rights and authority. But in each situation, you receive something different. So what would the best administration of his authority be? How about a combination - he gives you a ticket (which you deserve), but he uses his rightful authority to cut the ticket price in half (which is merciful) and then he hands you some cash (which is better than you don't deserve) because, he says, it looks like you've had a bad day. Graceful and merciful justice.

Now apply this to discipling a child, for example. Your 4-year-old knows the rules about talking to you while you are meeting with a friend. He has been told that unless it's an emergency, he is to wait patiently and occupy himself respectfully until you are done with the conversation and can devote your attention to him. Then, sure as the sun rises, your friend stops by to chat, and your 4-year-old son becomes the loudest and neediest preschooler you've ever seen. How do you react?

• You display justice, and put him in time-out until your friend leaves.
• You display mercy and let him sit on your lap while you talk (which doesn't change the fact that he's still being loud and interrupting your conversation). 
• You display grace by taking him out for ice cream.

 All of these actions, on your part, are ok. But sometimes we as parents (and just as humans in relationship), get "having mercy" and "showing grace" confused, and then we can't understand why rules are never followed, why lessons are never learned, and why we feel like a wet doormat by the end of the day. So why don't we exhibit all three? When the child interrupts (again), justfully discipline him with a time out, mercifully cut the conversation with your friend off a tad earlier than you would prefer, and gracefully thank the child for behaving and then go grab some ice cream (where you might be able to carry on the rest of that friendly conversation). Wouldn't this kind of discipline invite good behavior? I think so!

Let's take a look, just for a minute, at the Master of Grace (the one by whom all definitions and examples pale in comparison). By observing Him, we can see that He relates to us perfectly in justice, mercy and grace. For those familiar with Bible stories, here are a few examples. If you are not familiar with these stories, I have listed the Biblical reference for your reading pleasure. 

The Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32)- The returning son deserved a serious timeout, but his father knew that the son's punishment had already been done through the humiliation of losing his inheritance and the pain of being homeless for a time. So, the father had mercy by not inflicting justice, and showed grace by not only accepting the son back, but by throwing him a party.

The Day Laborers (Matthew 20:1-16) - the master of the house had every right to pay those who had worked all day more than those who worked only an hour; after all, those who worked all day were justified  to receive more. But what did he do? He showed the later workers grace by giving them all the same wages - completely undeserved.

(Sidenote: Did you notice, that in each story the ones who were not receiving grace -the elder son, the laborers who had worked all day- realized that grace is not fair, and got angry? Is that how you react when others receive grace?)

And finally, just to drive the point home a little more, I would like to point out how these three, justice, mercy and grace play out in some of the lives of God's most influential people. 

David (2 Samuel 11)- greatest king of all Israel - also a murderer and adulterer - he had his mistress' husband killed. God allowed David to experience justice through the accusations of a friend and (arguably) through the death of his ill-begotten son. He showed David mercy by not allowing David to be put in jail or retaliated against by his men. And he gave David grace by allowing him to bear another son, Solomon, who became the wisest (and most stubborn) king that Israel ever saw.

Peter (John 18:15-27)- Jesus' most passionate disciple - also a backstabbing friend and liar - he denied Jesus on the night Jesus was taken into custody and he said he never knew Him. God allowed Peter to experience justice when he felt the incredible guilt for turning on his best friend and Lord. He showed Peter mercy when he did not allow the king's men to arrest Peter as well as Jesus. He gave Peter grace when Jesus appeared to Peter again post-resurrection and revealed the truths of Messianic prophecy in the Old Testament. 

And finally, Paul (Acts 9:1-22) - the world's most effective and influential pastor and missionary - also a murderer of Christians and blasphemer - he spent most of his life on a lethal crusade against those who followed Jesus and had no remorse for denying that Jesus was anything more than a heretic. God allowed Paul to experience justice when, even a great deal after Paul's conversion, Paul was thrown into jail to live out most of his late-adult years. He showed Paul mercy when he did not have Paul killed by a revengeful Christian after his conversion. He gave Paul grace when Jesus not only appeared to Paul on the Road to Damascus, but God also gave Paul the words and charisma to write most of the New Testament and become the most famous of all Jesus followers to this day.

So, my friends, how do you display justice, mercy and grace? Do you spend time deciphering the three and evaluating how they can each be displayed lovingly in all relationships? I challenge you to remember the short definitions of each principle, and then work daily to judge and correct justly, punish mercifully and reward and love with an abundance of grace. And remember, as the song says, "Justice and mercy meet on the cross", and I add, "by grace".

(Hebrews 4:14-16) 14  Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15  For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16  Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.