(apologies : I somehow lost the original mail, but fortunately I
had kept this copy, stripped of its headers (so I'm not sure
what the original title was)
From: Derek McLarnen <dmclarne@pcug.org.au>
Gary Collins wrote:
> Yes, up to a point.
> But Eduardo, don't forget that Jesus went on to say,
> "Because you have seen, you have believed. Blessed are
> they who have not seen, yet have believed. He didn't
> commend Thomas for taking the position he did.
>
> Compare Hebrews 11:1-3:
> Now faith is being sure of what we hope for,
< Isn't that just "wishful thinking"?>
No, it's a bit more than that. The Christian faith is more than
just head knowledge, it is also experiential knowledge.
When I first became a Christian, I was essentially simply giving
mental assent to the teachings - head knowledge. Later, in my
teenage years, I came to a point where, due to a number of
circumstances which I won't go into here, I felt I no longer
wanted to go on living, and at one instant I seriously considered
the idea of taking my own life. (I am not sure whether I would actually
have gone so far as to do that, but that's what I felt like doing on
the spur of the moment). But I remembered at that time that Jesus
had said to his disciples, "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give
to you" (though I did not know chapter and verse). Lying on my bed,
I cried out to God, "give me this peace," and immediately, I
experienced a physical sensation in my body which began at the top of
my head and moved down to my feet and left, and this was followed
by an overwhelming experience of peace - although nothing had changed
in my situation, I somehow had peace in that situation.
<<psychological?>> (anticipating response.) Well, maybe, but it was
something that I was not expecting, something that was completely new
to my experience, and I have not heard of anyone else who has had a
similar experience. I choose to view it as God reaching out to one
of his children who was in need of him.
> and CERTAIN OF WHAT WE DO NOT SEE.
<There are a large number of claims concerning phenomena that
we do not see and cannot verify. We can't be certain of all
of these claims, since some are mutually contradictory. Is
there a reliable method for choosing the claims of which we
can be certain?>
> This is what the ancients were commended for.
<I'm not surprised they were commended. Such gullibility
would have made them easy to control.>
This passage in Hebrews goes on to say of these people, as you most
probably know, that "others were tortured and refused to be released...
some faced jeers and flogging while still others were chained and
put in prison. They were stoned, they were sawed in two, they were
put to death by the sword..." they were those who stood out in their
generation, standing up against those kings and rulers who were straying
from God's ways: commended by God but certainly not commended by men.
Telling people that by having faith they might end up having to
die for it hardly seems to be a way to control them. Also, those
who were doing the controlling would have preferred them to relinquish
their faith and go with the flow.
> By faith, we understand that the universe was formed at
> God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of
> what is visible.
<On the contrary, by faith we believe what we're told to
believe while understanding very little of the processes
involved. If you disagree, then can you please share with me
your understanding of HOW "the universe was formed at God's
command" with references to the evidence that supports your
understanding?>
The verse does not say that we understand HOW the universe was formed
at God's command (that's a job for science :-) ), but rather, THAT
the universe was formed at God's command.
Scientific laws are, by my understanding (which may be faulty)
basically descriptive of the processes we see in nature, rather than
explanatory. For example, we know that like electrical charges
repel, and unlike ones attract - but do we know why this should
be so? We have postulated the weak and strong nuclear forces
to help explain why all the protons in the atomic nucleus stay
together, but do we actually KNOW what they are? We explain the
unity charge of hadrons in terms of the 2/3 and -1/3 (or is it
the other way around) charges of the quarks of which they are
composed, but has this got us any closer to understanding what
electricity actually is? Don't get me wrong though- I find such
research fascinating, though I don't have time to go into such
things as much as I would like. But at the end of the day, neither
the scientist nor the christian can prove or disprove the scriptures,
"He is before all things and in him all things hold together" Col 1:17
"The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation
of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word" Heb 1:3
> It will always be possible to offer alternative
> explanations; for if we could "prove" God, in a scientific
> sense, then "believing" in him would cease to be an act of
> faith, and "without faith, it is impossible to please
> God..."
<That's one view. An alternative view is that, without faith,
it is impossible to please the leaders and other members of
your religion, who have a vested interest in the strength
and continuity of your belief. I argue that religious faith
is no more than institutionalised gullibility, encouraged to
prevent the faithful from enquiring too deeply into claims
that would have a great deal of difficulty standing up to
sceptical scrutiny.>
It has undoubtedly been used as such; but the existence
of the phoney does not disprove the existence of the real
thing.
<I would argue that humanity has passed the point where we
need believe anything that cannot stand up to sceptical
scrutiny.>
Many people who are more scientific and clearer-minded thinkers
than I have come to faith in Christ; some of them are on this
list. Maybe others would like to chip in and contribute their
reasons for their faith.
<You may disagree with this position but, if you do, I would
like a careful explanation of the difference between faith
and gullibility, particularly as it applies to belief in the
occurrence of specific scientifically improbable/impossible
phenomena claimed by texts and people of various religious
persuasions.>
<Some examples: Why would I be described as having faith if I
believed that Jesus were alive today, but be described as
gullible if I believed that Elvis Presley were alive today?>
We have Elvis' grave with us, and if necessary could disinter
his body.
The enemies of Jesus were never able to produce his body. Had
they done so, they would quickly and effectively nipped Christianity
in the bud. And Christianity, from the accounts we have, began
in Jerusalem, right where these events had taken place.
<Why would I be described as having faith if I believed in
the power of prayer, but be described as gullible if I
believed in the power of crystals?>
First of all, let me suggest that you would not necessarily be
described as gullible for believing in the power of crystals.
Not that I believe that crystals have their own intrinsic power,
but I do believe in a spiritual dimension and occult powers
that sometimes could produce these effects. Also, some such
healings are most likely psychological (and that goes for prayer
as well, of course). However, I would like to present the following
cases of people I know personally, who have been healed by God
following prayer, where I don't think the psychological explanation
would suffice (unless it can affect the immune system or the bone
marrow (?))
The first is a girl who for many years had severe allergic reactions
to most foods. She had to live on rice cakes and fresh fruit and
vegetables, and drink bottled water because she was allergic to tap
water. She could not stay in the bath longer than about 5 minutes
or else her skin would erupt in an itchy rash. One night she was
prayed for, and the next day she ate a Crunchie (tm) bar and a
normal meal of sandwiches, cakes etc and suffered no ill effects.
At the weekend she stayed in the bath for half an hour, again
with no reaction.
The second is a girl of about 13 (at the time) who was diagnosed
as having applastic anaemia. She had a number of bone marrow
transplants but none of them "took." Eventually the doctors said
there was nothing they could do. The church was praying for her in
the meantime; every time we prayed for something specific, that
happened. Eg, she caught an infection (potentially fatal in her
condition) - we prayed, and the infection left her. She developed
a dangerously high temperature - we prayed, and the temperature
went down. In between times, when we thought she was recovering
we stopped praying for a while, and then she would have a relapse.
And then one day, her blood count started mysteriously to increase
again, and she just kept improving until she was pronounced to be
in remission. Today, she seems perfectly healthy. Apparently,
if I remember rightly, the number of people in the UK who have had
this condition and recovered can ce counted on the fingers of one hand.
As one of my favourite preachers once said, "Coincidence? You're welcome
to think so. But I'd rather live in a string of coincidences.
Why doesn't God always heal people like this when we ask him? I
don't know. But he does it enough that I believe in him and in his
ability to do so.
<Is the difference between faith and gullibility hinge on no
more than whether we share the same belief system?>
I don't think so (see above) but the dividing line can at times be
very thin.
There have been times in my life when I've felt the way you
do, and asked myself "is it all real, or am I deluding myself?"
But then I think of the things that God has done for me and for
others whom I know personally; I read the testimonies of others
(especially scientists) who believe, and to date, I've always
answered that question to myself in the same way.
--Best regards/Gary