The next several posts will be dealing with the statement
Prove It.
Do I have to? Do I really have to? People tell me I do but I’m not so sure. What should I do?
At times people treat me as if I have some obligation to prove to them that God exists. Do I really? Is it really supposed to be my obligation to give enough empirical data to every Tom, Dick and Harry who asks? Isn’t there an unwritten rule in there that says science is superior to the spiritual? I don’t think people in Hiroshima thought so. We have proven we have the ability to send a man to the moon and I’m still not sure how that has made the world a better place.
Am I going to quote scripture about a God they don’t believe in? Will someone be swayed by the inspired missives of a God they don’t think exists? I could tell them that God’s existence is evident from creation but they were living on this rock before we had the discussion and they will be on that same rock long after it has ended.
I am really open to someone explaining why it is my obligation to prove it. Paul never had to prove that God existed. People weren’t trying to subtract deity in his day, they were constantly adding them.
Every field and street corner had its set of gods. Each city was loaded with enough temples to various gods that it makes First Baptist, Second Baptist and Third Baptist look pedestrian. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe if Paul were here he would spend his time trying to prove God existed. What does everyone think?
Throughout the Bible the message is the same, if you seek you will find. Maybe I’m just trying to dumb it down, but can I not take God at his word? If a person is really seeking God won’t he find Him?
I may sound insensitive but I’m really not. I spent ten years working at advertising agencies and design firms and I had countless spiritual discussions. It just seems that there is a difference between a Prover and a Seeker. I don’t treat the Prover like a jerk, I just refuse to agree that their position is superior. I tell them it is their choice if they want to believe.
I think sometimes we forget that trying to show people God isn’t a way to validate our own beliefs, it is to connect them with their Maker. It is to give them hope and share with them redemption. In the end I told those that I discussed this with that I would treat them no differently either way, that I enjoyed working with them all. Did I handle this the wrong way?
Didn’t Jesus have to deal with both? Didn’t a certain group of Pharisee’s and Teachers of the Law approach him for proof? I think he treated them differently. Did he give them proof? Yes, from an agreed upon existence of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but to prove something don’t we at least have to have some foundational agreement? When someone doesn’t believe in God where do you start? If they come to me telling me I have to prove it I usually tell them that I don’t think I do. I often add more reasons for them not to believe.
Science and the Spiritual
At some point in time it would seem that people bought into the idea that science is superior or that at the least that science and the spiritual reside in two separate spheres that are equal. I’m just not sure that is true. It seems to me that all is spiritual, science itself exists within the spiritual realm. Have you ever seen two scientists with different opinions on a subject, different interpretation of facts? Look at Pluto. Science said it was a planet, now what? If science was so scientific shouldn’t they come to the same conclusion?
You see science does discover facts. The problem with those facts is they have always existed. Just because no one named gravity doesn’t mean science validated its existence. It existed no matter what scientists thought.
Science just discovered what already exists. Was Christopher Columbus a scientist? In that regard the useful parts of science seem more like math to me. I agree we can find equations that work, how else would the world hold together, and yet not everything works scientifically.
If science was that all knowing couldn’t it create a formula that would keep me out of my wife’s dog house? If I did something the same way every time it would always produce the same results? Instead I find my wife’s emotions, moods, time of month, and a host of other factors impact the way we interact.
In the end I am not trying to downplay science, I just don’t think that I have some obligation to prove everything scientifically for it to be real. Someone can insist I must, okay, insist away, I’m just not at a place in my journey where I feel obligated to agree.
"Who is this that questions my wisdom with such ignorant words? Brace yourself, because I have some questions for you, and you must answer them." Job 38:2,3
There are other things that I want to discuss that people tell me I have to prove but I don't think I really do and I am interested in hearing what you think.
Prove It.
Do I have to? Do I really have to? People tell me I do but I’m not so sure. What should I do?
At times people treat me as if I have some obligation to prove to them that God exists. Do I really? Is it really supposed to be my obligation to give enough empirical data to every Tom, Dick and Harry who asks? Isn’t there an unwritten rule in there that says science is superior to the spiritual? I don’t think people in Hiroshima thought so. We have proven we have the ability to send a man to the moon and I’m still not sure how that has made the world a better place.
Am I going to quote scripture about a God they don’t believe in? Will someone be swayed by the inspired missives of a God they don’t think exists? I could tell them that God’s existence is evident from creation but they were living on this rock before we had the discussion and they will be on that same rock long after it has ended.
I am really open to someone explaining why it is my obligation to prove it. Paul never had to prove that God existed. People weren’t trying to subtract deity in his day, they were constantly adding them.
Every field and street corner had its set of gods. Each city was loaded with enough temples to various gods that it makes First Baptist, Second Baptist and Third Baptist look pedestrian. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe if Paul were here he would spend his time trying to prove God existed. What does everyone think?
Throughout the Bible the message is the same, if you seek you will find. Maybe I’m just trying to dumb it down, but can I not take God at his word? If a person is really seeking God won’t he find Him?
I may sound insensitive but I’m really not. I spent ten years working at advertising agencies and design firms and I had countless spiritual discussions. It just seems that there is a difference between a Prover and a Seeker. I don’t treat the Prover like a jerk, I just refuse to agree that their position is superior. I tell them it is their choice if they want to believe.
I think sometimes we forget that trying to show people God isn’t a way to validate our own beliefs, it is to connect them with their Maker. It is to give them hope and share with them redemption. In the end I told those that I discussed this with that I would treat them no differently either way, that I enjoyed working with them all. Did I handle this the wrong way?
Didn’t Jesus have to deal with both? Didn’t a certain group of Pharisee’s and Teachers of the Law approach him for proof? I think he treated them differently. Did he give them proof? Yes, from an agreed upon existence of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but to prove something don’t we at least have to have some foundational agreement? When someone doesn’t believe in God where do you start? If they come to me telling me I have to prove it I usually tell them that I don’t think I do. I often add more reasons for them not to believe.
Science and the Spiritual
At some point in time it would seem that people bought into the idea that science is superior or that at the least that science and the spiritual reside in two separate spheres that are equal. I’m just not sure that is true. It seems to me that all is spiritual, science itself exists within the spiritual realm. Have you ever seen two scientists with different opinions on a subject, different interpretation of facts? Look at Pluto. Science said it was a planet, now what? If science was so scientific shouldn’t they come to the same conclusion?
You see science does discover facts. The problem with those facts is they have always existed. Just because no one named gravity doesn’t mean science validated its existence. It existed no matter what scientists thought.
Science just discovered what already exists. Was Christopher Columbus a scientist? In that regard the useful parts of science seem more like math to me. I agree we can find equations that work, how else would the world hold together, and yet not everything works scientifically.
If science was that all knowing couldn’t it create a formula that would keep me out of my wife’s dog house? If I did something the same way every time it would always produce the same results? Instead I find my wife’s emotions, moods, time of month, and a host of other factors impact the way we interact.
In the end I am not trying to downplay science, I just don’t think that I have some obligation to prove everything scientifically for it to be real. Someone can insist I must, okay, insist away, I’m just not at a place in my journey where I feel obligated to agree.
"Who is this that questions my wisdom with such ignorant words? Brace yourself, because I have some questions for you, and you must answer them." Job 38:2,3
There are other things that I want to discuss that people tell me I have to prove but I don't think I really do and I am interested in hearing what you think.
posted by Darin L. Hamm at
9:50 AM
9 Comments:
Darin,
Great post.
I think we think we have to prove God to every Tom, Dick and Harry. We don't.
Listen to Romans 1;20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities- his eternal power and divine nature- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
God proves Himself. It isn't our job to prove God.
Yes as Christians we are to show the world Christ by our attitudes and lifestyle but that is totally different then trying to prove God. God has made himself known.
My dad is Chemistry teacher. My mom a college calculus teacher. Math and Science are a big part of my life. I believe God created science. Science and Mathmatics I believes proves that their is a God too. In the begin is time, God is mass, created: energy. the heavens and the earth: space. Science is a great thing that many Christians are afraid of. Take some time and just look at the mathmatics in the Bible too. Count the 40's, 3, 7's, 12, alot of prime numbers and look at their meanings. It very cool.
Again great post. I am along the lines that God does need us to prove anything...He has already done that.Men are without excuse.
Darin,
Prove it? Great post as ususal and thought provoking to say the least.
A crude illustration, but true, is one I head years ago in the hills of Western N.C.
A fellow said God is like a really bad dog in the back yard. You don'thave to prove anything, you just have to let him out of the box and he takes care of business.
Perhaps we need to let God out of the box in our lives by making Christ known.
Grace and Peace,
Royce Ogle
The reality is, given the fact that much of what passes for "science" these days is really "scientism", you cannot "prove it". What you can do is offer evidence. And you can ask questions that help a person discover the internal inconsistencies and biases of scientism.
What you are called to do is be ready to give reasons for the hope you have in the midst of a sometimes hopeless and chaotic world.
John,
scientism?
Where could I find some material on this? Sounds interesting.
I was reading on Wade's blog and it came up also.
Scientism is far from monolithic, so I'll try not to paint with too broad a brush here. There are several good textbooks and scholarly articles available on it, but here's the short version:
Scientism is philosophical in nature and goes beyond the actual study of the world of nature. It is more of a presupposition from which someone reasons (a worldview) that assumes a "closed system".
There are two extremes: hard scientism and soft scientism. Hard scientism believes that science alone will solve nearly all human problems or science will eventually explain or describe everything. If a belief isn't "scientific", then it's meaningless.
Soft scientism says that theological statements must be subjected to scientific scrutiny in order to have any intellectual credibility.
In either case, scientism believes that the material world is all that exists and that science is the only means of verifying truth-claims. All claims of knowledge must be scientifically verified.
Except for the truth claim that science is the only arbiter of truth. That one doesn't need to be scientifically verified for some reason.
John,
Thanks for the response.
Could you give me some examples of situations you have experienced talking with people who have a scientism worldview?
Thanks.
Darin,
The current debate over Intelligent Design is a good example. Critics claim that Intelligent Design is religion and not science, but what they mean by science is usually scientism (similar in many ways to a school of thought known as "logical positivism").
Anytime someone wants to reduce the conversation to only include naturalistic causes, they've veered from scientific exploration and have gone into scientistic speculation.
When a person says, "Show me God, and I'll believe in him", they've fallen prey to scientism.
Great Post, Darin.
Not that I'm against apologetics, but if God was able to be proven, there would be little room for faith.
I think one problem is that we lack faith in God to prove Himself, and we feel like we have to do it for Him.
Again, Good Post.
By the way, for some reason when I go to your blog from my work computer, my computer crashes. Sorry if I haven't been posting as frequently.
Proof is an esoteric and ephemeral thing. In fact, God seems to have created us in such a way that we can deny ANYTHING and EVERYTHING except His Direct Glory, at which EVERY knee shall bend and EVERY tongue will confess that Christ is Lord of all. But, until then... denial isn't just a river in Egypt anymore.
Augustine said, "Credo ut intelligam," which seems to mean, "it is by believing that we can know." THAT seems to be God's way.
in HIS love,
Nick
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home