Is Science Opposed to Christianity?

Keller points out the very modern claim that “you cannot be an intelligent scientific thinker and still hold to religious beliefs.” (Although this particular claim is very modern—Dawkins, 1986 and 2006, my mom heard just about the same thing in 1929 when she went to Coe College—“Anyone who is intelligent doesn’t believe the Bible.”) Of course the question is: is that right? The most common objection is against the reality of miracles. The answer has several levels. First, science admits that it is not equipped to test for miracles as it only deals with natural causes and effects. The next step is a long reach to claim that that proves there can’t be any miracles. What kind of logic is that? Just because I not know Portuguese doesn’t prove it doesn’t exist. The idea behind it all is the assumption that since there aren’t miracles, there can’t be a God who does miracles. So is Science opposed to Christianity? There are many on both sides of the discussion who say yes. It is commonly expressed like this: Evolution and Science don’t mix. Keller points out that there are however, many scientists who are Christians and who hold and teach some version of evolution as a process but do not accept evolution as an “All-encompassing Theory.” There are four different approaches to the problem: conflict, dialogue, integration, and interdependence. Each has its supporters and strengths and weaknesses. The point is that there are many ways to approach the question, with two major emphases. First, science itself is “unable to account for everything (many things?) about human existence to every thinkers’ satisfaction.” And the second is that the “majority of scientists consider themselves moderately or deeply religious.” There isn’t an uncrossable divide between science and Christianity. To those who have a hard time believing miracles, Keller points out that when Jesus rose from the dead, even some of his followers had a difficult time with it. After all dead people don’t just rise again from the dead. Miracles are hard to believe because they are counter to the natural order and our experience. And their purpose seems to move beyond capturing our minds to capturing our hearts. “Jesus’ miracles are not just a challenge to our minds, but a promise to our hearts that the world we want is coming.”

Keeping in Step with the Spirit--Remix

I always learn more by teaching, talking or writing than I do by mere reading or thinking. Putting it down on paper is the best of all--because I can look at the thoughts, mull them over, change them, reword them or delete them. Talking works pretty good too--except for the sad reality that I quickly forget what I said! During a recent Sunday School class we were working on Galatians 5:16-26. This section has the famous verses about the fruit of the Spirit. And it also reminds us of the challenge every Christian faces internally-a spiritual civil war between the the fallen sinful nature and the renewed Spiritual nature. Two points clicked for me this morning. First, There is a strong parallel construction between verses 16 and 18. Both verses contrast the fallen nature and the renewed Spiritual nature. In verse 16 the text says, "live by the Spirit." This is very similar to verse 18, "you are led by the Spirit." The contrasting action in verse 16 says, "and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature." The contrast in verse 18 says, "you are not under law." There is something similar or parallel between gratifying the sinful nature and being under the law. It seems that in the rest of Galations, being under law means trying to earn God's favor (or salvation) by doing things He likes or approves of. In other words it means trying to get God to react to what we do. Or more precisely, trying to control God by what we do. In the most religious terms of the context it would be something like--I am following the Mosaic laws so that God is under obligation to bless and accept me. It is a religious way of being your own savior and lord. So how could that be similar to gratifying the desires of the sinful nature? Certainly not in the sense of trying to gain God's approval, because truly pagan people don't seem to care anything for God. The similarity lies in the fact that this gratification is self oriented. When I gratify those desires I am doing what I want, or what I think will best serve me or make me happy. The way it is similar is that at the center of my heart, I am acting as my own god (or savior or lord). I wonder if this is part of what Bill Bright was thinking about when he gave us that famous illustration of the throne in one's heart. Who is on it? Me or Jesus? Whether it is the desires of the sinful nature or living under the law, the focus is the same--I want what I want and I want it now! I want to be in charge. I will run my own life, thank you. I'll be my own lord! Second, This realization then helped me to understand what it is to keep in step with the Spirit. If I understand the work of the Spirit as being to glorify Jesus (John 14-16), then keeping in step with the Spirit means seeing the person and work of Jesus more and more. In essence it is keeping the gospel before you all the time. When Jack Miller (who taught preachers at Westminster Seminary) talked about doing this he said we have to learn to "preach the gospel to ourselves all the time." And isn't this the way the Spirit transforms us? Look at 2 Corinthians 3:18. "And we, who with unveiled faces reflect (or contemplate) the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness..." What is it that changes us--the glory of Jesus. The entire package of his glory--his divine nature, his human nature, his death for the benefit of his people, his astonishing and amazing love and grace. With these two insights in mind, I realized why one of my friends told me his life was radically changed when he began to begin his day by reviewing Scriptures that expressed the work of Jesus to give new life. It can change your life!

Men of Colonial Mountain Climbers--Conditioning

Guys, If you were at the first orientation meeting you heard about the need for conditioning. Most of you already know this and most of you are already doing some things to get ready for the climbs. After Pastor Paul mentioned his conditioning goal, I felt weak. And slow. And old. So I rechecked some correspondance and websites and found a fairly reliable VO2 test that anyone can use. It was developed by Dr Ken Cooper (the Aerobics guy from way back). You can find a link to it here. VO2 has something to do with measuring the volume of oxygen your lungs and body can handle. It is a pretty effective measure of cardio conditioning. If you reach a certain point, then it is likely that you'll do okay in the mountains, at altitude (apart from altitude sickness). The test is simple. Run as far as you can in 12 minutes. Measure it. Compare the charts. The link I gave is measured in meters so I had to convert mileage to meters. For old guys like me it is something like 1.25 miles in 12 minutes. I believe you younger men probably need to go farther! The other factor that you should train for is long walks or hikes. I think the trip up Umcompaghre is more than 12 minutes. grace

How God Changes People--The Cay

During the past few weeks my 6th grade language arts class has been reading The Cay. It is a wonderful story and I highly recommend it. The setting is the Caribbean, during World War 2. Phillip is an eleven year old boy, whose mom is frightened after German U-boats attack the oil center of Curacao, off the coast of Venezuela. She wants to take him back to Virginia, for safety. They get on a boat bound for Miami, but it is sunk by a torpedo and Phillip ends up on a raft with Timothy, an old black West Indian man. Phillip’s mom was prejudiced and it comes out in Phillip as he interacts with Timothy. Oh yeah, Phillip was injured as he fell from the ship. He hit his head and on the second day on the raft went blind. Timothy and Phillip are stuck with each other. Phillip is an emerging racist. Timothy keeps focused on the work they have to do—what work? “Just keep alive, young bahss.” Eventually they come to a cay, a small low island, with a few palms and no people who will help them. As Timothy sets up camp, they make plans for rescue. Timothy makes a signal fire that they can light if they hear or see an airplane. After a few days on the island they gather sea-grape vines so that Timothy can make a rope for Phillip to get down to the fire if he hears a plane when Timothy isn’t there Then Timothy tells Phillip that he (Phillip) will have to begin to share in the work. Now Phillip is an eleven year old. He is blind. He doesn’t know if his mom got in a life boat or not. Life is not easy. And he thinks—“I can’t work, I’m blind”. Timothy announces that Phillip will be weaving the sleeping mats from palm branches. Phillip complains. Blind kids can’t work. Timothy assures Phillip that it is not hard, just over and under. In fact one of the best mat makers in the islands is blind. Finally, Timothy places some palm fronds in Phillip’s lap. “Here young bahss, it’s easy. Just over and under…” Phillip tries but it doesn’t work so well. He gives up. Timothy tries to help him by reaching his hands in and directly Phillip. “Just over and under…” At this point, Phillip loses it. Listen as Phillip tells it. I tried again, but it didn’t work. I stood up and threw the palm fibers at him, and screamed, “You stupid ugly black man! I won’t do it! You’re stupid, you can’t even spell…” Timothy’s heavy hand struck my face sharply. Stunned, I touched my face where he’d hit me. Then I turned away from where I thought he was. My cheek stung, but I wouldn’t let him see me with tears in my eyes. I heard him saying very gently, “B’getting’ back to wark, my own self.” I sat down again. He began to sing that ‘fungee and fish’ song in a low voice, and I could picture him sitting on the sand in front of the hut; that tangled gray hair, the ugly black face with the thick lips, those great horny hands, winding the strands of vine. The rope, I thought. It wasn’t for him. It was for me. After a while, I said, “Timothy…” He did not answer, but walked over to me, pressing more palm fronds into my hands. He murmured, “’Tis veree easy, ovah an’ under…” Then he went back to singing about fungee and fish. Something happened to me that day on the cay. I’m not quite sure what it is even now, but I had begun to change. I said to Timothy, “I want to be your friend.” He said softly, “Young bahss, you ‘ave always been my friend.” I said, “Can you call me Phillip instead of young boss? “Philleep,” he said warmly. I asked my sixth graders what happened. They said he got smacked! I asked them what they thought about it. Most thought Timothy was justified. One said, “Why didn’t he do it sooner?” I asked them what changed in Phillip. They said, he started to quit being racist. I asked why did he change. And few could answer. Some thought it was because he got some sense knocked into him. One said that he was probably afraid that he’d get beat if he kept it up. I pointed out the reality of change. He is no longer ‘young bahss’ but now Philleep. In the Bible a name change is significant. It means God is at work. But what happened here? A couple wrote down, ‘it’s something about the rope.’ And then I told them my story. Here’s what I told them. Phillip was taken aback when Timothy slapped him. At first he merely licked his wounds. And maybe nursed his grudge. But Timothy just kept on working. And all of a sudden Phillip realized what Timothy was working on. The rope. And it wasn’t for Timothy it was for Phillip. What Timothy was really doing was loving Phillip. And it was love that touched Phillip’s heart. No wonder he didn’t understand it then and maybe wouldn’t for a long time. Love is powerful. Love changes people. It doesn't call attention to itself so sometimes it is hard to see. Regardless of what my young student said, beatings do not change a person on the inside. It takes love to do that. And we who know the God who delights in our name, who has a name for us written on a white stone in heaven, who changes us from the inside out, wonder at the love that changes us. If you have stories that remind you of the love of God that changes us, please share them. I'd love to hear them.

A visceral objection - How can a God of love send people to hell?

For many modern Americans, this seems in impossible contradiction. The root of the objection goes something like this: To think God will send someone to hell means that person is unequal in dignity and worth. A normal consequence will be to then treat them as less than equal, eventually stretching to exclusion and even violence. Keller points out that while this objection to Christianity is raised frequently, it comes more from feelings than thought. And so this chapter is less sharply focused than the others so far, but his answers are still very helpful. He thinks the background for this question lies in the rise of science. Not that science is intrinsically notorious. But that as people gained scientific ideas, skills and technology, we all began to enjoy many benefits in this present world. C.S. Lewis says that magic became much more popular about the same time, as a rival to science, with the same goals, but less success and acceptance. What were the goals?--to manage and manipulate our present world for our benefit. And as science ascended there were those who consciously cast God and the metaphysical into the background and others who subciously accepted the fact that what's important is the here and now. The result--a world that was no longer God-centered, but man-centered. This puts God in the Dock--another book by Lewis, that answers some of these same kind of objections. But note: God is answerable to man, not vice versa. Keller than deals with three common misunderstanding about God and His wrath. First he says that all people are angry sometimes. And its a good thing that they are. Imagine being a parent who doesn't get angry if his daughter is mistreated. There is such a thing as good anger. Consider this quote from Anne Dillard, “God’s wrath is not a cranky explosion, but his settled opposition to the cancer…which is eating out the insides of the human race he loves with his whole being.” Second he cites the work of Miroslav Volf, a Croatian familiar with the wars, crises and prejudices of the Balkans. Volf says that to speak of a God of love who does not bring justice to the oppressed is to silence the good in people and will actually fuel the road of blood vengeance. If God will not cure all wrongs, it is up to me to make right the wrongs I and my family (or people) have suffered. Third, he points out that the road to hell is a process and that no one arrives there without practice and preparation for it. Many people think that as God sends someone to hell, they realize their plight and cry out only to hear God laugh, "too late." The biblical picture is of continuity of life style. The rich man in Luke 16 seems 'blind to what has happened. He still thinks Lazarus should be his servant and treats him as his water boy." If you want to get nasty about it listen to Lewis, "Hell is the greatest monument to human freedom." At the end of the chapter Keller takes up the issue of equality. His point is that no one can make any final judgments about anyone else's spiritual fate or state. History abounds with outspoken critics who convert and outspoken defenders who turn apostate. [As a personal note, it is at this point that we need to reflect on the image of God in people. That is the basis for respect and dignity and equality.] The fact that so many people want to think of God as a God of love is really remarkable. No other religion has such a personal and intimate God. The thought must arise from the Bible, which also reveals that He will judge, too.

Christianity is the cause of so much social injustice-- Chapter four

Some people complain about and argue against Christianity because of disappointment. It may be personal. Sometimes it is institutional. “The Church causes lots of problems in society and culture.” Keller points out that there are three major reasons for this complaint. One is deeply personal—Christians have lots of character flaws. The second concerns religions support and endorsement of many wars and violence. The third is the chilling reality of fanaticism. Character flaws A common expectation is that to be a Christian means having one’s moral life together. Yet there is a lot of moral failure or deficiency within the church. Leaders fail. By and large social-personal problems are found at about the same rate within the church as without. And there seem to be lots of nonreligious people who seemingly practice pretty good lives. A biblical solution for this arises from an appreciation of two foundational Christian truths—common grace and special grace. Common grace teaches that God spreads His good gifts across the face of the earth. And so it is not unexpected to find people who not only don’t know Him, but may even be among those who are antagonistic towards God, who live out goodness in many ways. Its part of being human in this world. The Christian doctrine of the Fall doesn’t teach that people are as bad as they can be, just that they are unable to please or seek after God. Special grace emphasizes the reality of fallenness. No person is good enough to please God and even our best efforts are tainted with death when done to promote or protect ourselves before Him. Special grace teaches that God gives life and love to those who are not good before God. Christian maturity then, which is character formation and practice, is a gradual process that follows conversion. So it shouldn’t be surprising to find Christians who don’t have it all together. It’s not an excuse for bad behavior, but it explains why people see it in Christians and why we should look for it in ourselves. Violence Some people argue that Christianity (and religion in general) is responsible for wars and violence because “it ‘transendentalizes’ ordinary cultural differences do that parties feel they are in a cosmic battle between good and evil.” Example after example are often cited: Northern Ireland, the Middle East, the Balkans, etc. What is overlooked in this list is the reality that over the past several hundred years there have been several cultures/nations that have sought to remove religion from themselves. France at the time of their Revolution is one. Soviet Russia is another, Cambodia another. And in each of these three examples, the level of violence rose dramatically…and it was state supported violence! Fanaticism The most pressing complaint is that of fanaticism. People who ‘really get into their religion’ get deemed fanatic, a term which is intended to arouse fear and suspicion. The common analysis of this phenomena is that a person or group of people assume that they are right with God because of who they are and what they do. And then they not only judge those who differ, but seek to change others to be like they are—and in some cases abuse power to this end. The Christian answer to this issue is to look deeper into Christianity rather than try to hold to a middle of the road variety. And when Keller means deeper, he means moving beyond being “fanatically zealous and courageous: to becoming dramatically “humble, sensitive, loving, empathetic, forgiving and understanding,” in other words to becoming more Christlike. And how is this accomplished? Only as the Christian grows in appreciation for the work of Jesus on his behalf. Point Those who move deeper into Christianity discover that the Bible offers the source for critique of life. Much of the work of the prophets was to point God-followers to more consistent life practices. A major theme was the work to correct social injustice. Keller says that “true faith is marked by profound concern for the poor and marginalized.” And that has been the practice for many Christians. While the horrific African slave trade was too often accepted by Christians, Christians were also opposed to it as it began and were the ones to work tirelessly to overturn it. Wilberforce and Woolman gave themselves to this work because they were seeking to live as Christians. Likewise the Civil Rights movement was more a religious and spiritual movement than a purely political one. When Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote from the Birmingham jail to the church in the south, he appealed to them to act in line with the truth of God and to oppose injustice. Christianity may give cause for argument against it in the case of personal deficiency and social injustice, but the remedy isn’t to give Christianity up, but to become more Christian, more like Christ. In His power and by His grace and for His glory.

Christianity is a Straightjacket! – ...Not!

Chapter three, The Reason for God One of the most pressing objections to Christianity concerns both the validity and application of absolute truth. Many people today assume that any “belief in absolute truth is the enemy of freedom.” Keller hears this objection voiced in three ways. First some object that absolute truth endangers civic freedom by barring some from a community. Others say it appears culturally narrow by failing to recognize that various cultures have different perspectives on reality. And still others claim that it enslaves (infantilizes) members by determining what they must believe/practice in every particular. Keller pushes back. Everyone acts as though they believe in truth even if they claim they don’t. Truth is unavoidable. When some claim truth is merely an exercise in power and control, they are making a truth claim themselves. (The real question is which one is right!) “If you say all truth claims are power plays, then so is your statement. If you say that all truth claims about religion and God are just psychological projections to deal with your guilt and insecurity, then so is your statement.” Community can’t be completely inclusive Every group limits itself in some ways. Consider an example from the book. Suppose that there are two people, one is on the board of the local Gay, Lesbian, and Transgender Support Community. The other on the board of the Alliance Against Same-Sex Marriages. Imagine the first having a religious experience and saying, “I now believe homosexuality is a sin.” About the same time the second learns that his son is gay. He begins to say, “he should have a right to marry his partner.” What happens? At some point, each community will have to exclude the person from the board—“you are now different than our stated goals and beliefs.” It would be expected. Yet of the groups, one has the reputation of being inclusive, the other has the reputation of being narrow and exclusive. But both act the same. Every group (or community) is based on common beliefs that act as boundaries, including some and excluding others. Neither community is being ‘narrow’—they are just being communities. So how do you judge communities? Not by their inclusiveness, but by how they treat those outside their community. Do they treat others with love and respect? To serve them and meet their needs? Christians should be criticized who are condemning and ungracious to unbelievers but not for maintaining standards for membership in accord with their beliefs. Christians should hold beliefs in charity and humility. Conversation should be in respect. Christianity isn’t culturally rigid It may be the perception that Christianity tries to mold cultures to become alike, but it just isn’t the case. Think about the rise and spread of Christianity. It began in Jewish Jerusalem. Then it became centered in the Mediterranean, then Northern Europe, then North America. Today the most vigorous churches are in the southern and eastern hemispheres. And in every place, Christianity has been practiced with different cultural expression. African scholar, Lamin Sanneh says that Christianity has helped Africans to become renewed Africans, not re-made Europeans. (There is another argument that says that modern secularism is less respective of differing cultures than Christianity.) Christianity adapts to surrounding culture without compromising main tenets. Beliefs should be held in charity and humility. Conversation should be in respect. Freedom isn’t Simple We’re back to the basic issue—does freedom exist without constraints? Keller says, imagine playing the piano well. It takes hours and years of practice. Time you don’t spend doing other things, time you aren’t ‘free’. Yet the result is musical ‘freedom’ that is a joy to both player and audience. Or imagine a boy falling in love with a girl. He thinks about what he can do to make her happy. He gives up other things so he can spend time with the girl. True intimacy is one of the most beautiful forms of freedom, yet it means giving other things up. To some it might appear that ‘she is leading him around by the nose.’ Not to him. For him it is wonderful. Man and woman both give to learn to serve the other. How is it with God and man? The normal thought is that man has to do the changing to fit Him. He’s God, I’m not. But Christianity is not ‘normal’. It is based on Jesus who changed to serve us. He set aside glory to become like us (the incarnation) and he gave up his life to save us (the atonement). For the Christian, once you realize how Jesus changed for you and gave himself for you, you aren’t afraid of giving up your freedom and therefore finding your freedom in Him. Then we will learn how to love others as well.