In nature, with its common grace from God, the sophisticated population has been rightly convinced leading to beliefs and action with proofs related to replication of methods and evidence – for truth related to nature. For life, order, progress, truth, understanding – get the facts, interpret them and live by the results. There is no doubt that the consequences of that scenario have served mankind better than any alternative that preceded it – when various follies including voodoo, mythology, guessing, dreaming, magic, tribal customs that include fetishes and the like, even nothing (nihilism), held sway. Christian missionaries in some parts of the world continue to encounter some ancient customs and practices amounting to fancifulness that not only enslaves infected populations intellectually, but spiritually. The insistence that we find facts in discovering earth life and practices is a good one. It is sometimes related to the scientific method, but it long preceded modern science. Even the ancient rhetoricians like Aristotle, Cicero, and Augustine insisted on the understanding between evidence and emotionalism, of fact and fiction or fancy. They were strong on the ethical uses of arguments and appeals for belief and action, believing there were faithful supports for life conclusions. We continue their idealism, with better tools, and call it the scientific method, which is improved with the more modern means of finding facts, gathering statistics, analyzing them, and concluding from them. We are conflicted about what is compelling. We continue the ancient habit of responding to rhetoricians, not so much from facts, but because of what we think of them, in relationships, personality, and management of communication. We see it often in political arenas. The public either likes or dislikes candidates, not for truths as much as for the ethos of candidates to be.
There remain the prevailing problems and questions that are sometimes passed over: 1) -even after the facts are found, will disagreement follow about what they mean? 2) -even granting the value of the method, are we limited only to that single method? 3) -even if we favor exclusivity for an approach to reality and truth, what is the meaning of the unknown to the known? 4) -even devoted to the proof scenario for knowledge (conclusions found in replication of a scientific process), do we find a scenario that embraces all of human life and behavior providing explanations leading to values, comfort, hope related to ideals and perpetuity for the essence of human life? In nature’s facts, rightly sorted out, we arrive at some conclusions in confidence. For some persons that is the whole story. Is it only part of the story? What are human love, mercy, peace, altruism, desire, and scores of other values, good and ill? How are they accounted for? Where do they come from? Where are they proved in the facts of nature? We know they are present, and that they gain or lose support and favor – and they are real. Since they may not fit the boundaries of nature’s proofs, what investigations/proposals relate to them? Answers affect us. Is there immortality?
A recent review of two scientists, committed Christians, illustrates our point. The younger believes in a kind of fiat creation that is, in his view, fitting to Scripture. The second person, a generation older, believes in an evolutionist model in interpreting creation’s pattern. Both are good men, both are biblically oriented Christians, both seekers of truth, friendly, prayerful, and both legitimate their searches. The men reveal one of the aggravations of temporarily earth-bound intellects, religious or secular – following what they feel is compelling. What is the answer? What is the truth? Ultimately, does it make any difference, or are we trying to prove something to other human beings who have only a short span of years to conclude with a life vision? Drive feels urgency, truth seems far away. At least the concepts of faith in God offer something, as devout thinkers have affirmed for centuries. In this is humility for persons knowledgeable of human limitations. In this humility, and fumbling in our searches, we find a marvelous concept of faith that leads to God in Jesus Christ. The idealism of seeking truth, using an ordered procedure and relying on evidence, even for those contexts where the process is the best available, the general public continues to follow feelings. Persons tend to be moved more by their confidence in accepted leaders than find personal faith for the invisible that point to conclusions. We are what our faith makes of us. Christians are quite willing to leave matters to God who is, we are sure, true in evaluation (judgment). *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020