The king, Nebuchadnezzar, ordered his staff director to find competent people to administer the affairs of state. He listed characteristics he was seeking in candidates. Included in the list was the effective use of intellectual aptitudes. Among men chosen were Daniel and his three friends, devout followers of faith in God, as codified in Moses’ writings. There was no hint that spiritual faith and natural learning were, or ought to be, in mutual animosity with each other. During recent decades several factors contributed to the split of faith from public education, from pure science, from social government (legal judgments), even from personal and family life. Gradually the concept of pluralism has gained strength, which concept tends to accent broad multi-cultural humanism as the orientation of the body politic. Objectivity may lose its meaning.
There is considerable evidence supportive of the benefits of faith to persons for every life period. There are many skeptics who do not believe that. They believe religion is an emergence of evolution related to some malfunction. Mankind has no involved God, for God is likely the fabrication of the human mind to account for creation. Most skeptics are not mean spirited, as they have sometimes been characterized, just as persons of faith also are mixed in attitudes. Either side may be embarrassed by some representatives. Generally, serious skeptics believe that any faith in God is a deterrent to society. It uses up time and energy that could be devoted to making the natural world order better for all living. It stirs up unrealistic expectations for life and death that distract and even divide society. Increasingly, skeptics are nudging scientists to form scientific studies to discredit the claims of religionists. If they do not do better in the effort, there ought to be an educative program that respects the reality – nature’s population as it is. They believe that science has exited God. Their conclusion is unproved, perhaps not provable, but they press it as all we have in evidence. (Scientists are theists and atheists, but that is not science.)
Christians ought to welcome the challenge. Objectivity will be vital, to keep such a project meaningful and explained through various interpretations. For example, some skeptics admit that Shamanism may have healings. These are explained in that the rise of hope and courage, affecting the body, may achieve the placebo effect – in that the patient gains inner personal resources to overcome illness. One researcher discovered that persons praying over their meals tended to live longer and happier than those who did not. But, God did not get the credit. The interpretation was that the temporary delay in eating reduced the bolting of food, causing a better approach to the whole experience so improved digestion of prayerful diners. God was not necessary to the situation. The challenge of the skeptics ought to be treated more seriously by Christian institutions. Scholarly research has been generated by some Christian oriented schools, but they may be made a bit insular, comforting the faithful. It would be helpful to include larger audience with scholars who know how to elicit information to publicize to the world significant data on the nature and effectiveness of righteous and practical Biblical/Christian life. Scriptural implications suggest this is entirely in order. It needs current publicity and distribution of data/conclusions. No instrument in history has done more for the education of populations than the Bible. Reading was highly advanced on the premise that every person ought to have the skill of reading so that they could read Scripture. What was a significant factor in the development and education of the human race is often treated as a barrier to modern education. We argue that it continues to be a factor for the best in the search for truth. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020