Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. (Hebrews 11:1-2)
I love these verses, but when people say that they are the definition of faith, I have to shake my head. Faith is assurance? OK, so what’s assurance? Faith is confidence? Of course it is, because confidence is con fideo: “with faith.” And what is hope? Once again, put faith on the table. Give me something to measure - to examine. That’s what the author of Hebrews is going to do through the rest of the chapter. I keep coming back to these issues of definition.
Hope is believing or holding onto the idea that something is going to happen… things are going to be a certain way, someone is going to arrive. It involves preparing for and watching for the desired outcome. We must use the word desired with some care. In general, it’s assumed that hope is toward a positive outcome. Sometimes, though, we hope for negative outcomes. We hope that person who irritated us is visited by karma – even if we don’t believe in karma. We do what people do when they hope but focus our attention on negative outcomes. Consider global warming. How could anyone want global warming? It’s silly to think anyone hopes for global warming. Putting aside those who want to say, “I told you so,” and those who see it as a means to power, I agree – people don’t want global warming, but they watch for it, prepare for it… they do all the things one does when one hopes. Dreading, warning others – they are a negative form of hope.
Those for whom global warming is a focus might be tempted to say, “But we have evidence.” Yes, there is evidence, and they interpret it one way, and another person might interpret it another. One sees historical change in temperatures and blames man, while the other sees natural cycles. The man blamer would likely say that having evidence means there’s no faith involved. But is that accurate?
How many of those who believe in global warming have spent the last ten years recording and evaluating the various measurements that, put together, are said to indicate global warming? How many have done the statistical calculations? I suspect that fewer than twenty percent…probably fewer than one percent. The rest of us get a general sense from our memories but generally rely on the findings of the scientists who study the phenomenon. They ring the alarm bells, and many believe them. For this precise moment, it does not matter whether they are right or wrong. All that matters is that most of those who are concerned about global warning do not have or understand the scientific data. They do not have direct proof that the evidence available was accurately calculated or that it means what they think it means. They could be one hundred percent right, or one hundred percent wrong, or (more likely) somewhere in between, but they believe – meaning they have faith – in what the scientists have told them.
And the evidence? A good deal of it involves samples that have ben collected and analyzed. It’s not experimental. It’s not following the scientific method. It’s the collection of physical, historical samples. It’s the use of clues from the environment to piece together how things looked in history. Science, at least in this case, is a historical study more than the application of the scientific method. I’m criticizing in a literal sense, not pointing fingers. They could be correct in their interpretation of their findings, but the point is that those findings are historical and involve interpretation. It is less accurate than if a human had used a thermometer to measure the temperature. The evidence also includes the human use of a thermometer. That’s OK. That’s evidence. And so are the histories written down by the witnesses who were present during Jesus’ lifetime, and after His resurrection. A good scientist is careful about his evidence, evaluates his evidence, but has faith in his evidence. He uses it to draw his conclusions. He uses it to advance his view of reality. That’s what faith is. That’s what it does.
Comments
Post a Comment