Common Ground?: Deep Faith and Deep Science

Thanks for the reply, Faith.I do understand where you're coming from, and what you are asking. The problem I have with the "what ifs" you asked is that I can see the overt problems. I can even, dimly sometimes, perceive the solutions (or a solution). What I can't see is the causal relationship between faith and the very real challenges we face.Let me turn things around in the what if department a bit, using your own idiom. What if God is testing all humanity (a la Job)? Except, unlike Job, it's not a test of faith. What if He is testing our ability to work together to solve problems? What if He is testing our use of His gifts of reason and intelligence? What if he, in fact, is testing us to see whether or not we are good stewards of His creation? I'd say we're not doing really well passing those tests.I agree with you that there is more to it than any one person can understand. But by the same token, doesn't it say somewhere in your idiom that God helps those who help themselves? Shouldn't we at least try to save what's left of creation in that case?

Well, that's an important calling and He has certainly charged us with that responsibility, but He also says that nothing can be done without Him, in our own strength. If you rely upon Him, you can accomplish a great deal, if it's in His will. Well, from my point of view God cares more about saving a person than saving the planet, and again, working to save the planet in one's own strength, without Him being in it, isn't going to work. At the same time I'm for doing whatever we can for the creation, as I said, short of dedicating my life to it.And no, "God helps those who help themselves" is not at all a Christian notion. Not sure where that one got started. In fact it may be the opposite in a certain sense. Of course we are to work, to "put legs to our prayers" as they say, but it is dependence on God in all things that brings about the most success in anything we do. "Waiting on God." Trusting Him, talking to Him about the problem, asking for His counsel, asking for help to understand and to be guided in the best action to take, and so on. It starts with recognizing what Jesus did on the cross, and then you have the New Life and then God is your help in all problems you face.I truly believe that my clearest posts at EvC come from Him. When I really understand something and say it clearly, it's because He was guiding it. (Mistakes and confusion of course are my own fault.)

Well, pursue the solution you dimly see, no problem there. I'd just say that if you did it in the conscious awareness of God's presence and asking for His guidance in your efforts, and His view of the problem, and so on, you'd learn by that how faith works. One can't just sit back and think about faith and expect to understand it, you have to act on it and then you start to get it. Even the tiniest faith the size of a mustard seed is enough. And to him who has, more is given.

Quetzal writes

quote:

---

I have read many articles that advance the argument you present...

---

While it is true that I said that much of the cause for the problems presented is purely economical, it is not true that when we deal directly with the cause we only have to deal with the cause. I guess what I'm trying to say is the fact that the problem mainly lies with the economic reasons directly implies other factors as well. And in this case, I completely agree with the following:

quote:

---

We have to deal with the complexity of the interactions between humans and their environment in economic terms. We have to look at concepts such as ecological footprint, environmental costs of economic growth, and the tragedy of the commons. We have to determine a way to objectively quantify such “purely” social issues as “quality of life” and historical cultural affect, as well as the value of ecosystem services so that we can calculate both the direct and indirect environmental cost among a myriad of other factors.

---

But...

quote:

---

In short, my biggest complaint about an economic-only approach to even defining the problem leads to at worst empty theorizing and at best a “pie-in-the-sky” utopian idealism along the lines of “All we need to do is bring the developing world up to the level of the developed world and all our problems are solved”. Or, “get the fundies to adopt all the excess children in the world and all our problems are solved”. Economics has its place. This isn’t it.

---

I fully realized that it is not as simple as what I sounded like. However, what I suggested above I strongly believe is a start to us approaching these problems. Face it, we need the vast majority of the people with all the doh (mainly us occupants of the first world countries) to care before any of these problems can even be addressed. And frankly, I don't think fundies like riverrat and faith and much of the rest of the well-off people think much of these problems let alone know what kind of approach to take to solve these problems. What I have heard plenty of are "lets pray..."

quote:

---

Let’s try a really simplified (in fact, grossly over-simplified, but illustrative) calculation to give you something to think about. The ecological footprint of the average American - using us as the standard for “developed world” - is approx. 1.5 ha (3.5 acres) per person...

---

And my point is that we don't need such land area per person or living accomodations. What much of what we call the first world nations have turned into is a consumer of crap based economy. People make daily trips to walmart only to buy things they don't need. They buy cars that cost 10 times more than the ones that would do just the same jobs. And while noone ever thinks of this, this way of thinking actually makes it to the third world countries where people are less educated and more vulnerable to exploitations.While I still believe that the short answer to these questions is simply economics, it implies much more. And again, we should pray/prey less and care more.Added by edit:I guess what I'm trying to say in too many words is that you're looking for a cure to the disease while I'm simply pointing to some methods to ease the symptoms. While it is true that it's certainly always better to cure the disease instead of treating the symptoms, we are not at all to a point where a solution is even possible. And instead of letting the dying suffer, easing their pain is better than not doing anything at all.Added by edit again:And to avoid being a plagarist, I got the human decency part from Thomas Brown.Edited by rgb, : I had a stroke of... just a stroke.Edited by rgb, : Is this part mandatory?

There are many of us that see no divide between science and faith. Traditionally Christians have used the two scriptures. One is the Bible and one is God's creation and each have their own theology. Science is merely one approach to studying the other scripture in an attempt to understand what and how God created. You were replying to Iano with this post. I think that you're misrepresenting his opinion but I'm convinced that this is a misrepresentation of the Christian position. What is fundamental to Christianity is love. It is about loving God, which is to love goodness and to hate evil, and it is about loving our neighbour whoever he/she might be. By extension it is also about loving future generations and that requires us to do all that we can to leave this world in such a condition that future generations can not only exist, but thrive.One of the problems I have with all of society today is the focus on self. The scientific community in the field of medicine works feverishly to extend our lives. One reason for over population is that we are hanging around here a lot longer than we used to. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be looking for a cure to cancer but I think that we put too much emphasize on it. I realize that this is not an issue in the third world but it is one that we should face up to here. Maybe some of the billions of dollars that go into cancer research should go into irrigating the barren parts of Africa.At the same time we are having fewer children and in many cases no children because it interferes with life style. The big western dream is to accumulate enough so that we no longer have to contribute and live a life of pure leisure and consumption. As I said it seems to be all about self. Because I am convinced of an afterlife does not absolve me of my responsibility to leave my children a place to stand in the physical world. I care for this world and the next. I believe that this world is a gift of God and it is a huge responsibility left to us to care for it. I certainly feel that the world is in peril for a number of reasons but I will never give up on it either.Edited by GDR, : typo

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

Its not a question of faith and science Q, it's a question of faith and faith. Or a difference in worldviews as you put it. The world for you is this time and this space and you have faith that science is one tool by which life for your daugthers may be that which you would want for them. Because you love them.I don't say that no attempt should be made to improve things. Christians have always attempted to improve the lot of people history is full of notable examples of such people. Whilst they stand side by side with the likes of yourself in doing so, they have their eye on a greater goal. They know they are shoring up a sinking ship and they do so not only to alleviate suffering now but that more may reach the lifeboat that leads to eternity. They are aware that temporal suffering of your daughters is but a drop in th ocean to what awaits them if they go down with the ship. There is nothing fatalistic in recognising what is happening. It is being pragmatic.What if I am wrong? If you mean regarding an afterlife - then the thought never enters my head. For there is no other side to the coin. And there is no necessity that there be one. For a person used to dealing in a world of tentitives this may prove a stumbling block. That I cannot help. There are definitives, there are absolutes. And your duty to your daughters is not only to consider the relevancy of your own afterlife but the relevancy of theirs.Its not that I don't care about this world Q. I am mindful of it and do what I can so as to reduce my negative impact on it. To reduce my eco-footprint as it were. But what I don't do is lose sight of the larger reality that awaits us all. It is what he has made me interested in. It is what he has given me a heart for. If one day he decides that a mechanical engineer is required to build water pumps in African village and outs a heart in me for that then go I will.But until then its you and your daughters and the like of you that he is after.

I think this is part of my problem. "His will" is pretty ineffable, no? Every time I hear this I hark back to the old joke about the drowning man. The guy keeps praying that if it be God's will to rescue him, then He will. He ignores all kinds of rescue attempts going on around him. Inevitably, the guy drowns. He goes to heaven and asks why he wasn't rescued. The answer comes back something along the lines of "Why did you ignore all the efforts I made to rescue you?" In other words, how do we recognize the will? If God exists, wouldn't it be better to do everything we can, and just assume God is providing the strength needed? Hunh. I never knew that. I've heard that expression almost as far back as I can remember. Funny what the hold an "urban legend" can have. Thanks for the clarification. I'm afraid I've never been very patient, at least when the important things are on the line. God seems to work very slowly, and I guess "mysteriously". Doesn't appear a very reliable way to operate. OTOH, I am aware that many believers find great comfort, solace and counsel in this kind of internal dialog. It just never worked for me.

I don't disagree with your observations. However, I think that addressing the symptoms without addressing the underlying causes is like placing a bandaid on an arterial hemorrhage. At best, you might slow the process. At worst you could compound the problem by thinking you've solved it.

Just because one guy prayed and ignored the answers hardly proves that prayer is to be given up. Pray AND do what makes sense to do.God has answered my prayers sometimes almost immediately.But you have to be a believer, and if nothing I said is an enticement to belief then of course it is useless to you.

All I can say in response, at this juncture, is "Thank you for making my point."

Hi GDR, thanks for your reply. I'm aware of that. If you'll hark back to the OP, you'll note that I stated the range of opinions on the subject represented a continuum. Being an atheist with a strong background in science, I pegged myself at one end. I deliberately left the other end vague, with the expectation that those who self-identified as "opposite" would provide their own definition. I think that was justified based on the responses received from Faith and iano to date. It was certainly not my intent to misrepresent Christianity as a whole. On the other hand, I feel I represented iano's individual position quite accurately. I might suggest you re-read his responses. My view, believer (and believe it) or not, is completely congruent with this. It is, however, not iano's position as he has elucidated it on this thread. He's been very clear that when the choice comes down to actually doing something in this life, or preparing for the next, he chooses the next. Waiting for God to motivate him is tantamount to an excuse not to do anything at all. And I applaud this sentiment, for it mirrors my own feelings. Common ground, indeed.

Not really. If one had to pinpoint a key aspect of what is happening to a person who converts to Christianity is it that they are put to death. Prior to this the person is master of their own destiny. Whilst there choice is influenced by all manner of things - in the end it is they who chose to do or not to do.In accepting Christ as their Lord they are accepting him as their Lord. He is the one steering life now - not self. And so one can expect him to steer. A good idea (I'm off to Africa to build water pumps) is not the same as a God-idea. God might have other plans for me. And if he does - there is no point in me running off to Africa. He might want that I stay in Ireland and help plan outreach courses for people who don't know him in my own community for instance.His plan - not my plan. This is not to say I always to what he wants but there is little point in tarring it all as an "excuse not to do anything at all"

Quetzal writes

quote:

---

However, I think that addressing the symptoms without addressing the underlying causes is like placing a bandaid on an arterial hemorrhage.

---

That's just it. Noone can agree on the underlying causes of the problems addressed. And while we sit here debating what they are, most of us fail to see that there are many many people who need some help right now at this moment.

quote:

---

At worst you could compound the problem by thinking you've solved it.

---

Not in the least. I'd compare what I've proposed as giving morphine to the dying. Sure it doesn't solve the problem... actually it does solve the problem. Bad example.

I’m afraid I’m going to have to leave this thread until at least Monday. I’m off to Cuenca to perform what some would consider one of my periodic exercises in futility: preaching to the unbelievers.I have chosen my sermon from the Gospel of Sustainable Agriculture, Book 4 (Agroforestry Systems), verses 20-24:20: Then he went among them saying, “Behold thy orchards; see how the leaves of thy plants are yellow and withered and thy yields hath fallen?”
21: “This is due to the Sun, for She is hot, and doth dessicate and burn thy crops.”
22: “Now lift up thine eyes to the Forest. See how it is cool and moist under the canopy?”
23: And he bade them, “Cut not thy Forest, but leave the canopy intact. Plant instead thy cacao in the shade of the mighty Kapok, and ye shall be rewarded with yield three-fold.”
24: And they saw that it was good.And also from Book 7 (Integrated Farming), verses 10-16:10: “Planteth thy forage crops nor neglect thee ye legumes, for they will rebuild thy Soil.”
11: And he went among them speaking of Intercropping, and Fish Ponds, and Terracing, and the use of the A-Level for Contour Mapping, and the raising of Native Species, saying:
12: “Nor forget ye thy Chickens, for their poop will fertilize.”
13: And also of Biol and Worm-bedding, for the California Red Worm is mighty in the land;
14: And they did as he bade, and prospered, and there was great rejoicing and the selling of excess production;
15: And the people were fed off the fruits of the land, and there was much feasting on cuy assado and imbibing of chicha;
16: And he saw that it was good.On the other hand, I could probably just wait around for Someone to tell me what to do.

As this thread has now fallen to page three, and there have been no responses since last Thursday, I want to ask if anyone thinks there remains anything to discuss. Iano is preaching circles, Faith is uninterested in engaging, and none of the other "faith" side have chimed in. My disagreements, what there are of them, with the rest of the posters seem to be in the nature of minor quibbles or misunderstandings (which have hopefully been clarified).That being said, unless someone sees a compelling reason to keep the thread open, I would request that a moderator give it 24 hours for any final comments, and close it down. It's not as though it were going anywhere anyway.