Confessions of a Religioholic

If you're reading this for the intriguing title, that's good. That's what titles are for :)

So I definitely have been convicted lately of my way of doing things, religiously speaking. I am guilty of what Shane Claiborne calls "spiritual bulimia," especially through my adolescence. What this concept implies is one totally immersing oneself in the trappings of spirituality. In Christian circles, this has generally, including with me, taken two major forms. The first is an emphasis on Christian "stuff"--Christian music, Christian books, Christian everything. While I don't deny that these kinds of things can be helpful in avoiding the terribly destructive areas of secular life, I think there is definitely a fine line between acceptable use of these resources and an excessive reliance on them. Too much of this Christian "stuff" promotes a sense of separateness from other people. While holy living and sanctification are important--no arguments there--isn't it counterproductive to reaching people with the message of Christ to disassociate ourselves with everything they hold to be valuable? While I recognize that there must be a balance maintained here--meaning I don't think these things are inherently "bad"--I also recognize that in my particular situation I was on the extreme "Christan-stuff" side. I lived in another world from my non-Christian friends, and in fact, I even focused on making Christian friends and minimizing my relationships with non-Christians. Obviously, this attitude was wrong on multiple levels, and I confess that it was my modus operendi for far too long.

The second way I've kind of been a "religioholic" is in my understanding of the sharp distinction between secular knowledge and religious knowledge. I have even been guilty of claiming that when one is in politics one must take on the views of politics, putting religion to the side, and vice-versa when one is in a religious situation. What this view really entails is an artificial construction of views that are convenient for religion but problematic for other areas of life. An interesting example is the classic science/religion controversy. I have been guilty of standing against everything that scientists have to say, especially about evolution, just based on my religious understandings. Refusing to entertain the idea that perhaps both forms of truth work, I have subscribed to a narrow perspective--one which I am now trying to forcibly shake. Understanding the true nature of the Bible has helped in this regard, making my former nearly literal (though, of course, complete literal interpretation is impossible) interpretations seem somewhat shallow. This course of thought has opened up so many more possibilities for faith.

It might be argued that these kinds of shakings in my faith are, in fact, signs of its weakening; but I disagree. Instead of not trusting myself to live my life in the world and isolating myself in a religioholic world, I live this life with a sense of deep trust in God. It's too safe to live exclusively among Christians, listen to only Christian music, etc.; and God never claimed that "being safe" is what he wanted for us. I think it takes a stronger faith to face the influences of the world and still remain true to God, to still love like Christ told us to despite the pain and struggle of life. It takes even more faith to recognize the good, that part of something that remains from God's first creation, in the world. Genesis tells us that what God created was "good," and although sin has corrupted the earth, it is still helpful to remember that the forbidden fruit was not "the tree of the knowledge of evil" but "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." What this implies is that both good and evil exist in the world. I know this sounds paradoxical, but I believe that God is too powerful for something like sin to completely erase the good in anything he created. Somewhere in creation, there is good. It takes a lot of faith to find it, and I hope that that's what I'm growing into out of my place of "relgioholicism."

Science and Empiricism

So, I've just finished a science class entitled "Scientific Discoveries and Paradigm Shifts." In this class we studied a lot about scientific truth and religion, specifically Christianity. Approaching science from a Christian perspective is a difficult concept for most people to envision, but we managed to do so.

One of the books that we read was Thomas Kuhn's classic The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which essentially argued that science progresses by "revolutions" that function much the same as political revolutions with different sides, times of confusion and conflict, and a clear winner. But this approach seems to me to limit science's defining characteristic: its empiricism.

Empiricism is basically the tenet that the senses are used to formulate theories. Science works within a realm of empiricism. It must observe and interpret the data taken in with the five senses. To say that science must overcome deception of the senses and interpret the truth regardless of what is perceived is asking it to do more than it can do. The realm beyond the empirical is the realm for the humanities, philosophy, religion, arts, etc.

Kuhn's model seems to be an undue placement of the assumptions of philosophical process onto an empirically based system of thought. No wonder so many scientists are uneasy with Kuhn's ideas. While his understanding of revolutionary, argumentative revolutions holds true in philosophy, religion, etc., it is not well-suited to the environment of science, where empirical observation is the basis for accuracy.

So if we accept this understanding of science, then we can easily see that there is no threat to Christian belief from science, no matter how far it goes. They work within differing realms of proof and truth. It simply is beyond the scope of science to prove the existence of God one way or the other, much as it is beyond the scope of religion to describe the physical structure of the universe. As theologians, that is not our purpose; our purpose is to understand God. I am willing to, as a student of religion, allow scientists to examine their realm of inquiry as long as I am free to examine mine.