Trust No One...!
A friend of mine had a situation recently where she was going to post something, decided to check it on a well-known fact-checking site, and eventually posted thanks for *not* posting it due to information that she read on the secondary site. I've often found myself doing that - a friend re-posts something, I go to this site, see that the post is in error, then post the link to debunk the initial repost.
However, someone else told this friend that she should *never* trust this particular, very famous, fact-checking site because they always lie. This FOAF was insistent that the fact checkers are, essentially (and not quoting), compliant with the liberal agenda and lie constantly. "You must decide for yourself and not rely on someone else to do your thinking for you!" was the basic assertion.
I couldn't help it. I asked for an example.
Nope, couldn't be provided, as we would get bogged down in minutae and the specifics of the argument. In other words, it was assumed that I would side with the fact-checkers in any example he would provide. He went on to say that, well, okay, 99+% of what was on this fact-checking site was truth, but they "went mainstream" and now lie about the big, critical things... I again asked for an example, and again it could not be provided. So, again, I'm left to conclude that this individual feels that I will accept the position of the fact-checking site and potentially ridicule him/argue with him/etc. because of his beliefs.
If he's reading this, I'm trying not to.
Because, see, as Christians, we are in a similar situation to this individual. We proclaim belief in something that cannot, in and of itself, be seen. One does not "see God." No, one sees the effects of God's passing, the result of God's creativity, the impact of God upon the lives of individuals and groups around the world, but not actually God Himself! We attribute things to God that cannot be "proven" by scientific inquiry - that a cancer tumour in one individual was suddenly isolated and easy to remove, that another person's deafness has been spontaneously alleviated with no medically explicable reason, that the spectra of refraction in suspended atmospheric water *does* turn the sky blue - and have faith that it is so, based on promises contained in book whose composition was suspended and frozen coming on 1,800 years ago, when science, medicine, and understandings of the natural world were generally in their budding infancy. Every composition, attestation, and treatise since the ascension of Jesus (whatever that may have actually looked like) is based upon the impression and assurance that God is present in the lives of His people, and while I indeed believe it to be true, and not only believe it but preach it and try to form the greater portion of my life around it, I realize that it is scientifically impossible to prove.
I also tend to find myself reading Christian authors who grapple with the questions, rather than those who "have the answers." I've read or own most of Philip Yancey's books, as he struggles to maintain faith in a world that so increasingly rejects it; on the other hand, I've never actually read anything by John Shelby Spong, except for snippets that make me recoil violently in dismay. I struggle with Calvin, though I have realized lately that much of his work in the Institutes is only conclusions he felt himself forced to draw based on what he could see and understand before him - he wasn't necessarily right, just striving to be as right as he could be in his present time, which happened to be four-and-a-half centuries ago! And I have an increasingly hard time with "lists", the "these seven things are killing your church" and "five habits to cultivate that will make your congregation thrive!" things. I find they produce a sense of inadequacy in me, which I can't see being intended, but nonetheless a result. While interesting, I find myslf avoiding contemplating them more and more. And yes, Prosperity Gospel nonsense just about makes me weep, despite the fact that it is propagated by those who call themselves Christians, just as I do.
"Draw your own conclusions."
I have tried. I have tried to draw my own conclusions based on my own experiences, on the experiences of others, on what has been written, on what has been spoken, on the grasping of my own weaknesses and strengths, and on many other factors. I look at prayers that have been answered as I have asked for them, as well as prayers given *different* answers (but answers nonetheless). I think of my blessings. I think of my gifts. I think of how I "fit" into certain situations, and how I don't fit into others. I consider that I *was* "made" for certain things, and if made then I have a Maker. I choose to believe that my Maker is benevolent, that He wants me to live well with my fellow creations because life is better for me if I do, that I *have* a choice between right and wrong, good and evil, selfish and selfless, and that no sin is unforgiveable if I repent of it with a truly contrite heart. I believe in the God that Jesus proclaimed. And I trust that even the worst moment in my life is ultimately for my welfare and can be used for good at some point, though I may not know it until it comes!
Here I am, and here I stand. I can do no other.
However, someone else told this friend that she should *never* trust this particular, very famous, fact-checking site because they always lie. This FOAF was insistent that the fact checkers are, essentially (and not quoting), compliant with the liberal agenda and lie constantly. "You must decide for yourself and not rely on someone else to do your thinking for you!" was the basic assertion.
I couldn't help it. I asked for an example.
Nope, couldn't be provided, as we would get bogged down in minutae and the specifics of the argument. In other words, it was assumed that I would side with the fact-checkers in any example he would provide. He went on to say that, well, okay, 99+% of what was on this fact-checking site was truth, but they "went mainstream" and now lie about the big, critical things... I again asked for an example, and again it could not be provided. So, again, I'm left to conclude that this individual feels that I will accept the position of the fact-checking site and potentially ridicule him/argue with him/etc. because of his beliefs.
If he's reading this, I'm trying not to.
Because, see, as Christians, we are in a similar situation to this individual. We proclaim belief in something that cannot, in and of itself, be seen. One does not "see God." No, one sees the effects of God's passing, the result of God's creativity, the impact of God upon the lives of individuals and groups around the world, but not actually God Himself! We attribute things to God that cannot be "proven" by scientific inquiry - that a cancer tumour in one individual was suddenly isolated and easy to remove, that another person's deafness has been spontaneously alleviated with no medically explicable reason, that the spectra of refraction in suspended atmospheric water *does* turn the sky blue - and have faith that it is so, based on promises contained in book whose composition was suspended and frozen coming on 1,800 years ago, when science, medicine, and understandings of the natural world were generally in their budding infancy. Every composition, attestation, and treatise since the ascension of Jesus (whatever that may have actually looked like) is based upon the impression and assurance that God is present in the lives of His people, and while I indeed believe it to be true, and not only believe it but preach it and try to form the greater portion of my life around it, I realize that it is scientifically impossible to prove.
I also tend to find myself reading Christian authors who grapple with the questions, rather than those who "have the answers." I've read or own most of Philip Yancey's books, as he struggles to maintain faith in a world that so increasingly rejects it; on the other hand, I've never actually read anything by John Shelby Spong, except for snippets that make me recoil violently in dismay. I struggle with Calvin, though I have realized lately that much of his work in the Institutes is only conclusions he felt himself forced to draw based on what he could see and understand before him - he wasn't necessarily right, just striving to be as right as he could be in his present time, which happened to be four-and-a-half centuries ago! And I have an increasingly hard time with "lists", the "these seven things are killing your church" and "five habits to cultivate that will make your congregation thrive!" things. I find they produce a sense of inadequacy in me, which I can't see being intended, but nonetheless a result. While interesting, I find myslf avoiding contemplating them more and more. And yes, Prosperity Gospel nonsense just about makes me weep, despite the fact that it is propagated by those who call themselves Christians, just as I do.
"Draw your own conclusions."
I have tried. I have tried to draw my own conclusions based on my own experiences, on the experiences of others, on what has been written, on what has been spoken, on the grasping of my own weaknesses and strengths, and on many other factors. I look at prayers that have been answered as I have asked for them, as well as prayers given *different* answers (but answers nonetheless). I think of my blessings. I think of my gifts. I think of how I "fit" into certain situations, and how I don't fit into others. I consider that I *was* "made" for certain things, and if made then I have a Maker. I choose to believe that my Maker is benevolent, that He wants me to live well with my fellow creations because life is better for me if I do, that I *have* a choice between right and wrong, good and evil, selfish and selfless, and that no sin is unforgiveable if I repent of it with a truly contrite heart. I believe in the God that Jesus proclaimed. And I trust that even the worst moment in my life is ultimately for my welfare and can be used for good at some point, though I may not know it until it comes!
Here I am, and here I stand. I can do no other.