Thomas was a fervent follower of Jesus. His emotional bond with his Master was so strong that at times he felt he was ready to die for Him (John 11:16).
But now Jesus was dead. Gloomy thoughts and sadness filled Thomas’ heart. What made things even more complicated was this unbelievable assertion the other disciples were making: Jesus had been resurrected and had shown Himself to them!
Was this possible? Torn between hope and fear of being hurt, Thomas decided he needed something more before accepting the truth of such an astonishing claim. He wanted to see and touch; he wanted physical evidence.
For Christians in the twenty-first century the situation is not all that different. In a time when our ability to explore and understand nature has greatly expanded, statements about reality can often be put to the test through observation and scientific experimentation.
This type of knowledge, acquired through direct examination of physical evidence, is often perceived as the most secure way to know what is true. At the end of the day, how else could we distinguish what information to trust among the myriad of disparate ideas we come into contact with every day? God gave us senses and intellectual abilities to organize evidence in the most logical way and base our decisions upon it.
The problemis that our belief system includes more than just what we can directly observe. We believe certain events happened in the past, for example, that Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden, of which there are no tangible remains. We believe that certain beings exist in the present, for example, angels, which we cannot continually experience with our senses.
We believe in the certainty of future events, such as the second coming of Jesus, which we can only predict but not yet see. The Bible itself contains definitions of faith that express this quality of “assurance about what we do not see” (Heb. 11:1).
The question, therefore, becomes, What role should physical evidence play in the construction of faith?
For those worried about the risk of developing a “blind” faith, adopted by credulous people who disregard visible evidence, there is good news. In spite of the belief in certain things we cannot touch and see, the core of the Christian faith is based on the revelation in space and time of these intangible realities.
The apostle John assures us that his testimony stems from that “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched” (1 John 1:1), meaning that he had direct physical interaction with Jesus.
Similarly, the apostle Peter reminds us that “we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Peter 1:16).
God really created the world, the biblical flood really occurred on earth, and Jesus really lived among us. If these were not actual events, we would truly be chasing wind and figments of imagination.
But when these realities interact with us and our world, the physical traces they leave through this interaction become a foundation on which to build our faith.
This was the case for many people of faith, not just John and Peter. Gideon certainly comes to mind as a prime example; and, of course, the discouraged Thomas.
Unfortunately, the Bible is also full of examples of people who were led astray by examination of the physical evidence. Eve (Gen. 3:6), Lot (Gen. 13:10, 11), the spies sent to Canaan (Num. 13:31-33), and many others based their wrong choices on what they could see. Observation of the most impressive pieces of physical evidence can elicit very different and, at times, opposite responses.
The resurrection of Lazarus, for instance, brought some to accept Jesus as the Messiah (John 11:45), but triggered in others the resolution to kill Him (John 11:53). Perhaps the problem is not in the evidence itself but in our limited ability to comprehend it. For all practical purposes, however, this still leaves us uncertain about how much our faith should be based on what we see.
Given this uncertainty, can we be sure that the foundations of some of our beliefs are solid?
We can, but not because of our own abilities or demonstrations. Paul explains that “faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ” (Rom. 10:17).
What transpires from this text is that the faith process is not our attempt at building a logical case for God; it is God’s outreach toward us. God is the initiator of the faith experience. He is the one who speaks through His Word. His Word is also spoken through nature and physical evidence.
This evidence is only a channel, and does not in itself lead to faith. What makes a difference is the attitude we choose when considering the evidence.
Faith happens when we adopt a listening attitude (the “
hearing” of Rom. 10:17), deciding to become a recipient rather than a manipulator. Faith happens when we change our disposition in interacting with the physical evidence, from self-centered to open and receptive. Faith happens when we look to learn, not to impose. Only then will empirical-experiential evidence become the place of an encounter with God in the context of a relationship.
When it feels as though we are being caught in a clash between what we believe and what we see, we are in good company. One day Jesus gave Peter a lesson on this very subject, commanding him to fish in daylight against all reasonable odds. Peter’s response is beautiful and touching: “Master, we’ve worked hard all night and haven’t caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets” (Luke 5:5).
Peter’s words do not imply denial of reason and empirical evidence; this is not a blind and ill-informed faith. It is a response of trust in the context of a relationship, which includes extensive pondering of empirical evidence. It is an act of decentering, a conscious choice, and an acknowledgement that we are jars of clay and God’s outreach is our treasure. It is a recognition that God is in control of nature (or the physical and biological universe) beyond what we see and understand.
True, this approach leaves us with the dilemma of why, at times, revelation seems to trump human rationality, when rationality is a God-given attribute. Perhaps this is the legacy of the Fall. Or perhaps this is not just a methodological problem, but being human means that even under the most ideal conditions we understand only in part how things really are and work.
Most important, however, the way we deal with this dilemma could represent the utmost test of faith: accepting God’s directions even when they do not appear to make sense. We look forward to the day when we will see clearly, face to face. But for now, experiencing incomplete understanding can be an effective reminder that an attitude of subordination is better than self-reliance. Today, we are still called to choose between being in charge or listening, directing or receiving, being served or serving.
Numerous Adventist scholars have written essays on the subject of truth, faith, and physical evidence. An extensive compilation of these articles can be found on the Geoscience Research Institute Web site:
