Earlier this year I entered into discussions with my brother about just this subject. I tried to keep an open mind because I really wanted to know more about how he thinks and feels, and where he stands on the God issue. Turns out he is a rather hardcore atheist, mostly sighting lack of evidence as his reason. He feels that while there are mountains of evidence supporting evolution, there is not a shred of solid evidence that God exists. And worse yet, many atrocities have been and continue to be committed in the name of religion and service to God. While I cannot deny the second issue, the first is not even an issue. We are both reasoning, logical types of guys who look at the facts and try to make decisions. He seems to reject the possibility of anything “supernatural”, while I look around and see reason, logic and extreme beauty in the handiwork of our Lord! While he sees the Big Bang and evolution as scientific certainties and the basic answer for where it all came from and how it came about, I see the Big Bang and evolution as one possible way (definitely supported by scientific evidence) that God brought creation to where we see it today. My brother seems to believe that there is no need to resort to invoking the supernatural when all we really need is more information to find the right answer. I don’t see why he sees the need to reject the spiritual world completely when our science shows that we know so little about anything! But one thing I did indeed find out is that no amount of logic and reasoning will convince a man of the existence of God. For us to come to a logical, reasonable understanding of the existence of God, there simply must be at least a kernel of faith placed in us by God. And I really believe that there is that kernel placed in us all, and that we can either let the Spirit develop it into some measure of faith and belief, or go the other way and reject that which was given to us. In our discussions, all of my reasoning and arguments fell far short of convincing my dear brother even of the possibility of the existence of God. So my witness to Christ fell on deaf ears, but I had to say it anyway!

And besides, I know this is a weak argument at best, so I never actually use it when trying to reason with folks about God, but I just gotta think that at the end of days for each of us, what could it hurt to be a believer? If it turns out there really IS a God and a spiritual realm, and you denied His existence, it would probably not go well for you. but if, as they seem to think, when you die that’s simply the end of you completely, then what possible disadvantage would there be for believing (eternally speaking)? Especially for those who say they don’t believe but still operate by a clearly defined moral and ethical code in this world. Just for the sake of an eternal safety net I would think people would want to believe on some level. To me, atheism just plain doesn’t make sense!

The word “Faith” implies, for me anyway, an element of doubt. Faith as writer of Hebrews 11:1 says, “is the reality of what we hope for, and the proof of what we don’t see.” Faith and belief are related but not the same. One may have Faith, but have doubts and lack of belief, but Faith is the gift of God that helps us overcome our doubts, fears and lack of belief. We cannot have faith unless there is an element of doubt — the great leap of faith is the leap over doubt and unbelief.

I often tell my Confirmands that it is never wrong to doubt, or even to question belief. What is wrong is when we stop seeking. Any pastor who is honest with you will be able to tell you about the dark nights of the soul she/he encounters periodically — the doubts, fears and even the questioning belief. If one never has doubts, fears, and never questions what one believes we are not children of God but automatons — robots without souls blindly following dogma and living without faith.

While the pastor proclaims she no longer believes… I wonder what her proclamation really means. I can identify with the pain and the dark nights of the soul that brings one to the proclamation. Upon such doubts – shared by John Wesley himself – are the foundations of renewal. While preach until you believe may sound too much like the old saw, “fake it until you make it,” it has validity. Doubt and even unbelief are the starting point of faith. Such an understanding has guided me to faith more many, many times!

In 1738, John Wesley, who would eventually found the Methodist movement, was uncertain of his faith, even though he was an Anglican priest. He worried, “How can I preach to others if I don’t have faith myself?” He talked about his worry with a Moravian pastor, Peter Bohler. “Should I stop preaching?” he asked. Bohler replied, “Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith.” That’s exactly what Wesley did, and exactly what happened.

Then, we have the situation of Mother Teresa, who wrote, “By blood, I am Albanian. By citizenship, an Indian. By faith, I am a Catholic nun. As to my calling, I belong to the world. As to my heart, I belong entirely to the Heart of Jesus.” Yet the world has been astounded to find that her life, while full of works that we would say were indicative of an incredibly strong faith, was empty of God. She acknowledged that for the last 50 years of her life, her spiritual life was empty. The Rev. Brian Kolodiejchuk, who compiled decades of her letters and is the editor of Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light (Doubleday), feels that her writings reveal that for the last nearly half-century of her life she felt no presence of God whatsoever – “neither in her heart or in the eucharist.”

The church anticipates spiritually fallow periods. Indeed, the Spanish mystic St. John of the Cross in the 16th century coined the term the “dark night” of the soul to describe a characteristic stage in the growth of some spiritual masters. Teresa’s may be the most extensive such case on record. (The “dark night” of the 18th century mystic St. Paul of the Cross lasted 45 years; he ultimately recovered.) Yet Kolodiejchuk sees it in St. John’s context, as darkness within faith. Teresa found ways, starting in the early 1960s, to live with it and abandoned neither her belief nor her work. Kolodiejchuk produced the book as proof of the faith-filled perseverance that he sees as her most spiritually heroic act. Read more from this article in Time here, and there is additional interesting information here.

Questions: Think for a bit about how inconstant your faith is. When do you find that God seems to be out of your life? When that happens, is it because God left or because you set him aside? How do you handle the dark nights of your soul?

“1Think of us in this way, as servants of Christ and stewards of God’s mysteries. 2Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. 3But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. I do not even judge myself. 4I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 5Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive commendation from God.”

He is pretty clear about the existence of “darkness” in our lives.

Questions: What is the difference between preferring privacy and loving “darkness”? Getting personal now: upon honest reflection what things in your life do you keep in “darkness” and need to expose to God’s light? What might happen to those things if you did?

Questions: How does the fact that nothing you do is hidden from God shape your daily decisions? Why does this fact not deter some people, even some Christians, from wrongdoing?

As far as justice goes, I have a few thoughts.
Justice is getting what you deserve.
Mercy is not getting what you deserve.
Injustice and Grace are both getting what you do not deserve. But the difference is Love.

Justice in this case would be Zimmerman getting what he deserves. And I am not sure any of us have the ability to judge him. But the Lord does. We must not turn our hearts from the Lord in a search for justice.

If Trayvon was unarmed and only inflicted a broken nose to Zimmerman, self-defense is not justified, in my opinion. There are certainly disarming techniques that can be used before a handgun. That is why I find handguns to be a most regrettable under the 2nd amendment. Without it, both men could be alive today and this would only be a matter of battery and assault.

Questions: Given these two definitions of the Old Testament word for justice, what would justice look like in the Zimmerman-Martin case? When and how is it our role to pass judgment in our search for universal justice? Is there a difference between ‘justice’ and ‘retribution’?