Words Less Spoken

At the moment the consensus in the scientific community is that the universe originated in a “Big Bang.” While that may be hotly contested by the religious community, there are certain facts that make the theory hard to easily dispell. One of those facts is that astronomers can observe the visible universe moving further and further away at increasing speed in all directions (and no we are not at the center of the universe.)

Some of the questions raised by those opposed to the theory are “what happened to cause the Big Bang, and where did all that stuff come from?” Just such a question was mentioned by John, a 15 year old also struggling with matters of faith and reason, who recently commented on my post “Branding an Adolescent Mind” at de-conversion.com:

Although, i speak to anyone willing to try to convert me but i have never heard anything that really made me wonder about the truthfullness of their beliefs. The one line that i really couldn’t answer was, ‘despite from the big bang and any of those scientific beliefs, where did all that matter come from?’ My only answer i could give to that christian crusader was, ‘Who are you to say that it all began from a superior being or entity, for some reason, deciding this should be and made it happen?’

Before I make an amateur attempt to answer that question, I want to say that science isn’t about having the one right answer. The thing I that I have come to admire most about science is the pursuit to ask better questions and find better answers. Many times throughout history science operated based on the best answers they had to work from at the time. When better evidence came along, those answers were set aside in light of what they later learned to be true. Nothing is sacred. Even what we consider to be scientific fact is really the best possible answer to a given problem at the moment. Although there are “laws” of physics, there are places where those basic laws break down and do not hold to be true, such as extreme environments like super massive black holes or the very early stages of expansion immediately after the Big Bang. I believe that whenever scientists hold their answers to be “infallible and inerrant,” they cease to be scientists and become religious zealots. I say all of that to say that I don’t have the definative answers to these big questions either. However, I do have better answers that I used to have, and I’m learning to ask better questions.

The simple answer to “where did all that stuff come from?” is a theory which says it came from a singularity, in which all of the matter in the universe was compressed into a space smaller than an atom. The better question that we are asking now is “what happened before the Big Bang?” Truthfully, no one knows. That’s why they call it theoretical physics, but as you would expect there are a number of evolving theories.

I tend to think that the answer to where it came from is the same as where it is going. The problem we have as humans is that we think of time as a linear concept, starting at point A in the past and moving toward point B in the future at a constant rate. Einstein’s theories show that time is indeed a relative thing. I wonder if time isn’t more circular. Can you find the beginning of a circle? Can you show me it’s end? It’s a senseless question. For us to keep asking where it all came from and where is it going may be just as senseless, because it may be that there was no beginning and there will be no end. Sounds strangely divine doesn’t it?

There are two prevailing theories as to how the universe will end that help us to answer how it began. One is that it will end in “fire and brimstone,” known as the Big Crunch. The other is that it will end in ice, known as the Big Chill. Again, this is my best amateur explanation of these ideas. The Big Crunch says that at some point the attractional force of gravity will slow down the expansion of the universe until a point that it begins to collapse back onto itself, eventually all the way back to a singularity once more. In this theory of the end of everything you also have the beginning of everything. This expanding/collapsing pattern repeats itself literally to “worlds without end.” On the other hand, the Big Chill says that the universe will continue expanding at an ever increasing rate of speed such that gravity is not strong enough to overcome the expansion. As matter in the universe continues to move further and further apart, stars will eventually die from a lack of fuel. The fate of this universe is a cold, dark and silent death. You can almost see how religious fundamentalists would appreciate the Big Crunch theory, if not for the the circular pattern of unlimited worlds and lives without end part. However, more of the scientific community is leaning towards the Big Chill theory as being more plausible.

I have enjoyed Stephen Hawking’s books immensely, especially his work on super massive black holes and Parallel Universes. My simple understanding of them is that it’s possible that an immense amount of gravity is compressed within a super massive black hole into a singularity, similar to what originated the Big Bang. At those extremes the fundamental laws of physics break down and theoretical physics steps in to fill in the gaps. In the theory of parallel universes it is possible that the compressed matter and energy of super massive black holes may actually result in a Big Bang of its own, resulting in a completely new and different universe from our own. If in fact it’s possible that super massive black holes result in a parallel universe, there would be an infinite number of parallel universes possible, not of all of which operate under the same laws of physics as ours. After 30 years of research Hawking reversed his theory on parallel universes and says now that after an immense amount of time super massive black holes die and eject their matter/energy back into the universe in an unrecognizable form from the original. Proving yet again that science like ourselves is a work in progress.

I share all of that to say that there is no one answer, at least not yet. We just have better answers and better questions than we used to have. The reality is that our average human lifetime is infinitely small in comparison to the life cycle of even this one known universe that we are in. No amount of science or religion will change the fact that each of us, everyone of us, will one day die. We will cease to be, at least in the linear concept of time that we live with. We are the children of stardust. Our bodies are literally comprised of elements derived from the stars. Given enough time, we will return to our source, whenever and wherever that may be. With those thoughts in mind I am far more inclined to believe in past lifetimes and future lifetimes than I am the Rapture. I am far more inclined to believe in the interconnectedness of all life. I am far more inclined to want to take care of the world we live in, and I am far more inclined to appreciate life, every life, for the wonderful rare and beautiful gift that it is. Good luck on your journey.

It was inevitable sitting in the barber’s chair yesterday with CNN on the TV that the subject of politics would come up. I’m passionate about politics and love a good discussion, but I don’t even try with some people. My barber’s a nice guy I’ve known for years, but he’s a local pastor too, so I don’t go there with him if I can help it.

It was easy to find common ground on our hope that Hillary is soundly defeated. The Clinton’s have been the favored whipping post of the right for years. I, however, wouldn’t have a problem voting for Bill over John McCain any day. I liked Bill. We all made money when he was in the White House. The Republicans passed more of the conservative agenda under his watch than they have under W. I have some ingrained reticence about Hillary in the White House. My wife doesn’t want any woman as President, but I would vote for any other qualified woman with no reservations. So it was easy to talk about our problems with Hillary.

To my surprise my barber said that he thought the Democrats should keep their eye on Obama because he was “one to watch,” as opposed to voting for Hillary. I thought, “Wow, maybe he’s developing an open mind. Maybe Obama’s connecting with more people than I realize.” Then he said that no matter how he felt about McCain at the end of the day he had to vote pro-life and could never vote for anybody that wants to support gays and lesbians. That pissed me off.

I told him that my oldest would be 18 in twelve more years. If McCain had one or even two terms in office, it was very likely that we’d still be embroiled in a war in Iraq and Iran by that time, and I don’t want my boys going over to get killed in a war that is pointless. His reply was, “Now, now, brother. You know the Word says not to worry about tomorrow and things that our out of your control.” What the hell?!  “I can do something about it. I can vote!” I snapped back. That ended of our discussion of politics.

This whole conversation underlies an observation of mine regarding the pro-life Christian right. They are not pro-life. They are anti-abortion, and there is a big difference. Don’t the lives of our servicemen and women count for something? Don’t the lives of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan count for something? What happened to being pro-life? The logic is baffling. You’ll vote for candidates who oppose abortion but support the death penalty and protracted senseless war?  I just don’t get it. Furthermore, what about the lives of gays and lesbians? Should we discard them from society because we don’t understand or approve of their behavior?

I think abortion is horrible. I would hope that the number of abortions would be reduced dramatically, but I believe that it should be safe and legal. Being anti-abortion is not pro-life. What about the life of a young girl whose future is about to be forfeited? the life of a girl who is raped by her father? the life of a baby whose mother cannot possibly care for it?

I think it’s past time we move beyond single issue politics or, to borrow from Obama, red vs. blue, left vs. right, and black vs. white politics. I think it’s past time for all of us to be pro-life in every sense of the word and stop allowing politicians and pundits to pigeon hole us into ideological boxes and political camps.

I had to post this ad from our local paper or few people outside the Bible belt would believe me. I’m still not sure if they’re selling a building for use as a church of their liking or trying to recruit new members to fill a church they’re starting. In either case this ad just fills my heart with warm fuzzy feelings and an irresistable urge to run down the aisle on Sunday to throw myself on the altar.

Maybe you were one of those snobby rich kids that had everything they ever wanted growing up, or maybe you were the kid who saved up every dollar and bought your own pair of designer jeans twice a year and took exquisite care of them. I was neither. I had nice things but Levi’s were the extent of my brand loyalties. Aside from the trendy things we all focus on as teenagers, there are a myriad of other mundane everyday things in our adolescent lives that we use because they are available to us. Toothpaste, ketchup, shaving cream, etc.

When you leave home for the first time, whether for college, marriage, or the working world, you are suddenly faced with more choices than you ever thought possible. You take for granted all the common utilitarian things your parents provided for you. Do you remember the first time you went out to buy toothpaste for yourself? What do you get? Do you buy what your mom had always bought for you? Do you stretch your rebellious wings in protest and go for something new? As simple and foolish as it sounds, it is a microcosm of the process we go through into adulthood. How much do we cling to? How far do we run away?

I still remember vividly walking into my first dorm room at La Tech and finding a nicely packaged shoe-sized box on my bed. Inside were Edge shaving cream, Coast soap, Crest toothpaste and several other necessities and loads of marketing flyers and coupons. Thirteen years later I’m still using those same brands. I did not consciously choose to try something different. Had I wandered down to Wal-Mart after running out of whatever I brought from home, I very well may have bought Aquafresh toothpaste because I had used it all my life, but I was given the opportunity to consider an alternative.

My trips down to the food court and cafeteria in the student center were just as life-altering. They had Bullseye BBQ sauce and Log Cabin syrup. I never had that before, and I really liked them. We always used Kraft BBQ sauce and Blackburn syrup at home. I don’t know how many kids ask their parents to try a different BBQ sauce. You just use what you have, what you’re comfortable with. To this day I still buy those brand at the grocery store. It was a conscious minute rebellious stand on my part. “This is different. I am on my own.”

The religions we grow up with are not all that different than the foods and everyday items we are comfortable with from our childhood. We all know (and you may have been) one of teens who ran away from the church of your childhood as fast and hard as you could the moment you were out the door. I wasn’t. I went deeper. I changed schools, switched my major to religion, married my high school sweetheart, and began pastoring churches by my sophomore year in college.

[Can we take an aside for just a moment and address something here? Who the hell lets a 19 year old kid pastor a church? For crying out loud, I don't care how mature or intelligent you are. It borders on child abuse. I know now that I was no where near mentally and emotionally mature enough to be in that situation. There is a lot to be said for the Methodist system that requires training, accountability, and assignment. This Baptist free-for-all independent streak can be detremental to the emotional well being of all concerned. Okay, just had to get that off my chest.]

It was later after several years of pastoral ministry, graduating college, and lots of life experiences that I began to move away from the comfortable religion of my childhood and seriously question the tenets and methods intensively. Once I stopped going to church every Sunday, it became easier to think clearly. While we may enjoy the fellowship and worship, there is an enormous amount of direct and indirect conditioning taking place. Whenever you remove yourself from that environment and begin to think independently, you may come up with different answers than those you were taught in Sunday School.

I don’t know which label is most appropriate to describe my theological quandry. It’s like trying to hit a moving target because I’m in a constant state of evolution. Maybe I’m a very liberal Christian, but there’s more that I disagree with in the church than I agree with, so it seems disingenuous to consider myself a Christian. I personally feel somewhere in the middle of agnosticism and atheism. My simple understanding of those terms is that one says we can’t know whether or not God is and the other says he is not.

I don’t really know whether God exists or not. If there is a God, he cannot possibly be anything like the Judeo-Christian version we’ve all been brought up to believe in. I’m much more inclined to believe in a unifying field or consciousness than a divine deity. Science and theoretical physics have given me answers to who we are, how we came to be, and what we’re doing here more than any sermon I’ve ever heard. It’s not really important to me which label fits me best, but I’ve felt more and more pressure to have a “coming out.”

I have no desire to diminish the faith of others or make a spectacle of myself. I just don’t believe the same way anymore. There are reasons why I turn down invitations to preach, why I don’t read the Bible the same way as others expect me to, why I don’t care about going to church, etc. I think it’s only a matter of time before family members, friends, or peers force the issue. I’d rather avoid the shock waves and the fallout, because I know that people get angry, they get hurt, they feel the need to put your name on the prayer list. I’m not interested. I may be called an atheist, an agnostic, or a liberal, but I’m happiest just being me. In fact I’m happier being me than I have ever been in my entire life, and for the first time in my entire life I chose to be me.

And the point is?