My 'Unbelievable?' Journey.

How's this for a dichotomy? 

The older I get, the less I feel I know about the world.

Though I might say that I have accumulated considerable knowledge over the course of my life, simply as a function of *being alive*, I know I haven't even scratched the surface of all that there is to know in this life.

In the past couple of years, I have experienced profound challenges -  aligned to the medical difficulties I have faced with my throat.

The threat to my to health - my life - has compelled me to confront some harsh truths about myself. Chiefly among them is that I don't have it all worked out. In fact, I know very little. I've moved through my life superficially in many ways. I don't  feel that I have lived a deep life. There is so much I feel has passed me by. There are questions I have never considered. My recent experience has prodded me to re-evaluate just who I am and what this life of mine is all about. In the midst of facing my own mortality, I arrived at this realisation and it scared me.

(image credit: Mikko Lagerstedt).

Where am I heading here?

With a sense of urgency (perhaps driven by the confrontation with my mortality),  I began to seek out voices, points of view and arguments that I previously would have felt inadequate in trying to understand. I would have probably dismissed or derided them because they would have seemed so clearly in opposition to everything I previously thought I believed in my atrophied world view. 

Through interlocutors like Alice Fraser, Claire Lehmann, Sam Harris, Dr. Deborah Soh, Steven Pinker, Jordan Peterson and the Weinstein brothers I began to crave longer form discussions that weren't afraid to tackle subjects like philosophy, discourse, progress, the state of polity, science and religion.

Religion...

Though I was christened Anglican, I've given little regard to Christianity or faith. At various times throughout my life I've been antagonistic towards it - finding its various dogmas distasteful and restrictive. I've (probably) aligned myself with atheism, with all its inherent focus on that which can be evidenced and qauntified. 

But here's a thing. In the course of my own Enlightenment project - of listening to these diverse voices and considering new ways of thinking - I've found myself becoming what I recently described on Twitter as a 'curious theologian'.

That resonated with another prominent voice I'd recently discovered, (via Jordan Peterson), the Christian broadcaster and journalist Justin Brierley.

Evidently, it was enough of an observation, for him to actually reach out to me and ask if I might discuss that further, which we did over the course of a few emails. The exchange was a brief but lovely one, which led Justin to generously offer me a copy of a book he has written called 'Unbelievable? Why After Ten Years Of Talking With Atheists, I'm Still A Christian.'

Justin is the host of a weekly show on the Premier Christian Radio Network in the UK. Titled 'Unbelievable?' the show provides a forum for debate and discussion between a Christian guest and an Atheist guest, with Justin moderating. The topics are varied and routinely fascinating but it is the spirit of congenial, good faith discussion about deep philosophical and theological questions that appeals to me so much. The community of guests Justin welcomes to the studio each week are an appealing collection of deep thinkers, formidable intellectuals and engaging humans who offer so much to learn and consider. Their debates are spirited too, which makes each episode thought provoking. 

'Unbelievable?' - the book is a compelling companion piece, in which Brierley explores the origins of his radio show and the underlying ethos behind it. More than that, 'Unbelievable?' is Brierley's dissertation on why, after 10 years of interviewing Atheists and Christians, he remains firmly committed to his own Christian beliefs.

However, unlike the fire and brimstone defence of Christianity that one might expect, Unbelievable is instead an engaging series of essays in which Brierley methodically sets out his arguments for Christian faith, his own belief in God and the Resurrected Christ. He challenges the commonly held views against Christianity by Atheists - briute facts - and draws upon science, cosmology, art, literature and history to make his case that Christianity has been a pre-eminent force in the human project. 

In reading 'Unbelievable?' I continued my engagement with Brierley via Twitter to clarify and seek further insights on the arguments he has set out. I've been impressed with his willingness to respond and it's spurred me on to treat his book with an open mind.

One chapter in the book, in particular, stood out to me. Brierley explores the atheist objection against God: suffering. I went into this, thinking that I would come down on the side of the atheist argument - that no God could exist that would allow suffering. But in his opening statement, Brierley recounts an experience of having one of his own newborn children admitted to an NICU. 

This struck me as I have spent much of my Nursing career working in ICU's - including NICU. Brierley tells of having to watch his child suffer as the medical and nursing team worked to treat his child and in the process, having to inflict more suffering on the child in order to care and treat him. Happily for Justin and his wife, their child was fine. 

His account had a significant impact on me. It altered the way I appraised the notion of suffering. It would seem that it is not as one sided or a product of a indifferent God as many would argue. 

Much of what I do as an Intensive Care Nurse involves suffering - whether I am  witness to it in the disease process or surgical condition. As a Nurse, I have to accept - and even impart - a certain amount of suffering in order to alleviate that suffering in the longer term. Brierley has even encouraged me to re-evaluate suffering and what it might mean in the context of Christianity and the notion of a God. I've also given a deeper consideration the question of what is caring? 

Where does the want to care for others - to alleviate suffering? Is it merely a human trait - the product of evolution? Or could it have some sort of theistic origin?

Caring & suffering... 

I'm still trying to work this out even as I write this so I may return to it in the future. The fact that *I am* trying to work this out is something of a revelation for me.

I find it difficult to argue that Christianity has not been a significant influence in our understanding of the moral landscape. Everything we know about morality and ethics - at least in the Western context - has arisen out of Christianity. Sure, Atheists will argue that morality and ethics are their own entities, observable and practiced by Christian and non-Christians alike. But it seems reasonable to credit their foundation in Christianity. 

But where does this all leave me - an individual unsure, (arguably) unknowledgable, with a long history of doubt of that which I can't readily observe.

I can only appreciate the existence of the radio show 'Unbelievable?' and its mission to bring people together to debate significant topics in the spirit of good faith. 'Unbelievable?' is one of the richest learnimg experiences I have ever encountered and it is encouraging me to see the world and my place in it more deeply and considerately than I ever have before. 

Justin Brierley's 'Unbelievable?' is quite possibly one of the most valuable books I have ever owned. It has kick started a quest to learn and grow in my thinking and it offers a road map to take. 

Will it lead me to a wholesale embrace of Christianity? It may and it may not. I'm not sure if that is the goal for me at this point. I find myself at the beginning of something new with 'Unbelievable?' in hand as a touchstone.  

What I am sure of is that I want to undertake the journey it offers. The learning potential. Deeper and more considerate thinking. The joy of discourse and the voices of fascinating minds. These are the jewels a work like 'Unbelievable?' can gift.

Thank you Justin. 

I believe in you.

Visit 'Unbelievable?' podcast/radio show here.

Purchase 'Unbelievable?' here. 

Tweet with Justin Brierley here. 

DFA. 

The Disconnectedness Of Connection.

I just sat through a re-watching of one of my most favourite films of all time yesterday afternoon - the 1997 Robert Zemeckis helmed "Contact" starring Jodie Foster and Matthew McConaughey. The movie explores the relationship between science and faith within the context of the scientist, Ellie Arroway (Jodie Foster), discovering a radio signal transmitted to Earth from deep space and the ramifications of that discovery for the entire human race.

Copyright © 1997 Time/Warner Inc. 

Among the the many ideas that the film offers up, one in particular resonated with me in 1997, and it continues to do so now. It's the question of whether science has advanced us as a species, whether it has been of benefit to our connectedness to one another or whether it has isolated us. 

What impresses me most about the film is the portrayal of the man of faith, Palmer Joss (Matthew McConaughey). Palmer Joss is a theologian and writer, a former priest whose search for his own truth has led him away from the Church. This facet of the character interests me less than the ideas he puts forward throughout the course of the film.

Matthew McConaughey as Palmer Joss from the motion picture Contact. Copyright © 1997 Time/Warner Inc.

I am especially drawn to this line of dialogue, in a scene Palmer Joss shares with Larry King during an interview to promote a book he has written. King asks Joss if he is against science, to which Joss replies by saying, no. 

"What I'm asking is... are we happier, as a human race? Is the world fundamentally a better place because of science and technology? We shop at home, we surf the Web, and at the same time we feel emptier, lonelier, and more cut off from each other than at any other time in human history..."

This line of dialogue resonates and it is an especially powerful observation when you consider that this was scripted pre-social media and indeed when the internet as we know it, was in its infancy. 

There is no doubt that science and technological advancement have been immeasurably beneficial to us as a species. I'm thinking in terms of practical applications such as health, education, agriculture, research, communication - even science itself. However, conversely, when I walk down the street today or ride the tram into town and see so many people with their heads buried in their smartphones, ear buds firmly positioned in their ears, I am often reminded of Palmer's line of thinking. And I observe it on social media - I'm as guilty of it as the next person - but increasingly, I find that it is empty of real interaction and engagement. The endless memes, the reposting of news articles that receive little engagement or, when they do,  the rampant tribalism housed in the comments sections of on-line news articles. People shouting to be heard by being as partisan as they can be.   

Connected yet so disconnected.

It has lead me to question...

I think people have come to rely on social media as a means of avoiding real contact with one another. They stay indoors, don't pick up the phone, put off opportunities to gather together. Rather, they depend upon the cocoon of the internet - the comment or the like; make themselves believe that that form of contact is adequate.

Now, obviously this doesn't apply to everybody - particularly among those who interact with people across continents and I'm not arguing that this form of interaction should be discouraged entirely. If you're are interacting only with those people at the expense of others in your own location, then I believe you probably need to take stock.

Jodie Foster as Dr. Elenore Arroway in the motion picture Contact. Copyright © 1997 Time/Warner Inc.

I've felt it. That loneliness that Palmer Joss spoke of. Weeks might go by and I've woken up one day to realize that, in some cases, it's been months since I've caught up with real friends in real interaction, real engagement. And it has lead me to re-evaluate where I stand in terms of my own connectedness to people, friends, family...even loved ones. 

Science and faith and the human condition have rarely been examined as eloquently as they are in the movie Contact and for that particular truth, I think Contact will stand as an important document for many years to come. Palmer Joss, as a character, asks us to question our connectedness to one another and whether we need to do more to bridge the gulf between us. 

I, for one, believe him...

DFA.