Editorial: How Do You Know?

Have you ever thought of how we come to "know" anything, how we become sure, at least to ourselves, something is true?

We all learn to discern and understand through the experience of cause and effect. In fact all knowledge is arrived at by a process of feedback we experience, as we navigate life. So why do so many people discount the experience of another and yet still buy into conclusions of others? Even though negative experiences can make us gun-shy, happier ones can reinforce a chosen path.

Of course, this approach brings us to the process of trial and error which we count on to help us move forward.

In it's negative form, experience can stimulate us to withdraw from events which appear similar to past problematic ones. Our conclusions from damaging life experiences can teach us, erroneously, to always be looking for the other shoe to drop. Unfortunately, we can adopt a type of predetermined distrust, a very lonely place. Really, what's happening is a person is superimposing their expectations from past occurrences on this new situation or person. We can begin to respond internally to old stimuli and become distrusting, even of ourselves, in the new experience. A trigger has developed a trap. It's actually the very scientific process of cause and effect until it's not. When this is in the area of emotion then it's not as cut and dry.

Science, makes the assertion, it is operating on the basis of empirical evidence. This means, on the basis of observable, repeatable conditions, materials, and influences, bringing about consistent results. These results are then expected and excepted as relative truths, becoming relied upon for use. So you could say, they are then trusted by the experimenters, and form their belief system.

This is roughly how the basis of 'knowledge' is built in human experience. It's important to see here, science is a belief, basically, a religion of science. All things being equal, in it's positive form, the cause and effect and trial and error approach is how we come to 'know' anything.

It is interesting, the word experiment and experience come from the same base. It is because an experiment is the process of working through a deliberate experience of something.

Of course, if we are taught enough information from a 'knowledge' base, we can begin to trust it without feeling the need to experiment ourselves. However, it's still important to notice, knowledge still requires experience, even if it's from the volume of others; anything else is merely conjecture. In school, this is where we start, and in life, hopefully, we truly put it to the test, in life's trial and error. If we keep our heads down and never really attempt to come to know what we have been taught ourselves, then we are coasting and cannot say we really know. It's the lazy, ignorant way of using our time in life. So in science, the bulk evidence of others is the same as what's called religion. Nevertheless, this same cause-and-effect, trial-and-error approach is what legitimizes the experience of God's reality to an individual. The personal experience of interacting with God is called 'relationship.' Just like with science, there is no clear evidence until one does the experiment reliably, themselves, and has a common experience. Consequently, without this effort, we can buy into scientific assertions, political opinions, cultural effects, or blind belief systems. I think most would agree on this.

This is not to say, by any means, whoever has a belief system is operating blind; in fact, the very opposite may be true. Really, there may be a large database of written material, corroborating testimony of many others, and a wealth of one's personal experiences others are not getting, and so could be 'knowledge.' Correspondingly, this is why people go to church on Sunday and are open to the entrance of Christ as the Lord and Saviour of their lives.

Statements attempting to diminish the experiences of others are often made by those unwilling to do the experiment in the same ways needed. This leaves no ability to validate truth, having no inclusive experience. Usually, this has to do with those pesky triggers again. A person doesn't open to experience, to gain what new thing may be 'known.'

Not being open to the reality of Christ being God, who wants to indwell us; you know, to help us in there, is really a function of fear of the unknown, an insecurity. Based on past errors, fearful expectations regarding change can stifle the motivation to 'know and grow.' So, the genuine release, for actual experience, is resisted. It's very sad. Things like fear of flying, of the water, of certain types of people, of even going outside are built on variations of this same dysfunction.

So what of our perception of what we experience, can it be trusted? Well, on a general basis, only as much as the next person's. Still, it's clear we trust the judgment of outside collective sources for the bigger picture. However, when it comes to personal things, we tend to rely upon our own personal experiences and judgment and are way less trusting of outside sources. The problem is, we and other humans are fallible. Even the collective experience of humanity may be an exercise in misjudgment, if you really want to follow this out to its ends.

So where do we go, and how do we 'know,' from here? The various disciplines of science have continually been challenged and corrected by the free thinking, out of the box non-follower of the crowd. Maybe not directly, as collective pride wouldn't allow it, but over time new lines of progress spring-board forward, overcoming attitudes of fearful, present expectations and mankind sobers up and learns. This is often in a humbling experience.

Then, there is the other side of things where, just because this is the way we've always done it, doesn't mean it's wrong or even outdated. The idea, "If it ain't broken, don't fix it," remains a good policy. Again, this requires a genuine look at things, an unreserved look, one open to unanticipated input, in order to 'know' if something isn't actually broken in some subtle way.

So, how do we 'know' how far we've drifted along the scale, between anxiousness and 'knowledge'? As foreign as it may seem, especially to the status-quo kind of thinking, it requires trust to know. (Heb 11:6a paraphrase) Trust is actually not always a thing to be earned, sometimes it needs to be given, extended, allowed, almost injected. At least in regards to openness to the new.

You see, without trust, we influence the data, colour it, and that's not scientific, is it? Truth, and so consequently honest experience, requires us to be open to whatever may present itself, not just to what we think may be. In a sense, it becomes our choice to get out of 'It's Way.' Then there is no interference, from our anxious interpretations, messing up what could be revealed, when stepping forward into what we don't yet 'know.' This parallels the confusion the world has over the collective historical experience of real Christians and their actual experience of Christ.

A little balance in perspective here: We all, by a large majority, Christians and non-alike, have gone through the same "education" system and learned what science 'knows.' Still, actually, most of us who say we trust science or claim to be scientific are really not there yet. This would require each of us to do every experiment ourselves, in the same environments, under the same conditions, with the same equipment, the same way as those who claimed these truths originally. Every doctor would have to do all the research over again. That's an amazing burden, and so we all function in real life on the basis of 'Belief.' This is defined as opening up to what is being shared with us, allowing ourselves to be influenced by it, and then living in it. Hence, the same way so many have come to experience Christ. It follows, until an individual releases to the experimental parameters, by asking Jesus to live in their spirit for the rest of their lives, and as Lord of their lives and means it, they have not entered into the experience of Christ. They have not repeated the experiment and so have not come to 'know.' Until this, happening now, 'Knowing' CANNOT happen. (Heb 11:6b paraphrase)

Christ, biblically, is 'known' to be God who came in the flesh, who died to purge us of our biases and their knee-jerk reactions, so you can "'know' the truth and the truth will set you free." (John 8:32 paraphrase) This experience has a 'knowledge' base of over 2000 years and millions upon millions of actual, personally tested, transformative, collective experiences. All these individuals have done the experiment. How much science do we usually go on, comparatively, a micro fraction? A few thousand experimental repetitions at best. Yet, in knee-jerk reactions, 'scientists' attempt to discredit what they cannot 'know,' the God who came in the flesh, because they will not open to empirical evidence on a spiritual level within our design. To deny what has not been experienced, is something true scientists cannot responsibly assert. It's a statement in a vacuum and leaves them out of the very belief foundation science says to function within. So they can 'never be qualified' to validate Truth in regards to Christ. Without the substance, there is no experience of actual 'knowledge' or power to live according to its truth. (2Tim 3:5a &7)

We are all "religious" at heart, the one who says, "I am not" is still stating a belief they live by. We all function on a mixture of taught material, common experiences of others, and our own actual experiences to substantiate truth to ourselves. If we are genuine, we will not miss that last step, and so substantiate this truth for ourselves.

What if evidence of Christ as God is in another level of empirical flow, not able to be measured by some electronic gizmo or physical measuring tool, like in the area of the spirit or soul. It requires release or trust to experience it, and is one of the ingredients or materials necessary to repeat the experiment faithfully.

Like when we were a baby, we had to integrate by experience, with our physical senses, what we all take for granted now. Jesus says this clearly in Mark 10:15 and Luke 18:17. As in learning to ride a bike, learning about the spiritual world and navigating in it is a bit precarious. However, as children, we had others to teach and to confirm our own actual experiences, to come to trust what we 'know,' what we release to, as the way things are.

God has this at heart, but first, an obstruction needs to be removed. This is what Easter is all about.

This coming weekend we will experience "Resurrection Weekend," aka Easter. On Friday morning, at 9:30 a.m., there will be a "Good Friday" walk, starting at Palmer Park in Port Perry. It continues up Queen Street, with various stops along the way. Come and experience the meaning of Christ's carrying of His cross, the one on which He died, to take our punishment of sins upon himself. This is so when He rose past death, He could extend the opportunity to experience for ourselves His new form of resurrected life. Life from the other side.

It's very scientific, when we individually ask Him in to our hearts, to rule there as Lord. What a Saviour we will find! Let's face it, if things are messed up, or stressed up on the inside, we can't expect to live healthy on the outside.

What an invitation. What a release!

Happy Resurrection, Happy Seasoning!