The Physics of Faith

A frequently expressed view is that science and religion have little to do with one another; that they speak different languages, for different purposes. Science is concerned with cold, hard facts, with what can be proven; religion, on the other hand, is concerned with faith, with what one believes despite (or in spite) of what can be effectively demonstrated.

To an extent this is true; but only, in my view, because science is the exploration of the physical universe, whereas faith is concerned, not with how we got here, but why we are here, and what that says about the relationship between the human and the divine. And yet I also feel that there is a profound overlap between science and religion, that the language of the former can in fact be deployed as a powerful analogy for an understanding of the latter.

It seems to me that much of the difficulty which Christians have in explaining events such as the resurrection of Christ resides in the fact that we live in a scientifically literate society. While relatively few people are cognizant of the specifics of disciplines such as physics, there is nonetheless a broad understanding of the scientific explanation of the physical universe. This frequently makes particular aspects of faith seem unbelievable to those who have even a rudimentary understanding of how the laws of nature operate. Indeed, for many Christians with a knowledge of science, it makes their own faith highly problematic - as Charles Darwin, among others, experienced.

I think this difficulty is no bad thing. Not, I hasten to add, because it provides the forum through which faith can “triumph” over science, but because it highlights that Christians cannot simply ignore the discoveries of science and what these have to say about the operation of the cosmos. Neither can we reasonably ask people to pretend that the scientific explanation of the universe either isn’t valid or doesn’t apply under certain circumstances. However, what Christians can do is utilise the language of science to speak of aspects of faith in terms that are relevant and accessible in a scientifically literate society.

As a theology student, this possibility was demonstrated to me powerfully last semester. My lecturer was talking about the resurrection of Christ, and provided the class with a copy of a sermon on the same subject which he had recently preached. I was deeply impressed by how my lecturer spoke in his sermon of the resurrection as a different kind of physicality which was nonetheless apprehensible in our universe, but which did not overturn the laws of nature as they are understood by humanity. It immediately occurred to me that this image of a different kind of physicality resonated strongly with one of the most exciting areas of scientific exploration: string theory physics.

I won’t go into the intricacies of string theory physics here; but one of the most evocative suggestions arising from string theory is that there are multiple dimensions to reality, only some of which are perceived by humans. The other dimensions all interact with the universe we perceive (even where the effects of that interaction are not perceptible) and may also possess their own laws of physics. In other words, all these other dimensions may contain the possibility of different forms of physicality than those known in “our” universe.

It occurred to me that even a rudimentary understanding of physics could thus also provide a way into the mystery of the resurrection. Being aware that there are other dimensions of reality of which we are not aware, but which nonetheless interact with “our” universe, immediately enables one to - analogously - envisage the resurrection as an event in which a different dimension of reality - the reality of God - broke into, and interacted with, the universe we know without overturning the laws of physicality as they apply to us.

Which is not to say that I think the resurrection was an example of the operation of string theory physics, or that string theory - or any system of human understanding - could ever “explain” God. Indeed, string theory is not accepted by the majority of physicists as a valid explanation of the cosmos because many of its more provocative suppositions are - and will probably remain - untestable. However, what string theory does do is arm Christians with a powerful tool of analogy with which to provide others a way into mysteries such as the resurrection of Christ. For God is, ultimately, a mystery, ineffable and inexplicable; however, what is required is not understanding but a means of engagement, a means through which broken humanity can participate in a conversation and relationship with God. A process by which the mystery remains, but becomes accessible.

Personally, I think Christians could do a lot worse - and, perhaps, not much better - than to use the wonders of the physical universe revealed in the language of science to open to others the joyous mystery of God.

Talk to you soon,

BB

Quote for the Day: Mystics are people who hope that science will one day overtake them. (Booth Tarkington)