by Aaron Davis
I’m not trying to stretch things to fit my example, but in recent years there have been some quantum theories that may parallel what was being experienced in these biblical examples that fit the mold for what we may not believe is possible.
No, Jesus isn’t some great magician. In each instance, it seems possible that Jesus may be performing what science has come to term Quantum Tunneling or Quantum Teleportation, when he seemingly transports from one place and appears out of nowhere from somewhere else.
Theoretical Physicist Gian Giudice explains Quantum Tunneling in his TED talk, “Why our universe might exist on a knife-edge”:
According to the laws of quantum mechanics, it is possible to have transitions between two states even in the presence of an energy barrier separating the two states—the phenomenon is called quantum tunneling. Because of quantum tunneling I could disappear from this room and reappear in the next room, practically penetrating the wall. Don’t expect me to actually perform the trick in front of your eyes because the probability for me to penetrate the wall is ridiculously small . . . But believe me, quantum tunneling is a real phenomenon and it has been observed in many systems. For instance a tunnel diode a component used in electronics works thanks to the wonders of quantum tunneling.
Quantum tunneling has been proven . . . where matter disappears and reappears in another place.
Because of quantum tunneling, in theory matter could exist in one place in the universe and then be transformed to another place in the universe . . . 39
In addition to the example of Jesus, it seems we may also see this same wonder displayed again in the story of Philip from Acts 8:26–40. In this story, Philip is speaking with an Ethiopian man, shares with him about Christ, and the man asks to be baptized. After baptizing him, Philip disappears and the Bible says Philip “found himself” in another town.
When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch no longer saw him, but went on his way rejoicing. But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he passed through he kept preaching the gospel to all the cities until he came to Caesarea. (NASB)
I realize that some reading this book may not believe this story and may have the perception that the Bible should not be taken literally but rather more as a piece of figurative literature. That’s fine. My point in referring to these stories is not to try to convince people that these events really happened, but rather to point out that scientifically it may not be as farfetched as one might have previously assumed if there are laws existing in the universe (like quantum tunneling and quantum teleportation). We have only now scratched the surface of understanding these theories, but God has known about them, as well as every other scientific theory that will ever be discovered, from the beginning.
The phenomena of quantum entanglement and quantum tunneling have paved the way for advances in the field of quantum teleportation, and on September 11, 2013, the Furusawa group at the University of Tokyo succeeded in demonstrating the first ever complete quantum teleportation of photonic quantum bits by using a hybrid technique. It’s not just science fiction anymore. This is real life.
What is seemingly obvious in all of the biblical cases of what appear to be the use of quantum physics is that God is absolutely not limited by our understanding. If anything is absolute in what He has revealed about Himself through His Word, it is that, unless there is a biblical or covenant absolute that He has placed Himself within, as in the example of “God cannot lie” (Titus 1:2), it seems that God is likely to unexpectedly blow our minds.
DOCTRINAL VERSUS BIBLICAL ABSOLUTES
If there is anything that I have learned over the course of spending a majority of my life in ministry, it’s that from a biblical standpoint, there are many more doctrinal absolutes taught than biblical absolutes. Or perhaps more modernly expressed, Man puts God in a will or won’t, always or never box much more than the Bible does.
Take, for example, the topic of salvation. From the perspective of the Christian faith, you would think that this would be a cut-and-dried topic. But depending upon the denomination you belong to (all sharing the common belief of being a Christian), whether Baptist or Pentecostal, Lutheran or Methodist, Presbyterian or Nazarene, Church of God or Church of Christ, I can think of several interpretations of this scripture alone.
John 14:2–7 (NIV)
Jesus Comforts His Disciples
“Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe also in me. My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going.”
Jesus, the Way to the Father
Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?”
Jesus answered, ”I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”
In verse 6 above, we see that Jesus informs his disciples that in order to have connection with God, you would have to go through Him, in essence explaining that He is the new conduit of that relationship. This is a very substantial and foundational scripture for all of Christendom.
When we read further into the New Testament, scriptures like Romans 10:9–13 explain in further detail what this looks like.
Romans 10:9–13 (AMP)
Because if you acknowledge and confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and in your heart believe (adhere to, trust in, and rely on the truth) that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
For with the heart a person believes (adheres to, trusts in, and relies on Christ) and so is justified (declared righteous, acceptable to God), and with the mouth he confesses (declares openly and speaks out freely his faith) and confirms [his] salvation.
The Scripture says, No man who believes in Him [who adheres to, relies on, and trusts in Him] will [ever] be put to shame or be disappointed.
[No one] for there is no distinction between Jew and Greek. The same Lord is Lord over all [of us] and He generously bestows His riches upon all who call upon Him [in faith].
For everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord [invoking Him as Lord] will be saved.
These are considered foundational passages of scripture in Christianity, outlining that in order to have an intimate relationship with God and have our sins forgiven and covered, the prerequisite is placing our faith in God and acknowledging Jesus as the Son of God who died for the sins of the world is (this is also called “salvation” or being referred to as “saved” from the repercussions of our sins). Salvation seems cut-and-dried when I read it, but I have heard many different interpretations of the subject of “salvation” alone, depending upon the denomination’s doctrine.
BREAKING IT DOWN
A few years ago, I heard a teaching by a minister named Shane Willard about the subject of covenant from a Hebrew perspective. He stated that in order to properly understand anything that is written in any form of literature (including the Bible), especially from a historical standpoint or when involving cultures that we may be unfamiliar with, we need always ask the following four questions:
Who wrote it?
Who was it written to?
How would they have taken it?
Are there any idioms, euphemisms, or figures of speech that they would have understood because they were particular to their culture?
That makes sense, doesn’t it? In order to know what they really meant, it would be helpful to know the details and background.
It was my own application of these questions from that point forward that began to lay a new foundation for my biblical understanding, in contrast to what I previously understood. This single teaching catapulted me outside of the traditional box I had been mentally trapped within. I thought and proc
essed so much of the Bible based upon what I had been taught from others and what my experiences conveyed. But intentionally applying this new teaching revolutionized how I read the Bible and studied historical events in general, and subsequently increased my perspectives exponentially.
IGNORANCE ISN’T BLISS
It is so easy to be ignorantly stifled by our personal perspectives. By our very nature, we often see things and process them (at least initially) through the lenses of our own experiences. So when we read a historical letter like that quoted above from the Apostle Paul to the Christian church in Rome (i.e., the book of Romans in the Bible), it is natural to process what is written through the filter of our modern daily experiences. However, if we are to more thoroughly and properly understand what is written within its context, we would need to do some research on the culture and history of the people Paul was writing to in his letter. We’d need to consider how they would have taken what was written and seek to understand why.
For those who have read Paul’s letter to the Roman church, have you ever asked why he included the text from Romans 10:9–13 in his letter to them? Looking at Christian and world history, the single most influential leader in history, Jesus Christ, had recently been crucified, and by the accounts of His disciples, was resurrected from the dead after three days. Then after spending a few weeks teaching His closest followers essential lessons of faith, He ascended to heaven before their eyes with a final commission to go into the world and teach the good news that He shared with them to everyone.
Regardless of anyone’s acceptance of these events, the accounts of His disciples and furthering of His message forever transformed world history, even dividing history’s timeline by the life of this man Jesus with the abbreviations BC (before Christ) and AD (anno Domini, which is Latin for “in the year of our Lord”).
At this time, the political and religious environment was antagonistic to say the least. The Roman Empire ruled most of the known world, the religions of that day were in constant opposition with each other, and the government martyred people for their beliefs, including Christ. Through the teachings of those disciples who walked with Jesus and those, like Paul, who had his own miraculous experience with Christ, people who had never even heard of Jesus were experiencing a new understanding about who God really was, His love for them, and their ability to have a personal relationship with Him.
In the midst of all of this, most world religions taught that there must be forms of significant personal sacrifice in order for their gods to accept them. However, the Gospel teachings (gospel meaning, “good news”) of Jesus made the simple claim that He was the liaison between man and God, and through faith and the grace of God, they were made right with Him, not by their personal sacrifice, but through Jesus’ final sacrifice of Himself.
John 3:16–17 (AMP)
For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.
For God did not send the Son into the world in order to judge (to reject, to condemn, to pass sentence on) the world, but that the world might find salvation and be made safe and sound through Him.
This concept of not having to pay their own price or penance for their wrongdoings was likely very foreign to this generation who had probably never been taught such a simple and liberating concept about God (which is why it would have been considered “good news” to them). As a result, they likely struggled with the same issues that many struggle with in Christianity today, such as a difficulty of being resolved in this possibility of God loving them, in spite of who they are and what sins they had committed.
Furthermore, understanding the subject of faith and belief today as it pertains to John 3:16 when the Bible says, “Whosoever believes in Jesus shall not perish but have everlasting life” is difficult enough with all of the information available to us at our fingertips on the Internet. But imagine how difficult it must have been to wrap their minds around the entirety of this faith and freedom gospel based simply upon belief and faith when every religious comparison they had was based solely upon their works and sacrifices?
As a result, I’m sure many were asking questions like . . .
How do I know if I really believe?
Am I saved because I acknowledge that I believe or should I do more?
Is there any way to clearly define that I am in right standing with God?
Can somebody please help me? I just want to know what to believe!
This doesn’t sound so different from what so many are saying today.
The truth about human nature is that we process events based upon memorials. We like to have specific time and date clarity as it pertains to life events. We celebrate our birthdates, anniversaries, graduations, victories, and defeats with memorials. And on an issue as important as where we stand with God, I easily comprehend the possibility of why the early church might question the simplicity of what was being presented to them, especially considering their previous experiences, perspectives, expectations, religious confines, and structures.
So, although it’s not necessarily explained in the historical account, I wonder if it is possible that word from the church leaders in Rome had gotten back to the Apostle Paul explaining that there were some issues concerning what it meant to actually believe in Jesus and be saved, and as a result, Paul includes a few sentences to clarify it, in essence creating a memorial and offering closure to the debate surrounding whether or not someone believes. Paul writes,
Romans 10:9–10 (NIV)
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.
BY FAITH OR WORDS?
The church today has done much the same thing with our salvation prayers. In your typical Christian church, a Sunday morning service is often concluded with an invocation to receive Christ as your Lord and Savior, followed by a sinner’s prayer asking Jesus to forgive you of your sins, come into your heart, and be the Lord of your life. However, there is no place in the Bible that tells us to do this per se, but the prayer covers the scriptural bases for confession and belief according to Romans 10:9–10 and offers the needed memorial in the minds of people for the day they came to a place of faith and understanding in Christ.
Still, I wonder if it’s possible that it’s really not this salvation prayer that saves, but rather the belief and faith that was established before the prayer was actually even prayed that is the true “moment of salvation.” That’s not traditionally taught, and some might call this semantics (including myself), but there may be a lesson in the example of this untraditional thought.
The problem that results in doctrinal absolutes on these issues versus biblical absolutes is that from a biblical perspective, there is not a prayer that you pray for salvation. That’s right. Nowhere in the Bible is there a requirement to pray for salvation or a template for a prayer you must pray for salvation. The words and structure of what has become the commonly known salvation prayer are an institution of man, created as a clear guideline to use when giving your life to Christ. We, in turn, have complicated it with religious structure and subsequently produced confusion in arguing it as an absolute.
If the salvation actually occurs when faith and belief is established, then confession is the by-product and not the event itself. This doesn’t necessarily diminish the importance of the prayer and confession, but it can change the perspective on the absolute that is often associated with it within a church’s doctrine and its teachings. Anyone who might seek to argue the case for the necessity of the confession of the mouth before salvation is established need only ask themselves if a mute person can be saved in order to place the proper emphasis back on faith and belief being the sub
stantiating factors, and not necessarily the words chosen for the application of the grace and redemption of God.
This is why asking questions is such an essential aspect of understanding both what is foundationally understood and pursuing the possibility of there being “more” available to us than perhaps we have previously known.
HOLDING PATTERNS
I feel like Christianity has been in a holding pattern of sorts, continuingly flying around the same landing pad but not seeing significant advancement or growth. As a matter of fact, statistically, what we are seeing is a decline in the acceptance of Christian teachings and principles. Why is that?
I’ve heard it said that if you want to continue to experience the same results, keep doing things the way you are doing them. If you want different results, you have to be willing to change.
Tradition will argue that the truth of the Bible transcends time, and people’s lack of acknowledgement is simply an indicator of where we are in the grand scheme of history and the end times. I don’t dispute that this may be the case, but if there is a chance that the relevance of Christianity in the eyes of people is based more upon the presentation, process, and adherence to tradition and doctrine, and not necessarily what is written in the Bible, shouldn’t that warrant at least a reevaluation of what we are, as a worldwide church, conveying or projecting?
I’ve often heard Christians and non-Christians alike argue that miracles and the operational authority like those that are conveyed in John 14 and Mark 16 were specifically for the disciples and apostles as initial evidences of the truth of the Christian message, but after the institution of the religion, they became obsolete and died out with the apostles. As I pointed out in an earlier chapter, this is also called cessationism.