Illness - Christians Not Immune.

Within the last few days, I was pouring through Paul's letter to the church at Philippi when I came across a little-known character by the name of Epaphroditus. He was sent by Paul and Timothy from Rome to the coastal city located on the eastern tip of Macedonia. It was while still in Rome itself that he fell ill, "almost to the point of death" according to Paul's own testimony (Phillipians 2:25-30.)

There was a good chance that Luke, the physician, might have been there with them, according to 2 Timothy 4:11, and with prayers and supplications, Luke might have helped the sick believer back into recovery sometime before the apostle sent him on his way to visit the Philippian church. Unfortunately, we are not told of the nature of Epaphroditus' illness, but going by Scripture, it looked to have been a bacterial or viral infection rather than an external injury.

What was the treatment of illnesses like so long before the advancement of modern medicine and the rise of the National Health Service? And with the supposed non-existence of antibiotics? It was on our 12th anniversary trip to the Greek island of Kos, of the Dodecanese, that some light was shed during a trip to the Asklepieion ruins, where around 400 BC, Hippocrates practised his medicine, and it was also the birthplace of the Hippocratic Oath, still taken today by medical students. When we visited, I was surprised at the Roman walls on one side of the site. Apparently, they were the remains of hospital wards where patients were kept in during their course of treatment, which included the taking various herbs reputed to having medicinal properties to hasten recovery.

Bust of Hippocrates.

But the main feature of this ancient hospital were the temples of worship, one on each level of the three-tier edifice. The upper level held the temple where patients with a terminal illness can go to and pray to his specific deity for a heavenly afterlife or even for miraculous healing. The sites on the other two levels were also for patients to pray and offer sacrifices for their healing. What I find remarkable is the parallel between this ancient establishment and the multi-faith chapel featured in all major NHS hospitals of our day. Medicine and religion were bedfellows back then as they still are, to some extent, at present. The head photo of this Blogger page features partially-restored pillars of a Roman temple at the Asklepieion, with my wife standing between them.

Therefore, it comes as no real surprise that Epaphroditus received medical care, most likely, in the form of medicinal herbs prescribed by Luke. And this, coupled by prayer, making his path to recovery with hardly any difference to that of Hippocrates and his form of healing at Kos some four centuries earlier.

Except for whom to pray to.

I am wondering whether Luke, who is the author of both his Gospel and Acts, had received his medical training from the students and followers of Hippocrates. Since he was a Greek, I am even pondering on whether this great man of God had even trained at the Asklepieion. Too bad that I had never attended a theological college or seminary to have learned more about Luke's background. As such, I can only speculate. But on one issue I can be more certain. For Luke to qualify as a physician during his pre-conversion days, he too most likely had to take the Hippocratic Oath, just as today's graduates do. The only difference lies that throughout ancestry, the names of various pagan deities were included in the Oath. Since then, this has been omitted from the rest of the Oath. Those were some of the details we learnt during our visit to the Asklepieion archaeological site.

I can understand why some Old Testament saints fell ill from time to time. The ancient tent-dweller Job was one good example. King Hezekiah was another. He was a godly king of Judah who fell ill, seriously enough to cry out to God when he was told of his imminent death. Back then, the Crucifixion with its atonement for sin had not yet taken place. But even after the Crucifixion and the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, if Epaphroditus' experience had anything to go by, then having the righteousness of Christ imputed does not make the believer immune to illness, an issue which may be more difficult to understand.

In support of this, I can cite more believers as examples. Timothy is one. According to 1 Timothy 5:23, this lover of God had frequent stomach problems throughout his life, and apparently had never experienced real healing, not as far as I know, anyway. Here I'm beginning to see a similarity between Timothy and my wife Alex, whose sufferings remain ongoing to this day. With the drinking of wine to replace water, Paul was not a medical student, but Luke, who most likely was with them, probably advised them on this matter, who in turn might have learned from the writings of Hippocrates.

Trophimus was another disciple who had suffered some illness, as mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:20. He was one of several believers who accompanied Paul on his missions (Acts 20:4) but the apostle left him behind at Miletus because he fell ill. Apparently, no prayers were offered, at least none were recorded, but Paul instructed Timothy to send greetings nevertheless.

Then there is the Apostle Paul himself, who was thankful to the churches in Galatia for giving him moral support for an illness he was suffering from, as recorded in Galatians 4:12-15. Apparently, it was at his eyes which followed his dramatic conversion in Damascus. Paul saw that his illness was "a trial" to the Galatians. In other words, it was offputting. If these believers were put off by the Apostle's eyes, this may indicate a mucus discharge, suggesting conjunctivitis. If this ailment has impaired his eyesight, then his need to write in large letters of Galatians 6:11 was necessary to see properly what he was writing. With his other letters, they were written by others directly under Paul's dictating.

An example of conjunctivitis.

This "thorn in the flesh" of 2 Corinthians 12:7-10 could be his referral to the same ailment of his eyes. I have a good longstanding friend who once disagreed with me over this during a discussion we had back in the 90s. He believed that "the thorn in Paul's flesh" was a mischievous person who was constantly following the Apostle, persistent in his harassing of him where ever he went. The disadvantage with this argument was that this tormenter would have boarded every ship Paul had sailed, as well as being present at every preach he delivered. All Paul had to do was to ask one of the ship's crew members to order the person to disembark at the first chance. The case of an ailment in his eyes, possibly conjunctivitis caused by either bacteria or virus, is far more plausible.

Experience with my wife's illness over the years, along with this present Coronavirus pandemic, has shown me not to be so independently minded which is part of my natural character, but to rely on God's goodness and mercy, thanking Him for all our provisions and not to worry about the future. Where worry is concerned, that is one of my obvious weakness, and it's tied to my quest for independence. But to be given the responsibility as my wife's carer is what I see is a privilege rather than a burden. Even then, I still panic whenever she suffers intense pain.

I can understand the opinions of some Christians who are into the healing ministry. First of all, let me say that they are my brothers in Christ, and therefore I love them and accept them as they are, sons of God and fellow believers. However, they will quote a command Jesus gave to his disciples when he sent them out during his own ministry, recorded in Matthew 10:8, that we were given authority to heal the sick and to drive out demons, that is to tell them to leave the person in the Name of Jesus, and to be healed in the Name of Jesus. The trouble with that is in the past when Alex was prayed for in this manner, it made things worse. As I see it, this kind of ministry looks to be very dangerous, and as such, I much prefer not to take part in it.

Therefore how can all the healings Jesus had performed, and by his disciples after his Ascension? Here is where those in healing had missed the point. According to the Bible, particularly in the New Testament, whenever a miracle is performed, whether it's to heal the sick and infirm, to drive out demons, even to raise the dead, or to supernaturally feed a large crowd - it's always done to bring glory to God. That is, to persuade people to believe that this Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, their Messiah, who will atone for their sin and rise again from the dead. A conversion of a person from sinner to saint always glorifies God.

And so the miraculous healing of a crippled beggar by Peter, recorded in Acts 3. The rest of the chapter and into chapter four records the explanation for the miracle and disputes over it by the Pharisees. The point of the miracle? To prove that this Jesus of Nazareth crucified is the risen Christ.

Then there a case between Peter and a female believer named Tabitha or Dorcas, depending on the language, Aramaic or Greek (Acts 9:36-42.) A devoted disciple of Christ, she still fell ill and died. Those in the healing ministry would point out that this is a classic example of compassionate healing. And indeed, it was. But the real purpose of the entire episode is found in verse 42, where it says:

This became known in all of Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord.

Even Paul's raising of Eutychus, a young man who fell asleep during Paul's long sermon and fell from a ledge and died, was raised to life to glorify God (Acts 20:7-12.) With very long sermons, it's quite tempting to feel bored after a while and being late at night too, to doze off. It just shows how human they really were, and not spiritual super-giants! I know full well that if I was in that situation, I would have dropped off to sleep too. There is no record of new conversions recorded after this incident, but the interruption has kept his audience awake until daybreak and they were able to take Eutychus back home. It looks as though God allowed such an incident to occur for his audience to hear the word he has for them.

During these troubled times, when news of other 800-plus deaths with Coronavirus here in the UK within the last 24 hours, everything looks so hopeless as the NHS seems to be fighting a losing battle against the virus. Where is God in all this?

When adding everything together, I have come to this conclusion. And that is, to the unbeliever, illness and pandemics like our present one is meant for people to call upon God and fall at his mercy and to receive the eternal life for all who believe. How I long to see many, many people saved through the redemption Jesus Christ has already provided.

For believers in Christ, God allows sickness, infirmities and illnesses to infect their lives. But as Paul had already explained, it's to keep us from becoming conceited. It's not necessarily a punishment for sin, as sin has already been dealt with on the Cross, and the imputed righteousness of Christ into our accounts makes us seen by God the Father as one with his Son. Rather, illness ravaging believers are part of the discipline God needs to bring us into maturity in Christ. And the Apostle Paul had quite a lot of suffering, not only from illness but also from persecution, flogging and imprisonment too. Conceit can be pretty difficult to quell!

An Astonishing Situation.

As we live somewhat ordinary day-to-day lives, from time to time something I find astonishing comes up on the news bulletin. Like the announcement that the space probe Rosetta had caught up with the comet 67P/C-G and throughout its rendezvous with it, about to orbit the rock on a triangular course, even to to find a suitable site for its robotic landing of its sibling Philae - not easy, as such a lump of rock flying through space is anything but spherical, let alone providing a landing pad. Rosetta was launched from near Kourou, in the South American State of French Guinea, on 2nd March, 2004 - the very same day as the birth of our second daughter. For the last ten years, this vehicle hurtled through space to purposely meet with the chosen comet to find out whether it holds any clues to the origins of life on Earth.

 

This idea originated from the theory that comets and other heavenly bodies contain the molecule which makes up the animo acids which from which all life originates, to put it simply. No doubt about it, the project is the product of human intelligence - the magnificence of the human mind, the ability to make decisions, and the possibility to solve extremely complex problems using mathematics and physics, making the human brain an astonishing marvel!

Other great ideas, other than the invention of the wheel, includes the discovery of Penicillin in 1928 by Dr. Alexander Fleming at St. Mary's Hospital in London. Like any normal human, he accidentally left open a Petri dish containing the culture of Staphylococcus bacteria - and like a discarded slice of damp bread, it wasn't long before common mould began to develop in the dish, causing a reaction with the bacteria, which such discovery led to the antibiotic Penicillin, a saviour-drug for multiple thousands of patients, particularly those who had contacted venom through sexually-transmitted diseases. This led me to think that such an act of apparent clumsiness or forgetfulness on the part of the scientist can allow nature to take its course and perform acts which we humans can consider miraculous. 

 

Medicine, for me anyway, can be a fascinating study. While the pre-Renaissance Western world was still languishing with life-threatening diseases, it was known that other cultures of the world, such as in the Far East and the American Indian, were familiar with various herbs which had medicinal powers. And although I had read articles in the past that the origin of medicine was connected with the occult, really it occurred to me that the only occult were the ritual dancing and religious beliefs which accompanied the healing of the patient - particularly among the Native Americans - but had these rituals not taken place, the herbs would have still have had their healing properties.

 

Then there was good old Dr. Hippocrates, who practiced at the Greek island of Kos in the 5th Century BC. He did not believe in surgical operations, as he thought that dissecting the body was against the will of the gods. But like the American Indian, he prescribed drugs gotten from various herbs, and even had in-patient wards where the sick can be observed while on medication. On the same grounds as the hospital, various temples dedicated to certain divinities were used for the sick to pray, and to offer sacrifices to the gods. Even in our modern hospitals, there is always a chapel found in the premises, but far less obvious and significant than the huge temples which dominated Hippocrates' day. The astonishing similarity of treatment over 2,400 years has allowed the Hippocratic Oath to be taken by medics even to this day.

 

Hospital of Hippocrates, the Asklepeion, Kos -taken October 2011

 

But the wonder of these natural herbs providing healing powers - including Penicillin which was gotten from a common mould, and that without accompanying religious rituals - demonstrates the love and mercy of God in such divine provisions. But even at present, when many of the medicinal drugs used at present are synthetic rather than natural, by his provision of the original herbs, we can thank the Lord for his mercies when it comes to healing of illnesses.

And so going back to the subject of the Rosetta Space probe, a stupendous result of a group of ingenious minds working together - then not to mention scores of other human creations and engineering feats, from the microchip which controls an intricate yet powerful computer, to the delicate mechanism of a wristwatch, made with precision to keep time accurately, right up to the mega-structures of civil engineering, such for example, the magnificent Sydney Harbour Bridge in Australia, or a railway tunnel bored through solid rock under the English Channel. Let's face it, modern engineering and technology has not only made day-to-day living much easier for us, but has also expanded our horizon of knowledge our forefathers would have never imagined.

Yet in the case of the Rosetta space probe - the very purpose of such a project will be to gather information for clues whether life here on Earth had its origin from outer space. This is a theory originally conceived by Sir Fred Hoyle, a brilliant astronomer and mathematician. Hoyle was an atheist, who rejected the idea of the Big Bang as the proposed theory for the origin of the Universe, and instead, advocated the steady state, which means that the Universe had existed from eternity past, and like a flowing river in which every water molecule is on the move, the river itself remains endless. Hoyle had much trouble reconciling Darwin Evolution with his own research on cell biology. For example, he used the probability of the enzyme, part of the protein chain formed within the nucleus of a cell, to calculate the impossibility of having evolved without divine intervention. He worked out that the probability of just the enzyme itself having evolved to its present form by chance is one out of one, followed by 40,000 zeroes! With such a mathematical result, Hoyle was forced to conclude the reality of divine creation - or come up with some other theory. In this case, to him life on Earth was the result of animo acid molecules entering the primeval ocean, itself formed by comets consisting of ice colliding with the primeval Earth.

Millions was spent, many, many man hours went into the designing, construction and launch of the Rosetta, to find out whether Fred Hoyle was right with his theory. It took a further ten years for the probe to catch up with the comet, and from the time of writing, it will be a further three months before Rosetta launches its sibling, the Philae, for a robotic landing on the comet itself to gather enough information to see how close to the truth this scientist had been. Suppose the comet does consist of ice, and animo acid molecules were found in the rock? Wouldn't this be a massive victory for Darwinism, and the Bible proved false after all?

That is precisely what these brilliant, academic minds are after. The final answer to the origin of life without the need for a God to stick his oar in. Atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris would also rejoice. The Bible would at last be thrown into the dustbin of history and mythology, and as John Lennon wrote and recorded his song - we can imagine a world without Heaven above, nor Hell beneath us, and no religion either. A perfect Utopian society.

This is what I find to be an astonishing situation. All over the world, brilliant, well educated minds abound, many engaged in creating new ideas, the latest inventions, and into medical research. Others study the stars to find out just how we got here. Still others were able to design a robotic vehicle which can carry out meticulous tasks millions of miles out in space. It is so incredible that even throughout history, we can see the wonders of the human mind and imagination. For example, around seventeen years previous to this, I found myself at The Chesters, one of the best preserved Roman sites in the UK, possibly of all of Europe other than the ruins of ancient Rome and Pompeii. The Chesters was a major Roman fort on Hadrian's Wall which marked the northern boundary of the entire Empire. What I have found intriguing were the well-preserved latrine system, a set of holes at a bench where water used to flow in a channel underneath. Also there was evidence of sanitary items existing. The whole structure would be still fully functional to this day had the watercourse beneath had not dried up. As with the Roman city of Aquae Sulis (now Bath Spa) the Romans were superb with plumbing and the hypocaust heating systems for their homes, their utility buildings, and their leisure centres.

 

Chesters Roman Fort, Hadrian's Wall, UK.

 

What a difference all this to our nearest cousins, the Primates, from which we supposed to have evolved from. It has been observed that the best they can do is use a large stone to crack a nut. It is a far cry from even the simplest of structures even a child can make. But our academics prefer to believe that we as Homo Sapiens are members of the Primate family, at one with the monkeys, apes, gorillas and chimpanzees. In the world of science, the Bible is ruled out.

It is this hostility to the truth of the Bible which lie behind the Rosetta space probe, along with other branches of science, particularly in Historical Geology and Paleontology. The universities in Britain and Europe became an intellectual battlefield particularly during the nineteenth century, with the likes of Charles Lyell, Jean Baptiste Lamarck, and Charles Darwin, along with others, throwing down the gauntlet against the Biblical truth of Divine Creation. Of all literature ever written throughout history, it seems odd to me that the truthfulness of Holy Scripture had so much opposition thrown at it, yet we as a nation hold a reverential respect for the highly educated, and applaud them for the ability in launching rockets into space, particularly for the purpose to disprove the reliability of the Bible.

Maybe the near-universal hostility of Scripture might have been stirred up by passages like this:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of the age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believed.
Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness o God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
1 Corinthians 1:18-25.

Spot on, Paul! Maybe it was because of what you have written that clever men of our age had sent a very expensive, highly technical device to look at a lump of rock in the sky.

Science Plus Faith - A Potential Mix

In 2011 my wife Alex and I spent a few hours strolling through the ruins of the Asklepeion, the remains of an ancient hospital at Kos, one of the Greek islands of the Dodecanese. The header photo on this page was taken at the Asklepeion, with Alex posing among six of the seven original Roman columns which once supported the roof of the Temple of Apollo. These columns were relatively recent, about AD 200, by comparison to the site on which they once stood, and standing once again after active restoration. Because dating back centuries BC, this hospital was the home of one of history's greatest doctors of all time - Hippocrates (c.460-370 BC.)

Bust of Hippocrates

Hippocrates has always been considered the father of medicine. One of his greatest achievements was to separate science facts from the pagan pantheon of bickering gods whose thoughts and actions determined the decisions made by men. Instead, what he did was observe the erratic behaviour of individuals and associate these behaviours with specific diseases. This idea eventually allowed him to draw up a theory that each human has four body fluids - blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. For good health, each of these fluids must be in perfect balance, according to Hippocrates. But generally, they are not in perfect balance but rather, each person has one, maybe two, dominating fluids which not only bring certain types of physical diseases, but also determine the person's behaviour, particularly in relating to others around him.

Therefore, this theory became known as the Four Humours, or Temperaments, and until recently it was used as a base tool for Psychology. This is the explanation on say; the sight of a partially filled glass. Two of the four humours would say,
"The glass is half full, let's make use of the resource we have." (Optimism.)
While the other two would lament,
"Oh dear, the glass is half empty, what will happen now?" (Pessimism.)

These are the two viewpoints over a half-filled (or empty) glass which psychologists divide personality into just two - extrovert and introvert. But Hippocrates saw that both these characteristics were divided into two sub-divisions, these creating four temperament types. One type of extrovert was people-centred. Hippocrates believed that it was warm blood which made this particular individual talkative, impulsive, very friendly and having a warm heart towards others. Thus this type of person was labelled Sanguine - meaning blood. The other type of extrovert was task oriented. He had good leadership capabilities, less talkative than the first, but very productive - but also had a quick temper and was prone to anger. Hippocrates believed that yellow bile predominated, and referred to him as Choleric - meaning anger-prone. Among the introverts, one was prone to be sad or moody most of the time, but also enjoyed the fine arts and music, and tended to be a critical perfectionist. The ancient doctor believed that black bile ruled the roost in this chap, and labelled him Melancholia - meaning prone to sadness. Finally the fourth type was observed as slow, unmotivated, always tired, and spent much of his time at rest. As such he was referred to as Phlegmatic - meaning that phlegm dominated in this person.

The Four Humours. Clockwise from upper left: Phlegmatic, Choleric, Melancholia and Sanguine.

Hippocrates referred to the fluid imbalance as the cause of various diseases, and his remedy to his patients was to rest and allow the body fluids to re-balance themselves in the effort to recover. He was one of the first to also prescribe herbal drugs to hasten the re-balance. At the Asklepeion, we were able to see the site of patient wards were the sick rested to aid recovery, as well as a counselling room where diagnoses were made.  The only feature which were absent were the operating theatres, mainly due to the culture of the day which forbade dissecting of the body to observe the human anatomy.

However, patients who had terminal illness were allowed to make peace with the god Asklepios, the son of Apollos and considered in ancient Greek folklore as the god of health and medicine. His temple was located on the upper of the three levels. Very much like the chapels found in modern hospitals.

The Asklepeion in Kos

Hippocrates was a brilliant analyst of his day, but modern science had disproved his theory of the four body fluids. However, according to Dr. S. I. McMillen in his book, None of these Diseases, (1964, final reprint 1980) this 20th Century medical doctor lists more than ninety diseases, illnesses and other infirmities brought about by excess stress and the constant over-production of adrenaline fed into the bloodstream. Normally, adrenaline is a hormone which is rapidly pumped into the bloodstream as a result of fright, or imminent danger, allowing the person for rapid action, fight or take flight. However, on the minus side, Dr. McMillen sites anger, fear and worry as the three main causes which activates the two adrenal glands, located on each kidney.  Since this is mainly an emotional issue affecting one's reaction towards an opinion, another person, group of people or a set of circumstances, its debilitating effect on one's health seems to bring a correlation between the research of Dr. McMillen and that of Hippocrates, namely that body fluids determine both behaviour and health. However, for Hippocrates to carry out his research, the major move he had to make was the departure of science from the superstitious beliefs of his day.

At present, we see science as a great benefit to our lives, especially in the area of medicine. But as I stated in my last two blogs, some disciplines of science had taken us away from faith in God and the truthfulness of the Bible. Darwinism is such one discipline. No other branch of science had enticed so many from belief and faith in God, challenging the truthfulness of the Bible. And yet, as a part in preparation of this article, I had checked some statistics. To tell the truth, I was somewhat surprised in what I have found, because according to The Guardian newspaper, printed Sunday 1st February, 2009 - the headline read:
Half of Britons do not believe in Evolution.
This headline came out close to the date of Charles Darwin's 200th birthday and at the time such discussion were at its peak. With 2,060 adults questioned, the result of the survey was:
25% believe that Evolution to be definitely true.
25% believe that Evolution to be probably true.
22% believe in creation by intelligent design, with 10% believing in the Young Earth creationism.
The remaining 28% were not sure.

In response to the survey, Professor James Williams of Sussex University commented:
Creationists ask if people believe in evolution. Evolution is a theory and a fact. You accept it because of the evidence. What the creationists have done is put a cloak of pseudo-science to wrap up their religious beliefs.  Evolution is very badly taught in schools so the results of the survey don't surprise me. On the other hand, creationism has traditionally been an issue in North America and there is a big problem in Australia and Turkey. It matters if people don't understand how science works.

Agreeing with Professor Williams, an anonymous commentator added:
Well, what a seriously depressing article! I knew that the Brits were thick, but I didn't realise we were that thick...

Maybe so, but there is a strong correlation between the UK and the United States, where the latest Gallup Poll showed that up to 46% of all Americans believe in Creationism, leaving 32% believing in Theistic Evolution and the remaining 15% believing in Evolution without divine intervention. With this kind of survey result, little wonder that neuroscientist Sam Harris, in his book, Letter to a Christian Nation, (2006) the author lamented:
Indeed, I am painfully aware that my country appears, as at no other time in her history, like a lumbering, bellicose, dim-witted giant.

In writing this blog, it becomes apparent that those who protest against creationism in favour of evolution are mainly post-graduates. This is endorsed by the same Gallup Poll that amongst post-graduates, only 25% believe in creationism, compared with 46% of the rest of the population. In turn, 29% believe in evolution without divine intercession to the 15% by the general population.

This is the hostility of those holding on to science in opposition to faith. But by looking, as an example, to microbiology, it becomes apparent that it is mathematically impossible for the cell to have evolved in the Darwinian sense, a fact that evolutionists simply don't admit, although those who research genetics and such allied studies are fully aware of the impossibility for the cell to have evolved without any form of divine intervention. To read the full details of this, go to one of my blogs,
A Small Block To The Reality Of Evolution, published 26th February, 2012.

But to read how the vastly complex mechanism of the cell works to produce the intricate protein chain needed to sustain life makes fascinating reading. And this knowledge, when mixed with faith in the God who designed it, brings out my awe and admiration to the Creator of life. Science, mixed with faith in a Creator, is a wonderful blessing. Not only does science as a whole makes daily living  less harsh but brings a lot of personal comfort, it is worthwhile noting that the most complex and the most intricate device ever created is the human brain. God has given us brains to learn all about the ins and outs of his creation, and we call that science.

Faith asks why the world works in a certain way. Science asks how. And both complement each other.