ABOUT GOD

In determining why Christianity seems to have done so much harm in society (the crusades, the inquisition etc), one has to distinguish between people who have a relationship with Christ, and the institution which calls itself Christian. An institution can never be Christian.

Suffering comes about mostly because of the gift God gave us, "free will", which is the gift that allows us to choose whether to love, or hate, which if the latter is chosen could cause much suffering. Without free will, however, we could not really love voluntarily. And without voluntary love, you just become a robot who cannot possibly love. Also with free will, God chooses to limit Himself as to His power as well as to His foreknowledge of an individual's future, although He does know the over-all beneficial future of society. As I say, most suffering is caused by our use of free will, but some suffering is also caused by creation limitations, and spiritual warfare (because you can't see this really taking place, doesn't mean it's actually not taking place). But this free will is also somewhat limited for the individual in that one's free will is greatly influenced by generation after generation of free will decisions made by their ancestors. And from looking at the world around us, one can see that many of these decisions went in the wrong direction.

But then how do you know that there really is a God overseeing all this? It's in the creation. It's illogical to assume that chance really created rationality, so since we were actually created with a desire for meaningfulness, which is a part of rationality and a creator is always greater than his creation, our creator must be greater in personhood (a God) than we are. And our physical smallness compared to what's out there in the universe should be no criteria for our importance to God. After all, we do have rationality. Another arguement for God's existence is that we being imperfect as we all know, but continually striving for perfection, must have developed this idea of perfection from someplace, and the most logical place that we developed this from seems to be from a higher power (a God, for instance). And finally, can you imagine a planet spinning around the universe in perfect unison allowing human life to evolve as it has for as long as it has without completely breaking up with all its earthquakes and volcanoes taking place without a God being in control.

So if there is a God, why doesn't He seem to answer prayer? This is a difficult question to answer, but it's probably due to the consequences of sin and spiritual warfare taking place around us, although in our prayers one can experience God being with us to comfort and heal us in any of the suffering we're encountering. The basic function of prayer, however, is to build a faith relationship between God and ourselves, and petitionary prayer is only a small part of this faith relationship. But with petitionary prayer being the crux of the problem as to whether prayer works or not, you can never scientifically prove that petitionary prayer really works, because there are so many interconnected variables to look at in God's scheme of things. Sometimes prayer seems to work, and sometimes it doesn't, but here you have to realize our loving God has a much broader perspective as to what is really needed for society's betterment, than we do while we're here on earth. And as I said above, you also have to take into account the consequences of sin, and spiritual warfare

ABOUT JESUS CHRIST

Who is Jesus Christ? According to Christians, Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He is also our Savior in that He saved us from our sin by suffering and dying on the cross and being raised from the dead. He was God's sacrifice for us. It was like perfection saving imperfection. But we actually have to believe in all this so that we can then become wrapped up in our belief, or Jesus Christ, just like a Christmas package, so that when God looks at us, all that He can see is His Son (perfection), or Himself as if He were looking into a mirror. Now how do we know all this? By reading the Gospels. But how do we know that the Gospels are really trustworthy. To go into this, you have to look at the Gospels, not as the literal Word of God, but as historical documents. In doing this, you have to ask certain questions about these documents . 1) Do the documents portray eyewitness accounts. The Gospels do. 2) Do the documents contain irrelevant material not pertinent to the eyewitness accounts? Yes, they do. 3) Do the Gospels contain self-damaging material? Yes, they do. For example,the boldness of some of the women during this time period, and the statement Jesus made from the cross when He cried out" My God, My God, Why have You forsaken Me?" 4) Do all 4 Gospels have a consistency as well as a divergency in perspectives? Yes, they do. 5) Do the Gospels increase their legendary exaggeration? No, they don't, even though they do have some supernatural events in them. 6) Is there any indication that the writers of the Gospels have an ulterior motive for writing them? No, there isn't. In fact they could have faced persecution for writing them. 7) Can outside sources from that time authenticate the Gospels? Yes, they can and do. 8) Do archeological findings substantiate many of the Biblical events related to us in the Gospels? Yes, they do. And 9) Were there many opponents of the Gospels at the time that could disprove the Gospels, but couldn't? Yes, there were. These are all questions that should be asked to determine whether a document has historical merit or not. And if the answers are all in the affirmative, except for questions 5 and 6, then the document has historical authenticity. In this case from the answers given above, the Gospels appear to be authentic historical documents and can be used as historical evidence for the life of Jesus Christ. But there still seem to be many historical discrepencies within the Gospels. This actually can be explained away by realizing that the Gospels were never intended to be a biographical sketch of Jesus Christ, although there was much biographical material contained therein. The purpose of the Gospels was really to convey a message of salvation for the readers. In doing this, the discrepencies then become irrelevent. And finally the authorship and date that the Gospels were written are not essential elements to the credibility as to what the Gospels actually say, although from the Book of Acts it does seem to say that at least the first three Gospels were written before 60 AD, and that the authorship of Luke is almost a certainty, whereas the authorship of the other Gospels are closer to a certainty than not. But the bottom line is that there is enough historical authenticity in the Gospels to make them worth-while reading.

As I say, in general, the Gospels are historically reliable, but how about the resurrection? Here too, you have enough historical criteria to indicate that the resurrection actually took place. For instance, 1) There are 5 independent sources to indicate that the event took place (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul),with each giving individual eyewitness accounts of the occasion. 2) Jesus's tomb was empty with His burial clothes neatly folded inside the tomb. This could have been easily checked out at the time by those opposed to the story. 3) The church's sudden growth a few weeks after the resurrection. 4) The resurrection accounts also have many irrevelant material and some self-damaging material (such as the role of women in the event) that are common to early eyewitness based accounts. 5) There is a total lack of theological reflection in the narrative which is not true for most legendary accounts. 6) The conversion of Paul is unexplained without the resurrection. 7)Paul lists over 500 witnesses to the resurrection (1 Cor 15) who could always be cross-examined. 8) The transformation of the Disciples which was a miracle considering their character before the resurrection. And 9) There is no motive for the authors to fabricate the story. They had nothing to gain, and everything to lose (their lives). Now does the resurrection prove that Jesus was also God Incarnate? No it doesn't, but if you can take the Gospels as reliable historical documents, you find that Jesus does make such statements in them as, "I and the Father are one", "If you see Me, you see the Father", and "He who believes in Me, believes in the Father who sent Me". This seems to show that Jesus really believed that He was God incarnate. And if the Gospels were fabricated, wouldn't the story have ended differently before the crucifixion?

ABOUT THE BIBLE

What about the Bible? Can you believe all that you find in the Bible? But before this question is answered, you have to ask the question as to why God can't be more obvious in what He really wants from us? The problem here is that even if He were, we probably would want to do our own thing anyway. There are several reasons for this. 1) The impression stupendous events have on us, such as miracles, are never permanent and fade away with time. 2) There are always other explanations available for anything you observe. 3) Divine things are never as clear in this world because of the spiritual warfare going on around us. And 4) God only wants a loving trusting relationship with us, and this requires a moral decision by us, not absolute proof which would require no moral decision having to be made whatsoever. Besides, nothing is ever absolute.

Now getting back to the Bible. It's true that there are some unbelievable stories contained therein, but in a sense, you have to look at the Bible as a baby carriage carrying the baby, whereby the baby carrage can have many defects in it, while the baby cannot, although sometimes it's hard to distinguish between the two. Also many of these so-called defects are really not defects at all, but a way of making a point allegorically that couldn't be made more effectively in any other way. After all, the Bible is basically not an historical or scientific book, but a book to show us how we could be redeemed. Now if you consider the Lordship of Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels as authentic, you have to consider the Bible itself as being authentic, because Jesus uses so much of the Old Testament in His teachings In other words, the Gospels' authenticity lends itself to the authenticity of the rest of the Bible. Besides the Bible seems to have a unity of purpose despite the diversity of its authorship, prophetic, and archaeological accuracy in many instances, and the Bible as a whole has given many people tremendous spiritual uplifts thoughout the centuries. Therefore if you consider the Gospels as being historically authentic, you also have to trust the Bible as a whole in being historically reliable as well. But why so much violence in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, whereby sometimes whole groups of people are killed under a loving God's direction? One has to realize that one has to measure one kind of evil against another, especially if the particular evil you want to stamp out is going to interfere with God's universal plan for redemption Besides, you still have the after-life to sort out what's right or wrong.

But with one authoritative Bible, why do we have so many Christian denominations with different translations and interpretations of the Bible? There are basically 3 reasons for this. 1) Primarily because of the sinfulness of the church, in that, despite the fact that Jesus prayed for unity among His children (John 17), our pride and arrogance insisted on our divisiveness. It's amazing that Jesus can still minister through this sinful church. 2) Some churches view the authority of the Bible in different ways, such as the Roman Catholic Church which views the Bible, Church Tradition and the Pope as equal in authority, and the Fundamentalists who view the Bible simply as a Supreme Legal Document. And 3) some churches have honest differences of opinion on how to interpret different portions of Scripture, such as the role women should play in the church,, due to the fraility of our human understanding. But the central message in all these traditions is still the same in that Jesus Christ died for our sins and saved all of us who believe in Him. And although the Bible is the prime source for this central message, God can speak to us in many other ways as well.

Now, what happens to those who aren't Christians? I'm not sure, but you should investigate and study the non-Christian's philosophy of life and belief, and see how it compares with that of Christianity to perhaps find out. Most belief systems do have much good in them, but do they contain as much truth in regard to this as Christianity does? I don't think so, because no other belief system provides an adequate solution in how to handle sin the way Chrisitnity does. So whatever belief system you do choose, this will guide you in how you might want to live the rest of your spiritual life. But you really have to study all the belief systems in order to discover what suits you best.

ABOUT CHRISTIAN LIFE AND DOCTRINE

Most belief systems feel that a Perfect God could accept imperfect or sinful human beings into His Heavenly Kingdom, because, after all, He is Perfect and He can accept anybody He desires.. And those He desires are those on balance who are better benefactors than sinners. But the question remains, "Can Perfection ever accept imperfection, or sinners, into His Heavenly Kingdom? If God does, wouldn't the sinners pollute His Kingdom. just as dirty water would pollute pure water. Many believe they wouldn't, but if they would, Christianity has a way around this. Christianity says that God came down to earth in the person of Jesus Christ, mingled with humanity for awhile teaching them about God, died on the cross absorbing our imperfections or sinfulness within Himself, and finally was resurrected as Perfection after only 3 days.. And those who believe in this Jesus Christ have placed around themselves this perfection so that when God sees us He only sees His son, Jesus Christ. In other words, it's like our being wrapped up like a Christmas present, with the wrapping being our belief in Jesus Christ, so that when God looks at us, He only sees the wrapping or Perfection (Jesus Christ), and not our own sinfulness. It's similar to God looking into a mirror at Himself. We still remain sinners, but God really doesn't see this. But as we put more and more of this wrapping around ourselves, the wrapping begins to seap more and more into our hearts, and as this happens we begin to change and become much more loving and forgiving. But you have to believe in Jesus Christ for this to happen and for you to enter into His Heavenly Kingdom.

But what about those who don't believe in Jesus Christ? Do they go to Hell as the Bible suggests? According to the Bible, Hell is described as a gruesome place, and nobody in their right mind would want to go there. And being such a gruesome place, it seems that only those who have committed the most horrendous sins should ever go there. This creates quite a dilema for the Christian belief, because we Christians believe that those who don't believe in Jesus Christ go there, but we also believe that God is very fair and just, and that He wouldn't just throw these non-believers into such a horrendous place as Hell if they're basically good people. After all, they never committed such horrendous acts whereby they deserved such horrendous punishment. God must have provided another alternative for them. Perhaps a type of Purgatory for them after death. Or perhaps Jesus died for them on the cross also, even though they did not consciously know Him or were incapable of knowing him, such as infants retards, or mental incompetents but did God's bidding anyway to the best of their ability. But to make sure that they're accepted by God, we Christian should still continue to share our faith with others. Hell, as I see it, is really only for those who have commited horrendous acts, such as Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Sadam Hussein, unrepentent criminals or assassins, and the political suicide bombers . And God's not really putting them there. They're putting themselves there by their own free will of so much hate and cruelty. And at the end of time, according to the Book of Revelation, they will be totally destroyed by God.

I was born in New York City in 1931, grew up on Long Island, graduated from Roanoke College in Virginia with a BA Degree in Political Science, and from New York Theological Seminary with a Masters Degree in Religious Education. I became a committed Christian in 1958, and after a number of years became a committed Ecumenical Christian. After my conversion though, my greatest sin of sexual obsession was greatly relieved by my discovering that being active in a social nudist (both sexes) camp for 3 years would do this for me. This changed my life most dramatically. In the secular world, I worked as an accountant in various companies for about 25 years in New York City, then moved down to Argentina and worked for about 23 years as a Business English conversationalist teacher with some of the top managers. I also became a Stephen Minister (trained counselor) while down here. Married twice (the last to an Argentine) widowed once, no children, one cat. You can contact me via (corbinwr@yahoo.com).