With all of the different religions, how can I know which one is correct?

[Patriot]

What is the Baha'i faith?

Question: "What is the Baha'i faith?"

Answer: The Baha'i faith is one of the newer world religions stemming originally from Shi'ite Islam in Persia (modern-day Iran). However, it has come to achieve a unique status of its own. The Baha'i faith has distinguished itself as a unique world religion because of its size (5 million members), its global scale (236 countries), its practical autonomy from its parent religion of Islam (there is little blurriness between the two), and for its doctrinal uniqueness, being monotheistic yet inclusive.

The Baha'i faith’s earliest forerunner was Sayid Ali Muhammad who on May 23, 1844, declared himself the Bab ("Gate"), the eighth manifestation of God and first since Muhammad. Implicit to that statement was the denial of Muhammad as the last and greatest prophet and a denial together of the unique authority of the Koran. Islam did not take kindly to such thoughts. The Bab and his followers, called Babis, saw heavy persecution and were part of great bloodshed before the Bab was executed as a political prisoner just six years later in Tabríz, Ádhirbáyján, July 9, 1850. But before he died, the Bab spoke of a coming prophet, referred to as "He whom God will Manifest." On April 22, 1863, Mirza Husayn Ali, one of his followers, declared himself the fulfillment of that prophecy and the latest manifestation of God. He donned the title Baha'u'llah ("glory of God"). The Bab was therefore viewed as a "John the Baptist"-type of forerunner leading up to Baha'u'llah who is the more significant manifestation for this age. His followers are called Baha’is. The uniqueness of this budding Baha'i faith, as it has come to be called, becomes clear in the Baha'u'llah’s declarations. Not only did he claim to be the latest prophet foreseen in Shi'ite Islam, and not only did he claim to be a manifestation of God, but he claimed to be the second coming of Christ, the promised Holy Spirit, the Day of God, the Maiytrea (from Buddhism), and the Krishna (from Hinduism). A kind of inclusivism is apparent from the early stages of the Baha'i faith.

No other manifestation is said to have come since Baha'u'llah, but his leadership was passed on by appointment. He designated a successor in his son Abbas Effendi (later, Abdu'l-Baha "slave of Baha"). While the successors could not speak inspired scripture from God, they could interpret scripture infallibly and were viewed as the maintenance of God’s true word on earth. Abdu'l-Baha would appoint his grandson Shoghi Effendi as successor. Shoghi Effendi, however, died before appointing a successor. The gap was filled by an ingeniously organized governing institution called the Universal House of Justice which remains in power today as the governing body for the Baha'i World Faith. Today, the Baha'i faith exists as a world religion with yearly international conferences convening at the Universal House of Justice in Haifa, Israel.

The core doctrines of the Baha'i faith can be attractive in their simplicity:

1) Adoration of one God and the reconciliation of all major religions.
2) Appreciation of the diversity and morality of the human family and the elimination of all prejudice.
3) The establishment of world peace, equality of women and men, and universal education.
4) Cooperation between Science and Religion in the individual’s search for truth.
To these may be added certain implicit beliefs and practices:
5) A Universal Auxillary Language.
6) Universal Weights and Measures.
7) God who is himself unknowable nevertheless reveals himself through manifestations.
8) These manifestations are a kind of progressive revelation.
9) No proselytizing (aggressive witnessing).
10) The study of different Scriptures besides simply Baha'i books.
11) Prayer and worship is obligatory and much of that according to specific instructions.

The Baha'i faith is quite sophisticated, and many of its followers today are educated, eloquent, eclectic, politically liberal, yet socially conservative (i.e., anti-abortion, pro-traditional family, etc.). Moreover, Baha’is are not only expected to understand their own uniquely Baha'i scriptures, but are also expected to study the scriptures of other world religions. Therefore, it is quite possible to encounter a Baha'i who is more educated on Christianity than is the average Christian. Furthermore, the Baha'i faith has a strong emphasis on education combined with certain liberal values such as gender egalitarianism, universal education, and harmony between science and religion.

Nonetheless, the Baha'i faith has many theological gaps and doctrinal inconsistencies. Compared to Christianity, its core teachings are only superficial in their commonality. The differences are deep and fundamental. The Baha'i faith is ornate, and a full critique would be encyclopedic. So, only a few observations are made below.

The Baha'i faith teaches that God is unknowable in His essence. Baha’is have the difficulty of explaining how they can have an elaborate theology about God yet assert that God is "unknowable." And it does not help to say that prophets and manifestations inform mankind about God because, if God is "unknowable," then humanity has no reference point whereby to tell which teacher is telling the truth. Christianity rightly teaches that God can be known, as is naturally known even by non-believers, though they may not have a relational knowledge of God. Romans 1:20 says, "For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead…" God is knowable, not only through the creation, but through His Word and the presence of the Holy Spirit, who leads and guides us and bears witness that we are His children (Romans 8:14-16). Not only can we know Him, but we can know Him intimately as our "Abba, Father" (Galatians 4:6). True, God may not fit His infinity into our finite minds, but man can still have partial knowledge of God which is entirely true and relationally meaningful.

About Jesus, the Baha'i faith teaches that He was a manifestation of God but not an incarnation. The difference sounds slight but is actually enormous. Baha’is believe God is unknowable; therefore, God cannot incarnate Himself to be present among men. If Jesus is God in the most literal sense, and Jesus is knowable, then God is knowable, and that Baha'i doctrine is exploded. So, Baha’is teach that Jesus was a reflection of God. Just as a person can look at a reflection of the sun in a mirror and say, "There is the sun," so one can look at Jesus and say, "There is God," meaning "There is a reflection of God." Here again the problem of teaching that God is "unknowable" surfaces since there would be no way to distinguish between true and false manifestations or prophets. The Christian, however, can argue that Christ has set Himself apart from all other manifestations and has confirmed His self-attested divinity by physically rising from the dead (1 Corinthians 15), a point which Baha’is also deny. While the resurrection would be a miracle, it is nonetheless a historically defensible fact, given the body of evidence. Dr. Gary Habermas, Dr. William Lane Craig, and N.T. Wright have done well in defending the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The Baha'i faith also denies the sole sufficiency of Christ and of Scripture. Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah were all manifestations of God, and the latest of these would have the highest authority since he’d have the most complete revelation of God, according to the idea of progressive revelation. Here, Christian apologetics can be employed to demonstrate the uniqueness of Christianity’s claims and its doctrinal and practical truthfulness exclusive of contrary religious systems. The Baha'i, however, is concerned for showing that all the world’s major religions are ultimately reconcilable. Any differences would be explained away as:

1) Social Laws—Instead of supra-cultural Spiritual Laws.
2) Early revelation—As opposed to the more "complete" later revelation.
3) Corrupted Teaching or Misinterpretation.

But even granting these qualifications, the world’s religions are too varied and too fundamentally different to be reconciled. Given that the world’s religions obviously teach and practice contrary things, the burden is on the Baha'i to salvage the world’s major religions while dismantling almost everything foundational to those religions. Ironically, the religions which are most inclusive—Buddhism and Hinduism—are classically atheistic and pantheistic (respectively), and neither atheism nor pantheism is allowed within the strictly monotheistic Baha'i faith. Meanwhile, the religions that are least theologically inclusive of the Baha'i faith—Islam, Christianity, Orthodox Judaism—are monotheistic, as Baha'i is.

Also, the Baha'i faith teaches a sort of works-based salvation. The Baha'i faith is not much different from Islam in its core teachings about how to be saved except that, for the Baha'i, little is said about the afterlife. This earthly life is to be filled with good works counterbalancing one’s evil deeds and showing one’s self deserving of ultimate deliverance. Sin is not paid for or dissolved; rather, it is excused by a presumably benevolent God. Man does not have a significant relationship with God. In fact, Baha’is teach that there is no personality in God’s essence, but only in His manifestations. Thus, God does not submit easily to a relationship with man. Accordingly, the Christian doctrine of grace is reinterpreted so that "grace" means "God’s kind allowance for man to have the opportunity to earn deliverance." Built into this doctrine is a denial of Christ’s sacrificial atonement and a minimization of sin.

The Christian view of salvation is very different. Sin is understood as being of eternal and infinite consequence since it is a universal crime against an infinitely perfect God (Romans 3:10, 23). Likewise, sin is so great that it deserves a life (blood) sacrifice and incurs eternal punishment in the afterlife. But Christ pays the price that all owe, dying as an innocent sacrifice for a guilty humanity. Because man cannot do anything to unblemish himself or to deserve eternal reward, he either must die for his own sins or believe that Christ graciously died in his place (Isaiah 53; Romans 5:8). Thus, salvation is either by God’s grace through man’s faith or there is no eternal salvation.

It is no surprise then that Baha'i faith proclaims Baha'u'llah to be the second coming of Christ. Jesus Himself warned us in the Gospel of Matthew concerning the end times: "Then if any one says to you, 'Lo, here is the Christ!' or 'There he is!' do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect" (Matthew 24:23-24). Interestingly, Baha’is typically deny or minimize any miracles of Baha'u'llah. His unique spiritual claims are based on self-attested authority, uncanny and uneducated wisdom, prolific writing, pure living, majority consensus, and other subjective tests. The more objective tests such as prophetic fulfillment employ heavily allegorical interpretations of Scripture (see Thief in the Night by William Sears). The belief in Baha'u'llah largely reduces to a point of faith—is one willing to accept him as the manifestation of God, in the absence of objective evidence? Of course, Christianity also calls for faith, but the Christian has strong and demonstrable evidence along with that faith.

The Baha'i faith therefore does not accord with classical Christianity, and it has much to answer for in its own right. How an unknowable God could elicit such an elaborate theology and justify a new world religion is a mystery. The Baha’i faith is weak in addressing sin, treating it as if it were not a big problem and is surmountable by human effort. Christ’s divinity is denied, as is the evidential value and literal nature of Christ’s resurrection. And for the Baha'i faith, one of its biggest problems is its pluralism. That is, how can one reconcile such divergent religious without leaving them theologically gutted? It is easy to argue that the world’s religions have commonalities in their ethical teachings and have some concept of ultimate reality. But it is another beast entirely to try to argue unity in their fundamental teachings about what the ultimate reality is and about how those ethics are grounded.

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is religiosity?

Question: "What is religiosity?"

Answer: Religiosity can mean “piety” or “the state of being religious”; however, for the purpose of this article, we will consider the secondary definition of "the exaggerated embodiment of certain aspects of religious activity." To be religiose is to be “excessively or sentimentally religious” or to practice one’s religion in a meddlesome way. Thus, religiosity is characterized by excessive involvement in religious activities. Religiosity usually entails extreme zeal outside of and beyond the norms of one’s faith. It is more than affection for religion; it is affectation in religion. Religiosity usually reflects one’s individual beliefs more than those of the religious organization itself. Another term for religiosity, though less common, is religiousness, “the state of being superficially religious.”

To summarize, religiosity is a term used by Christians and non-Christians alike to refer to religious activity in the extreme. Religiosity is an inappropriate devotion to the rituals and traditions of a religion. Religiosity is something that should never be a characteristic of a follower of Jesus Christ, but, sadly, it sometimes is. Whenever a Christian takes his/her eyes off of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, religiosity/religiousness can be the result. It is often easier to observe the rules, rituals, and traditions of a religion than it is to maintain a passionate relationship with the Lord.

How can religiosity be avoided? It is a matter of perspective and priority. What is the priority? Is it worshiping and following the Lord Jesus Christ, or is it fulfilling the rituals of a religious organization? What is the perspective? Do we serve God in order to “earn” His love or to be seen and admired by other people, or do we serve God because we love Him and are grateful for the wonderful salvation He has provided? Religion, ritual, and tradition are not the problem. The attitude behind the religious practice is the problem.

Recommended Resource: The Master’s Plan for the Church by John MacArthur

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is irreligion?

Question: "What is irreligion?"

Answer: The term irreligion refers to a spectrum of non-religious belief systems, including secular humanism, agnosticism, atheism, and antitheism. It covers beliefs that are simply indifferent to religion, that reject religion, and that are hostile to religion. Irreligion is partly defined by cultural context. Today, atheism is the most common understanding of irreligion. In 18th-century England, even deism would have been considered an irreligious point of view.

Irreligion is increasing in popularity worldwide. According to a global poll taken in 2017, 25% of people claim they are not religious and an additional 9% are convinced atheists, with percentages in these categories increasing every time a poll is taken. A survey conducted in 2012 showed that 36 percent of the world’s population are not religious. Interestingly, irreligion does not necessarily coincide with a rejection of the church. Some countries that have high irreligion rates, like Sweden and Albania (over 50 percent for both countries) also show a high percentage of the population affirming that they are part of a religious group—Lutheran and Muslim for those two countries, respectively. Another demographic shows that 47 percent of atheists living in Scandinavia are also members of the national churches. The conclusion is obvious: belief in God is not necessary to obtain or claim membership in the organized church.

In Jesus’ day, the Pharisees classified the irreligious as “sinners” (Mark 2:16). That is, the Pharisees considered themselves separate from anyone who did not follow their prescribed rules. There was the world of their religion—which added the Pharisees’ own traditions and subsidiary laws to the Law of God—the world of paganism, and the world of irreligion. The world of religion had plenty of problems. During His ministry, Jesus repeatedly confronted the religious leaders of that time, telling them that they were too focused on the rules and the tenets of their religion, hoping to find salvation in doing good works and in keeping their traditions, rather than in God (John 5:39). Their religious system was unhealthy and ineffective not only for themselves but for those they proselytized (Matthew 23:15).

Irreligion is often a reaction against the oppressive nature of religion that attempts to appease God or the gods. Finding perfection too high a goal, or the law too heavy a burden, or the gods too capricious, or their ears deaf to prayer, people turn away from religion. Thankfully, the true God has already been appeased, through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:25). He knows that the law is a burden to man, who cannot attain perfection (Romans 3:10–11, 20), and He therefore provides salvation by grace through faith (Romans 5:1; Philippians 3:9). Jesus says to those in bondage, “Come to me, for my yoke is easy and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:28).

Recommended Resource: Introduction to Philosophy: A Christian Perspective by Norm Geisler

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

Are there supposed to be any rituals in Christianity?

Question: "Are there supposed to be any rituals in Christianity?"

Answer: In religious contexts, a ritual is a set form of worship. Rituals involve symbolic physical actions; some examples of rituals are genuflecting before entering a pew, making the sign of the cross, and lifting aloft the Host during the Catholic Mass.

Religion can be defined as “belief in a deity, expressed in conduct and ritual.” The two most common ingredients in religion thus defined are rules and rituals. To be a faithful adherent of Judaism or Islam, for example, a person must observe lists of do’s and don’ts. Ritual-based religion is most prominently displayed in Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant, liturgical High Church services, but it is also a mainstay of Buddhism and Hinduism.

The Mosaic Law prescribed a set of rituals for Israel’s worship of God. There were many ceremonial laws for them to observe. Some of those laws were very specific and involved the sprinkling of water, the sprinkling of blood, the waving of grain, or the washing of clothes. The Mosaic Law was fulfilled in Christ (Matthew 5:17). The rituals of the Old Testament were never intended to be a permanent part of worship, as Scripture clearly teaches: “[The gifts and sacrifices] are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order” (Hebrews 9:10, emphasis added). The “external regulations” are not binding on us today.

There is no New Testament mandate to include recitations, ceremonial objects, or symbolic physical gestures in our worship today. Our devotion is to the Lord Jesus, not to various rituals or liturgies. True Christianity, as derived from accurate interpretation of the Bible, is not rules-based or ritual-based. Rather, it is relationship-based. The living God through Jesus has made those who believe in Christ His own children (John 1:12).

The only “rites” the New Testament church is commanded to observe are the ordinances: baptism by immersion (Matthew 28:19) and communion (1 Corinthians 11:25). But, even then, no details are given to regulate the exact methods to use. Baptism, of course, requires water, and communion requires bread and “the cup.” Churches are free to baptize people in baptismals, lakes, swimming pools, or horse troughs. For communion, the Bible does not specify the frequency of the meal, the type of bread to use, the alcohol content in “the cup,” or exactly who should administer the ordinance. Churches are allowed some freedom in these matters.

All churches have a format that they typically follow, and this can be thought of as a “ritual.” Of course, it is good for everything to be done “in a fitting and orderly way” (1 Corinthians 14:40), and having a procedure to follow is not wrong. But, if a church is so liturgical and its structure so rigid that the Holy Spirit is not able to freely operate, liturgy has gone too far.

Additionally, liturgies or rituals designed by people are fallible and are often unscriptural. It is even possible to “nullify the word of God” with the traditions people have created (Mark 7:13). Jesus warned against “vain repetitions” (Matthew 6:7), and many rituals held in churches today are just that. Repetitious prayers or creeds or songs can, over time, lead to dullness in worship rather than the free expression of one’s heart, mind, and soul before God (Matthew 22:34–40).

Are rituals wrong? No, not inherently. Empty ritual is wrong, as is any ritual that replaces, obscures, or detracts from a vibrant relationship with Christ. Are rituals commanded in the church? No, except for baptism and communion. God sees the heart, and He seeks those who worship Him “in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). Rituals can be beneficial, but external rites should never be allowed to replace inner devotion.

Recommended Resource: Slave: The Hidden Truth About Your Identity in Christ by John MacArthur

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is truth?

Question: "What is truth?"

Answer: Almost two thousand years ago, Truth was put on trial and judged by people who were devoted to lies. In fact, Truth faced six trials in less than one full day, three of which were religious, and three that were legal. In the end, few people involved in those events could answer the question, “What is truth?”

After being arrested, the Truth was first led to a man named Annas, a corrupt former high priest of the Jews. Annas broke numerous Jewish laws during the trial, including holding the trial in his house, trying to induce self-accusations against the defendant, and striking the defendant, who had been convicted of nothing at the time. After Annas, the Truth was led to the reigning high priest, Caiaphas, who happened to be Annas’s son-in-law. Before Caiaphas and the Jewish Sanhedrin, many false witnesses came forward to speak against the Truth, yet nothing could be proved and no evidence of wrongdoing could be found. Caiaphas broke no fewer than seven laws while trying to convict the Truth: (1) the trial was held in secret; (2) it was carried out at night; (3) it involved bribery; (4) the defendant had no one present to make a defense for Him; (5) the requirement of 2-3 witnesses could not be met; (6) they used self-incriminating testimony against the defendant; (7) they carried out the death penalty against the defendant the same day. All these actions were prohibited by Jewish law. Regardless, Caiaphas declared the Truth guilty because the Truth claimed to be God in the flesh, something Caiaphas called blasphemy.

When morning came, the third trial of the Truth took place, with the result that the Jewish Sanhedrin pronounced the Truth should die. However, the Jewish council had no legal right to carry out the death penalty, so they were forced to bring the Truth to the Roman governor at the time, a man named Pontius Pilate. Pilate was appointed by Tiberius as the fifth prefect of Judea and served in that capacity A.D. 26 to 36. The procurator had power of life and death and could reverse capital sentences passed by the Sanhedrin. As the Truth stood before Pilate, more lies were brought against Him. His enemies said, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King” (Luke 23:2). This was a lie, as the Truth had told everyone to pay their taxes (Matthew 22:21) and never spoke of Himself as a challenge to Caesar.

After this, a very interesting conversation between the Truth and Pilate took place. “Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, ‘Are You the King of the Jews?’ Jesus answered, ‘Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?’ Pilate answered, ‘I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?’ Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.’ Therefore Pilate said to Him, ‘So You are a king?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.’ Pilate said to Him, ‘What is truth?’” (John 18:33–38).

Pilate’s question, “What is truth?” has reverberated down through history. Was it a melancholy desire to know what no one else could tell him, a cynical insult, or perhaps an irritated, indifferent reply to Jesus’ words?

In a postmodern world that denies that truth can be known, the question is more important than ever to answer. What is truth?

A Proposed Definition of Truth

In defining truth, it is first helpful to note what truth is not:

• Truth is not simply whatever works. This is the philosophy of pragmatism—an ends-vs.-means-type approach. In reality, lies can appear to “work,” but they are still lies and not the truth.
• Truth is not simply what is coherent or understandable. A group of people can get together and form a conspiracy based on a set of falsehoods where they all agree to tell the same false story, but it does not make their presentation true.
• Truth is not what makes people feel good. Unfortunately, bad news can be true.
• Truth is not what the majority says is true. Fifty-one percent of a group can reach a wrong conclusion.
• Truth is not what is comprehensive. A lengthy, detailed presentation can still result in a false conclusion.
• Truth is not defined by what is intended. Good intentions can still be wrong.
• Truth is not how we know; truth is what we know.
• Truth is not simply what is believed. A lie believed is still a lie.
• Truth is not what is publicly proved. A truth can be privately known (for example, the location of buried treasure).

The Greek word for “truth” is aletheia, which literally means to “un-hide” or “hiding nothing.” It conveys the thought that truth is always there, always open and available for all to see, with nothing being hidden or obscured. The Hebrew word for “truth” is emeth, which means “firmness,” “constancy” and “duration.” Such a definition implies an everlasting substance and something that can be relied upon.

From a philosophical perspective, there are three simple ways to define truth:

1. Truth is that which corresponds to reality.
2. Truth is that which matches its object.
3. Truth is simply telling it like it is.

First, truth corresponds to reality or “what is.” It is real. Truth is also correspondent in nature. In other words, it matches its object and is known by its referent. For example, a teacher facing a class may say, “Now the only exit to this room is on the right.” For the class that may be facing the teacher, the exit door may be on their left, but it’s absolutely true that the door, for the professor, is on the right.

Truth also matches its object. It may be absolutely true that a certain person may need so many milligrams of a certain medication, but another person may need more or less of the same medication to produce the desired effect. This is not relative truth, but just an example of how truth must match its object. It would be wrong (and potentially dangerous) for a patient to request that their doctor give them an inappropriate amount of a particular medication, or to say that any medicine for their specific ailment will do.

In short, truth is simply telling it like it is; it is the way things really are, and any other viewpoint is wrong. A foundational principle of philosophy is being able to discern between truth and error, or as Thomas Aquinas observed, "It is the task of the philosopher to make distinctions."

Challenges to Truth

Aquinas’ words are not very popular today. Making distinctions seems to be out of fashion in a postmodern era of relativism. It is acceptable today to say, “This is true,” as long as it is not followed by, “and therefore that is false.” This is especially observable in matters of faith and religion where every belief system is supposed to be on equal footing where truth is concerned.

There are a number of philosophies and worldviews that challenge the concept of truth, yet, when each is critically examined it turns out to be self-defeating in nature.

The philosophy of relativism says that all truth is relative and that there is no such thing as absolute truth. But one has to ask: is the claim “all truth is relative” a relative truth or an absolute truth? If it is a relative truth, then it really is meaningless; how do we know when and where it applies? If it is an absolute truth, then absolute truth exists. Moreover, the relativist betrays his own position when he states that the position of the absolutist is wrong—why can’t those who say absolute truth exists be correct too? In essence, when the relativist says, “There is no truth,” he is asking you not to believe him, and the best thing to do is follow his advice.

Those who follow the philosophy of skepticism simply doubt all truth. But is the skeptic skeptical of skepticism; does he doubt his own truth claim? If so, then why pay attention to skepticism? If not, then we can be sure of at least one thing (in other words, absolute truth exists)—skepticism, which, ironically, becomes absolute truth in that case. The agnostic says you can’t know the truth. Yet the mindset is self-defeating because it claims to know at least one truth: that you can’t know truth.

The disciples of postmodernism simply affirm no particular truth. The patron saint of postmodernism—Frederick Nietzsche—described truth like this: “What then is truth? A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms … truths are illusions … coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as coins.” Ironically, although the postmodernist holds coins in his hand that are now “mere metal,” he affirms at least one absolute truth: the truth that no truth should be affirmed. Like the other worldviews, postmodernism is self-defeating and cannot stand up under its own claim.

A popular worldview is pluralism, which says that all truth claims are equally valid. Of course, this is impossible. Can two claims—one that says a woman is now pregnant and another that says she is not now pregnant—both be true at the same time? Pluralism unravels at the feet of the law of non-contradiction, which says that something cannot be both “A” and “Non-A” at the same time and in the same sense. As one philosopher quipped, anyone who believes that the law of non-contradiction is not true (and, by default, pluralism is true) should be beaten and burned until they admit that to be beaten and burned is not the same thing as to not be beaten and burned. Also, note that pluralism says that it is true and anything opposed to it is false, which is a claim that denies its own foundational tenet.

The spirit behind pluralism is an open-armed attitude of tolerance. However, pluralism confuses the idea of everyone having equal value with every truth claim being equally valid. More simply, all people may be equal, but not all truth claims are. Pluralism fails to understand the difference between opinion and truth, a distinction Mortimer Adler notes: “Pluralism is desirable and tolerable only in those areas that are matters of taste rather than matters of truth.”

The Offensive Nature of Truth

When the concept of truth is maligned, it is usually for one or more of the following reasons:

One common complaint against anyone claiming to have absolute truth in matters of faith and religion is that such a stance is “narrow-minded.” However, the critic fails to understand that, by nature, truth is narrow. Is a math teacher narrow-minded for holding to the belief that 2 + 2 only equals 4?

Another objection to truth is that it is arrogant to claim that someone is right and another person is wrong. However, returning to the above example with mathematics, is it arrogant for a math teacher to insist on only one right answer to an arithmetic problem? Or is it arrogant for a locksmith to state that only one key will open a locked door?

A third charge against those holding to absolute truth in matters of faith and religion is that such a position excludes people, rather than being inclusive. But such a complaint fails to understand that truth, by nature, excludes its opposite. All answers other than 4 are excluded from the reality of what 2 + 2 truly equals.

Yet another protest against truth is that it is offensive and divisive to claim one has the truth. Instead, the critic argues, all that matters is sincerity. The problem with this position is that truth is immune to sincerity, belief, and desire. It doesn’t matter how much one sincerely believes a wrong key will fit a door; the key still won’t go in and the lock won’t be opened. Truth is also unaffected by sincerity. Someone who picks up a bottle of poison and sincerely believes it is lemonade will still suffer the unfortunate effects of the poison. Finally, truth is impervious to desire. A person may strongly desire that their car has not run out of gas, but if the gauge says the tank is empty and the car will not run any farther, then no desire in the world will miraculously cause the car to keep going.

Some will admit that absolute truth exists, but then claim such a stance is only valid in the area of science and not in matters of faith and religion. This is a philosophy called logical positivism, which was popularized by philosophers such as David Hume and A. J. Ayer. In essence, such people state that truth claims must either be (1) tautologies (for example, all bachelors are unmarried men) or (2) empirically verifiable (that is, testable via science). To the logical positivist, all talk about God is nonsense.

Those who hold to the notion that only science can make truth claims fail to recognize is that there are many realms of truth where science is impotent. For example:

• Science cannot prove the disciplines of mathematics and logic because it presupposes them.
• Science cannot prove metaphysical truths such as, minds other than my own do exist.
• Science is unable to provide truth in the areas of morals and ethics. You cannot use science, for example, to prove the Nazis were evil.
• Science is incapable of stating truths about aesthetic positions such as the beauty of a sunrise.
• Lastly, when anyone makes the statement “science is the only source of objective truth,” they have just made a philosophical claim—which cannot be tested by science.

And there are those who say that absolute truth does not apply in the area of morality. Yet the response to the question, “Is it moral to torture and murder an innocent child?” is absolute and universal: No. Or, to make it more personal, those who espouse relative truth concerning morals always seem to want their spouse to be absolutely faithful to them.

Why Truth Is Important

Why is it so important to understand and embrace the concept of absolute truth in all areas of life (including faith and religion)? Simply because life has consequences for being wrong. Giving someone the wrong amount of a medication can kill them; having an investment manager make the wrong monetary decisions can impoverish a family; boarding the wrong plane will take you where you do not wish to go; and dealing with an unfaithful marriage partner can result in the destruction of a family and, potentially, disease.

As Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias puts it, “The fact is, the truth matters—especially when you’re on the receiving end of a lie.” And nowhere is this more important than in the area of faith and religion. Eternity is an awfully long time to be wrong.

God and Truth

During the six trials of Jesus, the contrast between the truth (righteousness) and lies (unrighteousness) was unmistakable. There stood Jesus, the Truth, being judged by those whose every action was bathed in lies. The Jewish leaders broke nearly every law designed to protect a defendant from wrongful conviction. They fervently worked to find any testimony that would incriminate Jesus, and in their frustration, they turned to false evidence brought forward by liars. But even that could not help them reach their goal. So they broke another law and forced Jesus to implicate Himself.

Once in front of Pilate, the Jewish leaders lied again. They convicted Jesus of blasphemy, but since they knew that wouldn’t be enough to coax Pilate to kill Jesus, they claimed Jesus was challenging Caesar and was breaking Roman law by encouraging the crowds to not pay taxes. Pilate quickly detected their superficial deception, and he never even addressed the charge.

Jesus the Righteous was being judged by the unrighteous. The sad fact is that the latter always persecutes the former. It’s why Cain killed Abel. The link between truth and righteousness and between falsehood and unrighteousness is demonstrated by a number of examples in the New Testament:

• For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness” (2 Thessalonians 2:11–12, emphasis added).

• “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18, emphasis added).

• “who will render to each person according to his deeds; to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation” (Romans 2:6–8, emphasis added).

• “[love] does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:5–6, emphasis added).

What Is Truth? - Conclusion

The question Pontius Pilate asked centuries ago needs to be rephrased in order to be completely accurate. The Roman governor’s remark “What is truth?” overlooks the fact that many things can have truth, but only one thing can actually be the Truth. Truth must originate from somewhere.

The stark reality is that Pilate was looking directly at the Origin of all Truth on that early morning almost two thousand years ago. Not long before being arrested and brought to the governor, Jesus had made the simple statement “I am the truth” (John 14:6), which was a rather incredible statement. How could a mere man be the truth? He couldn’t be, unless He was more than a man, which is actually what He claimed to be. The fact is, Jesus’ claim was validated when He rose from the dead (Romans 1:4).

There’s a story about a man who lived in Paris who had a stranger from the country come see him. Wanting to show the stranger the magnificence of Paris, he took him to the Louvre to see the great art and then to a concert at a majestic symphony hall to hear a great symphony orchestra play. At the end of the day, the stranger from the country commented that he didn’t particularly like either the art or the music. To which his host replied, “They aren’t on trial, you are.” Pilate and the Jewish leaders thought they were judging Christ, when, in reality, they were the ones being judged. Moreover, the One they convicted will actually serve as their Judge one day, as He will for all who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.

Pilate evidently never came to a knowledge of the truth. Eusebius, the historian and Bishop of Caesarea, records the fact that Pilate ultimately committed suicide sometime during the reign of the emperor Caligula—a sad ending and a reminder for everyone that ignoring the truth always leads to undesired consequences.

Recommended Resource: True Truth: Defending Absolute Truth in a Relativistic World by Art Lindsley

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

Who is the Dalai Lama?

Question: "Who is the Dalai Lama?"

Answer: Buddhism is the fourth largest of the world’s religions, with about 375 million followers. The religion of Buddhism is made up of several sects, philosophies, or schools. One of these is Tibetan Buddhism, which is a religion-in-exile, forced from its homeland when Tibet was conquered by the Chinese. The leader of Tibetan Buddhism is the Dalai Lama, who has lived in exile in India since he fled the Chinese occupation of Tibet in 1959.

Partly because of the worldwide prominence of the Dalai Lama, most people have heard about Tibetan Buddhism. The Tibetan form of Buddhism is one of the most complicated because it is tied to the ancient spirit-oriented religion of the Tibetan plateau. The essential goal of Tibetan Buddhism, however, is the same as that of other types of Buddhism: to realize enlightenment and enter Nirvana, or the freedom of one’s spiritual self from the attachment to or affection for worldly things.

Tibetan Buddhism focuses on its monks, called “lamas.” Correspondingly, it also recognizes a multitude of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas (deities or beings who have attained enlightenment worthy of Nirvana but remain in the world to help others), as well as their consorts. Lamas use different meditation techniques, which include what are called “mandalas” (spiritual diagrams) and prayer wheels. The Dalai Lama is the highest lama. What is interesting is that, whenever the Dalai Lama dies, Tibetan Buddhists believe he is reborn as an infant, and officials of the religion search for the child—who is supposed to bear certain distinguishing marks—and when he is discovered, he then becomes the new Dalai Lama.

The current Dalai Lama is named Tenzin Gyatso and is the 14th Dalai Lama. His real name is Lhamo Thondup. Born in 1935 and “discovered” in 1937, he was given the name he now bears, Tenzin Gyatso. He became the political head of Tibet in 1950. However, he left Tibet to establish a government-in-exile in 1959 when the Chinese took over that country. In 1989, the Dalai Lama won the Nobel Peace Prize.

Most Buddhists consider Jesus to be an “enlightened master” but not the Son of God. During an interview with Christianity Today, the Dalai Lama said that Jesus had lived previous lives and His purpose was to teach a message of tolerance and compassion, to help people to become better human beings. And this is the primary problem with the Dalai Lama and all of Buddhism. While some aspects of the Dalai Lama’s message are undeniably positive, and while most Buddhists are indeed kind-hearted, “good” human beings, their denial of the biblical Jesus infinitely outweighs any positive aspects of Buddhism.

The Scriptures reveal that Jesus is God in human form, slain for the sins of the world (John 3:16). Yes, Jesus taught compassion, but that was not the primary reason for His coming. Jesus came to provide salvation for all those who receive Him as Savior. Jesus died to pay the penalty for our sins. Jesus provides salvation for us because we are absolutely incapable of saving ourselves. Due to Buddhism’s explicit rejection of this truth, the Dalai Lama is a false prophet, and Buddhism is a false religion. On the most crucial of issues, the Dalai Lama is, sadly, not enlightened.

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is Buddhism and what do Buddhists believe?

Question: "What is Buddhism and what do Buddhists believe?"

Answer: Buddhism is one of the leading world religions in terms of adherents, geographical distribution, and socio-cultural influence. While largely an “Eastern” religion, it is becoming increasingly popular and influential in the Western world. It is a unique world religion in its own right, though it has much in common with Hinduism in that both teach Karma (cause-and-effect ethics), Maya (the illusory nature of the world), and Samsara (the cycle of reincarnation). Buddhists believe that the ultimate goal in life is to achieve “enlightenment” as they perceive it.

Buddhism’s founder, Siddhartha Guatama, was born into royalty in Nepal around 600 B.C. As the story goes, he lived luxuriously, with little exposure to the outside world. His parents intended for him to be spared from the influence of religion and protected from pain and suffering. However, it was not long before his shelter was penetrated, and he had visions of an aged man, a sick man, and a corpse. His fourth vision was of a peaceful ascetic monk (one who denies luxury and comfort). Seeing the monk’s peacefulness, he decided to become an ascetic himself. He abandoned his life of wealth and affluence to pursue enlightenment through austerity. He was skilled at this sort of self-mortification and intense meditation. He was a leader among his peers. Eventually, his efforts culminated in one final gesture. He “indulged” himself with one bowl of rice and then sat beneath a fig tree (also called the Bodhi tree) to meditate till he either reached “enlightenment” or died trying. Despite his travails and temptations, by the next morning, he had achieved enlightenment. Thus, he became known as the 'enlightened one' or the 'Buddha.' He took his new realization and began to teach his fellow monks, with whom he had already gained great influence. Five of his peers became the first of his disciples.

What had Gautama discovered? Enlightenment lay in the “middle way,” not in luxurious indulgence or self-mortification. Moreover, he discovered what would become known as the ‘Four Noble Truths’—1) to live is to suffer (Dukha), 2) suffering is caused by desire (Tanha, or “attachment”), 3) one can eliminate suffering by eliminating all attachments, and 4) this is achieved by following the noble eightfold path. The “eightfold path” consists of having a right 1) view, 2) intention, 3) speech, 4) action, 5) livelihood (being a monk), 6) effort (properly direct energies), 7) mindfulness (meditation), and 8) concentration (focus). The Buddha’s teachings were collected into the Tripitaka or “three baskets.”

Behind these distinguishing teachings are teachings common to Hinduism, namely reincarnation, karma, Maya, and a tendency to understand reality as being pantheistic in its orientation. Buddhism also offers an elaborate theology of deities and exalted beings. However, like Hinduism, Buddhism can be hard to pin down as to its view of God. Some streams of Buddhism could legitimately be called atheistic, while others could be called pantheistic, and still others theistic, such as Pure Land Buddhism. Classical Buddhism, however, tends to be silent on the reality of an ultimate being and is therefore considered atheistic.

Buddhism today is quite diverse. It is roughly divisible into the two broad categories of Theravada (small vessel) and Mahayana (large vessel). Theravada is the monastic form which reserves ultimate enlightenment and nirvana for monks, while Mahayana Buddhism extends this goal of enlightenment to the laity as well, that is, to non-monks. Within these categories can be found numerous branches including Tendai, Vajrayana, Nichiren, Shingon, Pure Land, Zen, and Ryobu, among others. Therefore it is important for outsiders seeking to understand Buddhism not to presume to know all the details of a particular school of Buddhism when all they have studied is classical, historic Buddhism.

The Buddha never considered himself to be a god or any type of divine being. Rather, he considered himself to be a ‘way-shower' for others. Only after his death was he exalted to god status by some of his followers, though not all of his followers viewed him that way. With Christianity however, it is stated quite clearly in the Bible that Jesus was the Son of God (Matthew 3:17: “And a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased’”) and that He and God are one (John 10:30). One cannot rightfully consider himself or herself a Christian without professing faith in Jesus as God.

Jesus taught that He is the way and not simply one who showed the way as John 14:6 confirms: “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by me.” By the time Guatama died, Buddhism had become a major influence in India; three hundred years later, Buddhism had encompassed most of Asia. The scriptures and sayings attributed to the Buddha were written about four hundred years after his death.

In Buddhism, sin is largely understood to be ignorance. And, while sin is understood as “moral error,” the context in which “evil” and “good” are understood is amoral. Karma is understood as nature’s balance and is not personally enforced. Nature is not moral; therefore, karma is not a moral code, and sin is not ultimately immoral. Thus, we can say, by Buddhist thought, that our error is not a moral issue since it is ultimately an impersonal mistake, not an interpersonal violation. The consequence of this understanding is devastating. For the Buddhist, sin is more akin to a misstep than a transgression against the nature of holy God. This understanding of sin does not accord with the innate moral consciousness that men stand condemned because of their sin before a holy God (Romans 1-2).

Since it holds that sin is an impersonal and fixable error, Buddhism does not agree with the doctrine of depravity, a basic doctrine of Christianity. The Bible tells us man’s sin is a problem of eternal and infinite consequence. In Buddhism, there is no need for a Savior to rescue people from their damning sins. For the Christian, Jesus is the only means of rescue from eternal damnation. For the Buddhist there is only ethical living and meditative appeals to exalted beings for the hope of perhaps achieving enlightenment and ultimate Nirvana. More than likely, one will have to go through a number of reincarnations to pay off his or her vast accumulation of karmic debt. For the true followers of Buddhism, the religion is a philosophy of morality and ethics, encapsulated within a life of renunciation of the ego-self. In Buddhism, reality is impersonal and non-relational; therefore, it is not loving. Not only is God seen as illusory, but, in dissolving sin into non-moral error and by rejecting all material reality as maya (“illusion”), even we ourselves lose our “selves.” Personality itself becomes an illusion.

When asked how the world started, who/what created the universe, the Buddha is said to have kept silent because in Buddhism there is no beginning and no end. Instead, there is an endless circle of birth and death. One would have to ask what kind of Being created us to live, endure so much pain and suffering, and then die over and over again? It may cause one to contemplate, what is the point, why bother? Christians know that God sent His Son to die for us, one time, so that we do not have to suffer for an eternity. He sent His Son to give us the knowledge that we are not alone and that we are loved. Christians know there is more to life than suffering, and dying, “… but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10).

Buddhism teaches that Nirvana is the highest state of being, a state of pure being, and it is achieved by means relative to the individual. Nirvana defies rational explanation and logical ordering and therefore cannot be taught, only realized. Jesus’ teaching on heaven, in contrast, was quite specific. He taught us that our physical bodies die but our souls ascend to be with Him in heaven (Mark 12:25). The Buddha taught that people do not have individual souls, for the individual self or ego is an illusion. For Buddhists there is no merciful Father in heaven who sent His Son to die for our souls, for our salvation, to provide the way for us to reach His glory. Ultimately, that is why Buddhism is to be rejected.

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

I am a Buddhist. Why should I consider becoming a Christian?

Question: "I am a Buddhist. Why should I consider becoming a Christian?"

Answer: Compared with Buddhism, Christianity has several distinguishing features that show that it deserves consideration.

First, while both Christianity and Buddhism have an historical central figure, namely Jesus and Buddha, only Jesus is shown to have risen from the dead. Many people in history have been wise teachers. Many have started religious movements. Siddhartha Guatama, the historical Buddha also called Sakyamuni, stands out among them for having special wisdom and a profound philosophy of life. But Jesus also stands out, and He has confirmed His spiritual teachings with a test that only divine power could pass. Jesus’ body of teachings is confirmed by the death and resurrection of His literal body—a fact which He prophesied and fulfilled in Himself (Matthew 16:21; 20:18-19; Mark 8:31; 1 Luke 9:22; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians 15). Jesus deserves special consideration.

Second, the Christian Scriptures are historically outstanding, deserving serious consideration. One could even say that the history of the Bible is so compelling that to doubt the Bible is to doubt history itself since the Bible is the most historically verifiable book of all antiquity. The only book more historically verifiable than the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) is the New Testament. Consider the following:

1) More manuscripts exist for the New Testament than for any other of antiquity—5,000 ancient Greek manuscripts, 24,000 in all including other languages. The multiplicity of manuscripts allows for a tremendous research base by which we can test the texts against each other and identify what the originals said.

2) The manuscripts of the New Testament are closer in age to the originals than are any other document of antiquity. All of the originals were written within the time of the contemporaries (eyewitnesses), in the first century A.D., and we currently have parts of manuscript dating back to A.D. 125. Whole book copies surface by A.D. 200, and the complete New Testament can be found dating back to A.D. 250. Having all the books of the New Testament initially written within the times of eyewitnesses means that the books did not have time to devolve into myth and folklore. Plus, their truth claims were held accountable by members of the Church who, as personal witnesses to the events, could check the facts.

3) The New Testament documents are more accurate than any other of antiquity. John R. Robinson in Honest to God reports that the New Testament documents are 99.9 percent accurate (most accurate of any complete antique book). Bruce Metzger, an expert in the Greek New Testament, suggests a more modest 99.5 percent.

Third, Christian ethics has a stronger foundation than Buddhist ethics. Christian ethics is founded in the personal character of God. God is personal and moral. His nature is good, and therefore all actions which align with His goodness are actually good. Whatever departs from His goodness is actually evil. For Buddhists, however, ultimate reality is not understood as personal. But morality by its very nature requires personality. To illustrate, consider the morality of a rock. One does not blame a rock for being used in a murder since it is not a person with moral duties. Rather, the moral duty lies with the person who used that rock for evil purposes. Buddhism lacks the personal framework for moral duty. With Buddhism, karma is the framework for morality. But karma is impersonal. It is akin to a law of nature. Breaking a karmic "rule" is not intrinsically evil. There seems to be no significant difference between error (non-moral mistakes) and sin (moral wrongdoing).

Furthermore, many Buddhists even assert that the dualities of "good" and "evil" ultimately break down. "Good" and "evil" would be part of maya, the illusory world of sensory reality. The categories of morality are not grand enough to map onto ultimate reality, and enlightened individuals will see that good and evil blur into one. But such a position means that ultimate reality would not be "good." It wouldn’t be "evil" either, but then what assurance exists that "ultimate reality" is even a worthwhile pursuit? And what grounds would there be for living a morally good life as opposed to an amoral life without regard for moral distinctions, or an inactive life avoiding moral choices as much as possible? If Buddhism asserts that reality is not ultimately personal and the distinctions between good and evil are not actually real, then Buddhism does not have a true foundation for ethics. Christianity, on the other hand, can point to the character of God as personally founding morality and providing a basis to distinguish good from evil.

Fourth, Christianity rightly appreciates "desire." Buddhist ethics seems to have a core difficulty at this point. Sakyamuni taught that tanha, "desire" or "attachment," is the root of suffering and is to be dissolved. But some admittedly good things are based on the idea of desire. Love, for example, is "to desire the good of another" (John 15:13; 1 John 4:7-12). One could not even love unless one had a degree of attachment in desiring someone else’s well-being. In contrast, Christianity teaches that desire is good when it is properly directed. Paul urges Christians to "desire the greater gifts" of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:31; 14:1). In the Psalms, we see pictures of worshipers longing for and desiring fellowship with God (Psalm 42:1-2; 84). And, of course, God does not simply act loving, He is love (1 John 4:9; Psalm 136; John 3:16). Sacrificing desire altogether seems to throw out the proverbial baby (love) with the dirty bathwater (suffering).

Fifth is the question "What do you do with your sin?" Buddhism has at least two ideas of sin. Sin is sometimes understood as ignorance. It is sinful if one does not see or understanding reality as Buddhism defines it. However, in Buddhism, there is still an idea of moral error termed "sin." To do something deliberately evil, to break a spiritual or earthly law, or to desire wrong things, these would be identifiable sins. But, this latter definition of sin points to a kind of moral error that requires real atonement. From where can atonement rise? Can atonement come by adherence to karmic principles? Karma is impersonal and amoral. One could do good works to even the balance, but one cannot ever dispose of sin. Karma does not even provide a context whereby moral error is even moral. Whom have we offended if we sin in private? Karma does not care one way or the other because karma is not a person. Can atonement come by prayer or devotion to a Bodhisattva or a Buddha? Even if those characters could offer forgiveness, it seems like sin would still be left unpaid. They would forgive sin showing it to be excusable; it is not a big deal.

Christianity, on the other hand, has the only adequate theological view of sin. In Christianity sin is moral error. Ever since Adam, humans have been sinful creatures. Sin is real. And it sets an infinite gap between man and bliss. Sin demands justice. But it cannot be "balanced out" with an equal or greater amount of good works. If someone has ten times more good works than bad works, then he or she still has bad works on the conscience. What happens to these remaining bad works? Are they just forgiven as if they were not a big deal in the first place? Are they permitted into bliss? Are they mere illusions thus leaving no problem whatsoever? None of these options are suitable.

Concerning illusion, sin is too real to us to be explained away as illusion. Concerning our sinfulness, when we are honest with ourselves we all know that we have sinned. Concerning forgiveness, to simply forgive sin at no cost treats sin like it is not of much consequence even though we know that to be false. Concerning bliss, bliss is not much good if sin keeps getting smuggled in. It seems like the scales of karma leave us with sin on our hearts and bliss either cannot tolerate us, or it must cease being perfect so that we can come in.

Christianity has an answer for sin. No sin goes unpunished, but the punishment has already been satisfied in Christ’s personal sacrifice on the cross. God became man, lived a perfect life, and died the death that we deserved. He was crucified on our behalf, a substitute for us, and a covering, or atonement, for our sins. Furthermore, He was resurrected, proving that not even death could conquer Him. He promises the same resurrection unto eternal life for all who put their faith in Him as their only Lord and Savior (Romans 3:10, 23; 6:23; 8:12; 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 3:21).

This is no "easy believism" where God, like a janitor, just cleans up all our mistakes. Rather, this is a life-long commitment where we take on a new nature and begin a new relationship with God Himself (Romans 6:1; Ephesians 2:1-10). When a person really believes God is who He says He is in the Bible, and really believes God did what He says He did in the Bible, and a person puts his or her life on that belief—that person is transformed. He becomes a new creation by the power of God (2 Corinthians 5:17). You cannot stay the same once you have that belief. One could just as easily continue reading the morning paper after realizing his house was on fire. That knowledge (the house is on fire) motivates action and changes your life (stop reading the paper and do something about the fire).

Nor is Jesus simply an answer among many others. All the world’s religions have some level of truth in them, but ultimately, Jesus is the only answer to the human condition. Meditation, works, prayer—none of these can make us worthy of the infinite and eternal gift of heaven. None of these can undo the sin we’ve done. Only when Christ pays our sin debt and we place our faith in Him can we be saved. Only then is sin covered, hope assured, and life filled with eternal meaning.

Finally, it is only in Christianity that we can know that we are saved. We do not have to rely on some fleeting experience, nor do we rely on our own good works or fervent meditation. Nor do we put our faith in a false god whom we are trying to "believe-into-existence." We have a living and true God, an historically anchored faith, an abiding and testable revelation of God (Scripture), and a guaranteed home in heaven with God.

So, what does this mean for you? Jesus is the ultimate reality! Jesus is the perfect sacrifice for your sins. God offers all of us forgiveness and salvation if we will simply receive His gift to us (John 1:12), believing Jesus to be the Savior who laid down His life for us, His friends. If you place your trust in Jesus as your Savior, you will have absolute assurance of eternal life in heaven. God will forgive your sins, cleanse your soul, renew your spirit, give you abundant life in this world, and eternal life in the next world. How can we reject such a precious gift? How can we turn our backs on God who loved us enough to sacrifice Himself for us?

If you are unsure about what you believe, we invite you to say the following prayer to God; “God, help me to know what is true. Help me to discern what is error. Help me to know what is the correct path to salvation.” God will always honor such a prayer.

If you want to receive Jesus as your Savior, simply speak to God, verbally or silently, and tell Him that you receive the gift of salvation through Jesus. If you want a prayer to say, here is an example: “God, thank you for loving me. Thank you for sacrificing yourself for me. Thank you for providing for my forgiveness and salvation. I accept the gift of salvation through Jesus. I receive Jesus as my Savior. Amen!”

Have you made a decision to trust Jesus as your Savior because of what you have read here today? If so, please click on the "I have accepted Christ today" button below.
If you have any questions, please use the question form on our Bible Questions Answered page.
Recommended Resource: Jesus Among Other Gods by Ravi Zacharias

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is Hinduism and what do Hindus believe?

Question: "What is Hinduism and what do Hindus believe?"

Answer: Hinduism is one of the oldest known organized religions—its sacred writings date as far back as 1400 to 1500 B.C. It is also one of the most diverse and complex, having millions of gods. Hindus have a wide variety of core beliefs and exist in many different sects. Although it is the third largest religion in the world, Hinduism exists primarily in India and Nepal.

The main texts of Hinduism are the Vedas (considered most important), Upanishadas, the Mahabharata, and the Ramayana. These writings contain hymns, incantations, philosophies, rituals, poems, and stories from which Hindus base their beliefs. Other texts used in Hinduism include the Brahmanas, the Sutras, and the Aranyakas.

Though Hinduism is often understood as being polytheistic, supposedly recognizing as many as 330 million gods, it also has one “god” that is supreme—Brahma. Brahma is an entity believed to inhabit every portion of reality and existence throughout the entire universe. Brahma is both impersonal and unknowable and is often believed to exist in three separate forms: Brahma—Creator; Vishnu—Preserver; and Shiva—Destroyer. These “facets” of Brahma are also known through the many other incarnations of each. It is difficult to summarize Hindu theology since the various Hindu schools contain elements of almost every theological system. Hinduism can be:

1) Monistic—Only one thing exists; Sankara’s school

2) Pantheistic—Only one divine thing exists so that God is identical to the world; Brahmanism

3) Panentheistic—The world is part of God; Ramanuja’s School

4) Theistic—Only one God, distinct from Creation; Bhakti Hinduism.

Observing other schools, Hinduism can also be atheistic, deistic, or even nihilistic. With such diversity included under the title “Hindu,” one may wonder what makes them “Hindu” in the first place? About the only real issue is whether or not a belief system recognizes the Vedas as sacred. If it does, then it is Hindu. If not, then it is not Hindu.

The Vedas are more than theology books. They contain a rich and colorful “theo-mythology,” that is, a religious mythology which deliberately interweaves myth, theology, and history to achieve a story-form religious root. This “theo-mythology” is so deeply rooted in India’s history and culture that to reject the Vedas is viewed as opposing India. Therefore, a belief system is rejected by Hinduism if it does not embrace Indian culture to some extent. If the system accepts Indian culture and its theo-mythical history, then it can be embraced as “Hindu” even if its theology is theistic, nihilistic, or atheistic. This openness to contradiction can be a headache for Westerners who seek logical consistency and rational defensibility in their religious views. But, to be fair, Christians are no more logical when they claim belief in Yahweh yet live life as practical atheists, denying Christ with their lives. For the Hindu the conflict is genuine logical contradiction. For the Christian, the conflict is more likely simple hypocrisy.

Hinduism views mankind as divine. Because Brahma is everything, Hinduism asserts that everyone is divine. Atman, or self, is one with Brahman. All of reality outside of Brahman is considered mere illusion. The spiritual goal of a Hindu is to become one with Brahma, thus ceasing to exist in its illusory form of “individual self.” This freedom is referred to as “moksha.” Until moksha is achieved, a Hindu believes that he/she will be repeatedly reincarnated in order that he/she may work towards self-realization of the truth (the truth being that only Brahman exists, nothing else). How a person is reincarnated is determined by karma, which is a principle of cause and effect governed by nature’s balance. What one did in the past affects and corresponds with what happens in the future, past and future lives included.

Although this is just a brief synopsis, it is readily seen that Hinduism is in opposition to biblical Christianity on almost every count of its belief system. Christianity has one God who is both personal and knowable (Deuteronomy 6:5; 1 Corinthians 8:6); has one set of Scriptures; teaches that God created the earth and all who live upon it (Genesis 1:1; Hebrews 11:3); believes that man is created in God’s image and lives only once (Genesis 1:27; Hebrews 9:27-28); and teaches that salvation is through Jesus Christ alone (John 3:16; 6:44; 14:6; Acts 4:12). Hinduism as a religious system fails because it fails to recognize Jesus as the uniquely incarnated God-Man and Savior, the one solely sufficient source of salvation for humanity.

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is the Diwali festival in Hinduism?

​

Question: "What is the Diwali festival in Hinduism?"

Answer: The word diwali comes from a Sanskrit word dipavali (or deepavali), literally meaning “row of clay lamps.” Diwali is the Festival of Lights, celebrated in India, Fiji, Malaysia, Nepal, Singapore, and other Eastern nations. The festival is the biggest and most important festival in Hinduism, but it is also observed by Buddhists, Sikhs, and Jains. Diwali occurs on the night of the new moon during the month of Kartika, according to the Hindu lunisolar calendar. It falls between mid-October and mid-November on the Gregorian calendar. The festival signifies a triumph of light over darkness, knowledge over ignorance, and good over evil.

Worship of the goddess Lakshmi—the goddess of fertility and wealth—is common during the Diwali festival season. People also decorate and clean their homes, buy gifts for their family members and friends, share sweets, and place lights on their rooftops and around their homes. Many people open their doors as an invitation to Lakshmi to enter their houses. Women often create beautiful patterns on their floors and walkways in preparation for Diwali, and on Diwali night fireworks are set off. Children listen to legends about goodness triumphing over evil and hope triumphing over despair.

The spiritual significance of Diwali is rooted in the Atman, which is the Hindu concept of that which is beyond the physical body and mind, the pure and immortal aspect of all that exists. Atman is the light of higher knowledge that dispels ignorance and awakes compassion and unity, and it is something that Hindus and Buddhists strive to achieve. Though, cross-culturally, there are many different interpretations of the Atman and differing practices associated with this belief, the main idea is the same: the triumph of inner light over inner darkness.

The Diwali festival shows the universal desire for goodness to triumph over evil and for knowledge to extinguish ignorance. However, the false gods of Hinduism are not the source of goodness and light. Lakshmi is a false goddess; Vishnu and Krishna are not the heroes they are portrayed to be. We cannot find enlightenment by looking within the Self.

The Bible says that Jesus Christ is the Truth (John 14:6). “In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind” (John 1:4). Jesus warns that there is a “light” that is actually darkness (Matthew 6:23) and admonishes us to take care: “See to it, then, that the light within you is not darkness” (Luke 11:35). In the Garden of Eden, the serpent came with a lie and proffered knowledge (Genesis 3:4–5), and he deceived Eve into disobeying God, who is the true source of light. “Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14). The point is that good things are often used by evil spirits to deceive well-meaning people. Light and hope and knowledge are wonderful things—things God wants us to have. But Diwali represents a search for those things in the wrong place.

Those who follow Jesus will be like the blind man in John 9 whose eyes were opened. He had lived in the dark, but now he lives in the light. When the Diwali festival ends, the lights go out, and people resume their lives, but Jesus Christ offers a continual light in the soul that is never extinguished. “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it” (John 1:5).

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

I am a Hindu, why should I consider becoming a Christian?

Question: "I am a Hindu, why should I consider becoming a Christian?"

Answer: Comparing Hinduism and Christianity is difficult, in part, because Hinduism is a slippery religion for Westerners to grasp. It represents limitless depths of profundity, a rich history, and an elaborate theology. There is perhaps no religion in the world that is more variegated or ornate. Comparing Hinduism and Christianity can easily overwhelm the novice of comparative religions. So, the proposed question should be considered carefully and humbly. The answer given here does not pretend to be comprehensive or assume even an "in-depth" understanding of Hinduism at any particular point. This answer merely compares a few points between the two religions in effort to show how Christianity is deserving of special consideration.

First, Christianity should be considered for its historical viability. Christianity has historically rooted characters and events within its schema which are identifiable through forensic sciences like archeology and textual criticism. Hinduism certainly has a history, but its theology, mythology, and history are so often blurred together that it becomes difficult to identify where one stops and the other begins. Mythology is openly admitted within Hinduism, which possesses elaborate myths used to explain the personalities and natures of the gods. Hinduism has a certain flexibility and adaptability through its historical ambiguity. But, where a religion is not historical, it is that much less testable. It may not be falsifiable at that point, but neither is it verifiable. It is the literal history of the Jewish and eventually Christian tradition that justifies the theology of Christianity. If Adam and Eve did not exist, if Israel did not have an exodus out of Egypt, if Jonah was just an allegory, or if Jesus did not walk the earth then the entire Christian religion can potentially crumble at those points. For Christianity, a fallacious history would mean a porous theology. Such historical rootedness could be a weakness of Christianity except that the historically testable parts of the Christian tradition are so often validated that the weakness becomes a strength.

Second, while both Christianity and Hinduism have key historical figures, only Jesus is shown to have risen bodily from the dead. Many people in history have been wise teachers or have started religious movements. Hinduism has its share of wise teachers and earthly leaders. But Jesus stands out. His spiritual teachings are confirmed with a test that only divine power could pass: death and bodily resurrection, which He prophesied and fulfilled in Himself (Matthew 16:21; 20:18-19; Mark 8:31, 1 Luke 9:22; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians 15).

Moreover, the Christian doctrine of resurrection stands apart from the Hindu doctrine of reincarnation. These two ideas are not the same. And it is only the resurrection which can be deduced convincingly from historical and evidential study. The resurrection of Jesus Christ in particular has considerable justification through secular and religious scholarship alike. Its verification does nothing to verify the Hindu doctrine of reincarnation. Consider the following differences:

Resurrection involves one death, one life, one mortal body, and one new and immortally glorified body. Resurrection happens by divine intervention, is monotheistic, is a deliverance from sin, and ultimately occurs only in the end times. Reincarnation, on the contrary, involves multiple deaths, multiple lives, multiple mortal bodies, and no immortal body. Furthermore, reincarnation happens by natural law, is usually pantheistic (God is all), operates on the basis of karma, and is always operative. Of course, listing the differences does not prove the truth of either account. However, if the resurrection is historically demonstrable, then distinguishing these two after-life options separates the justified account from the unjustified account. The resurrection of Christ and the larger Christian doctrine of resurrection are both deserving of consideration.

Third, the Christian Scriptures are historically outstanding, deserving serious consideration. In several tests the Bible surpasses the Hindu Vedas, and all other books of antiquity, for that matter. One could even say that the history of the Bible is so compelling that to doubt the Bible is to doubt history itself, since it is the most historically verifiable book of all antiquity. The only book more historically verifiable than the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) is the New Testament. Consider the following:

1) More manuscripts exist for the New Testament than for any other of antiquity—5,000 ancient Greek manuscripts, 24,000 in all including other languages. The multiplicity of manuscripts allows for a tremendous research base by which we can test the texts against each other and identify what the originals said.

2) The manuscripts of the New Testament are closer in age to the originals than are any other document of antiquity. All of the originals were written within the time of the contemporaries (eyewitnesses), in the first century A.D., and we currently have parts of manuscript as old as A.D. 125. Whole book copies surface by A.D. 200, and the complete New Testament can be found dating back to A.D. 250. Having all the books of the New Testament initially written within the times of eyewitnesses means that they did not have time to devolve into myth and folklore. Plus, their truth claims were held accountable by members of the church who, as personal witnesses to the events, could check the facts.

3) The New Testament documents are more accurate than any other of antiquity. John R. Robinson in Honest to God reports that the New Testament documents are 99.9% accurate (most accurate of any complete antique book). Bruce Metzger, an expert in the Greek New Testament, suggests a more modest 99.5%.

Fourth, Christian monotheism has advantages over pantheism and polytheism. It would not be fair to characterize Hinduism as only pantheistic ("God is all") or only polytheistic (having many gods). Depending on the stream of Hinduism to which one ascribes, one may be pantheistic, polytheistic, monistic ("all is one"), monotheistic, or a number of other options. However, two strong streams within Hinduism are polytheism and pantheism. Christian monotheism has marked advantages over both of these. Due to space considerations, these three worldviews are compared here in regards to only one point, ethics.

Polytheism and pantheism both have a questionable basis for their ethics. With polytheism, if there are many gods, then which god has the more ultimate standard of ethics for humans to keep? When there are multiple gods, then their ethical systems do not conflict, do conflict, or do not exist. If they do not exist, then ethics are invented and baseless. The weakness of that position is self-evident. If the ethical systems do not conflict, then on what principle do they align? Whatever that aligning principle is would be more ultimate than the gods. The gods are not ultimate since they answer to some other authority. Therefore, there is a higher reality to which one should adhere. This fact makes polytheism seem shallow if not empty. On the third option, if the gods conflict in their standards of right and wrong, then to obey one god is to risk disobeying another, incurring punishment. Ethics would be relative. Good for one god would not necessarily be "good" in an objective and universal sense. For example, sacrificing one’s child to Kali would be commendable to one stream of Hinduism but reprehensible to many others. But surely, child sacrifice, as such, is objectionable regardless. Some things by all reason and appearance are right or wrong, regardless.

Pantheism does not fare much better than polytheism since it asserts that ultimately there is only one thing—one divine reality—thus disallowing any ultimate distinctions of "good" and "evil." If "good" and "evil" were really distinct, then there would not be one single, indivisible reality. Pantheism ultimately does not allow for moral distinctions of "good" and "evil." Good and evil dissolve into the same indivisible reality. And even if such distinctions as "good" and "evil" could be made, the context of karma voids the moral context of that distinction. Karma is an impersonal principle much like a natural law such as gravity or inertia. When karma comes calling on some sinful soul, it is not a divine policing that brings judgment. Rather, it is an impersonal reaction of nature. But morality requires personality, personality which karma cannot lend. For example, we do not blame a stick for being used in a beating. The stick is an object with no moral capacity or duty. Rather, we blame the person who used the stick abusively. That person has a moral capacity and a moral duty. Likewise, if karma is merely impersonal nature, then it is amoral ("without morality") and is not an adequate basis for ethics.

Christian monotheism, however, roots its ethics in the person of God. God’s character is good, and, therefore, what conforms to Him and His will is good. What departs from God and His will is evil. Therefore, the one God serves as the absolute basis for ethics, allowing a personal basis for morality and justifying objective knowledge about good and evil.

Fifth, the question remains "What do you do with your sin?" Christianity has the strongest answer to this problem. Hinduism, like Buddhism, has at least two ideas of sin. Sin is sometimes understood as ignorance. It is sinful if one does not see or understand reality as Hinduism defines it. But there remains an idea of moral error termed "sin." To do something deliberately evil, to break a spiritual or earthly law, or to desire wrong things, these would be sins. But that moral definition of sin points to a kind of moral error that requires real atonement. From where can atonement rise? Can atonement come by adherence to karmic principles? Karma is impersonal and amoral. One could do good works to "even the balance," but one cannot ever dispose of sin. Karma does not even provide a context whereby moral error is even moral. Whom have we offended if we sin in private, for example? Karma does not care one way or the other because karma is not a person. For example, suppose one man kills another man’s son. He may offer money, property, or his own son to the offended party. But he cannot un-kill the young man. No amount of compensation can make up for that sin. Can atonement come by prayer or devotion to Shiva or Vishnu? Even if those characters offer forgiveness, it seems like sin would still be an unpaid debt. They would forgive sin as if it were excusable, no big deal, and then wave people on through the gates of bliss.

Christianity, however, treats sin as moral error against a single, ultimate, and personal God. Ever since Adam, humans have been sinful creatures. Sin is real, and it sets an infinite gap between man and bliss. Sin demands justice. Yet it cannot be "balanced out" with an equal or greater number of good works. If someone has ten times more good works than bad works, then that person still has evil on his or her conscience. What happens to these remaining bad works? Are they just forgiven as if they were not a big deal in the first place? Are they permitted into bliss? Are they mere illusions, thus leaving no problem whatsoever? None of these options are suitable. Concerning illusion, sin is too real to us to be explained away as illusion. Concerning sinfulness, when we are honest with ourselves we all know we have sinned. Concerning forgiveness, to simply forgive sin at no cost treats sin like it is not of much consequence. We know that to be false. Concerning bliss, bliss is not much good if sin keeps getting smuggled in. It seems that the scales of karma leave us with sin on our hearts and a sneaking suspicion that we have violated some ultimately personal standard of right and wrong. And bliss either cannot tolerate us, or it must cease being perfect so that we can come in.

With Christianity, however, all sin is punished though that punishment has already been satisfied in Christ’s personal sacrifice on the cross. God become man, lived a perfect life, and died the death that we deserved. He was crucified on our behalf, a substitute for us, and a covering, or atonement, for our sins. And He was resurrected proving that not even death could conquer Him. Furthermore, He promises the same resurrection to eternal life for all who have faith in Him as their only Lord and Savior (Romans 3:1023, 6:23; 8:12; 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 3:21).

Finally, in Christianity we can know that we are saved. We do not have to rely on some fleeting experience, nor do we rely on our own good works or fervent meditation, nor do we put our faith in a false god whom we are trying to "believe into existence." We have a living and true God, a historically anchored faith, an abiding and testable revelation of God (Scripture), a theologically satisfying basis for ethical living, and a guaranteed home in heaven with God.

So, what does this mean for you? Jesus is the ultimate reality! Jesus was the perfect sacrifice for our sins. God offers all of us forgiveness and salvation if we will simply receive His gift to us (John 1:12), believing Jesus to be the Savior who laid down His life for us – His friends. If you place your trust in Jesus as your only Savior, you will have absolute assurance of eternal bliss in heaven. God will forgive your sins, cleanse your soul, renew your spirit, and give you abundant life in this world and eternal bliss in the next world. How can we reject such a precious gift? How can we turn our backs on God who loved us enough to sacrifice Himself for us?

If you are unsure about what you believe, we invite you to say the following prayer to God; “God, help me to know what is true. Help me to discern what is error. Help me to know what is the correct path to salvation.” God will always honor such a prayer.

If you want to receive Jesus as your Savior, simply speak to God, verbally or silently, and tell Him that you receive the gift of salvation through Jesus. If you want a prayer to say, here is an example: “God, thank you for your love for me. Thank you for sacrificing yourself for me. Thank you for providing for my forgiveness and salvation. I accept the gift of salvation through Jesus. I receive Jesus as my Savior. Amen!”

Have you made a decision to trust Jesus as your Savior because of what you have read here today? If so, please click on the "I have accepted Christ today" button below.
If you have any questions, please use the question form on our Bible Questions Answered page.
Recommended Resource: Jesus Among Other Gods by Ravi Zacharias

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is Taoism / Daoism?

Question: "What is Taoism / Daoism?"

Answer: Taoism (also spelled Daoism) is a religion whose adherents are mostly found in Far Eastern countries such as China, Malaysia, Korea, Japan, Vietnam and Singapore where its temples are found. Current estimates are that several hundred million people practice some form of Taoism, with some 20 to 30 million on the Chinese mainland. This is quite remarkable since mainland China is a communist nation and forbids many forms of religion. Taoism’s origins can be traced back to the 3rd or 4th century B.C. Like many religions, Taoism has its own set of scriptures, the main one simply referred to as the "Tao." Other texts are included, and the full spectrum of Taoist canon is known as the Daozang. The word "Tao" comes from the character in the Chinese alphabet of the same name. The word means "way" or "path."

Taoism has never been a unified religion, and some scholars place it in three categories: philosophical, religionist and Chinese folk religion. Because of this it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what Taoists believe. Roughly stated, Tao deals with the flow of the universe, or the force behind natural order that keeps all things balanced and in order. It is considered to be a source of existence and "non-existence." Some Eastern religions refer to this as the "yin and yang" of the universe, which can also express itself as the equal forces of "good" and "evil."

Most adherents of Taoism believe anything from polytheism (belief in many gods) to ancestor worship. Taoists tend to worship mostly on holidays in their calendar when food is set out as a sacrifice to the gods or the spirits of departed ancestors. Other forms of sacrifice include burning paper money so it will rematerialize in the spirit world for a departed ancestor to use. A number of martial arts disciplines such as T'ai Chi Ch'uan and Bagua Zang have their roots in Taoism. Few people in the Western world practice Taoism, and it would appear some have confused Tao with Zen, as evidenced from the books The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra or The Tao of Pooh by Benjamin Hoff.

Although the word Tao means "way," it is not the true Way. There are many religions which claim they are one of the ways to get to God. But Jesus Christ said that He is the only way to God (John 14:6). Because Taoism denies this, it fails in that it does nothing to deal with the sin nature of mankind. Everyone who has ever been born (except Jesus) came into the world with a sin nature inherited from Adam in the Garden of Eden, and it is that sin that separates us from God. A holy and righteous God cannot accept anything sinful in His sight. But in His mercy, He sent His Son Jesus (who was God in the flesh) into this world to die on the cross and exchange His righteousness for our sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). It is only by accepting this atoning death and believing in Christ that we can escape the judgment of God and receive eternal life (Ephesians 2:8-9). Christ, not Tao, is the way to eternal life.

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is the meaning of the yin and the yang?

Question: "What is the meaning of the yin and the yang?"

Answer: The concept of yin yang (often called “the yin and the yang”) is a Chinese philosophical idea used to explain how opposite forces are interconnected and interdependent upon each other. In other words, black could not exist without white, dark without light, cold without heat, etc. The yin yang concept is the basis of many branches of classical Chinese science and philosophy, traditional Chinese medicine, and different forms of Chinese martial arts and exercise, including tai chi.

As with much of Chinese philosophy and culture, the concept of yin yang is mysterious and complex, and a full treatment of it is not possible here. The connection between yin yang and Taoism, however, is undeniable. Tao deals with the flow of the universe, or the force behind natural order that keeps all things balanced and in order. It is considered to be a source of existence and "non-existence." Most adherents of Taoism believe anything from polytheism (belief in many gods) to ancestor worship. Taoists tend to worship mostly on holidays in their calendar when food is set out as a sacrifice to the gods or the spirits of departed ancestors. Other forms of sacrifice include burning paper money so it will rematerialize in the spirit world for a departed ancestor to use. A number of martial arts disciplines such as T'ai Chi Ch'uan and Bagua Zang have their roots in Taoism.

Taoism and the yin yang concept are directly contradictory to biblical Christianity. While it is true that evil would not exist without goodness, the converse is not true. Goodness can and does exist without evil. Evil is not required to understand good or to have good. A doctor does not have to have asthma, in order to know how to treat asthma. Rape does not have to exist in order to understand the joy and intention that God has for sex. DaVinci’s mural The Last Supper is an example of terrific workmanship, yet today it is faded, chipped, and marred by decay. Must the decay exist in order to appreciate the beauty of the art? Not at all.

The holiness of God is eternal, complete, and undivided. God’s righteousness admits no admixture of sin; there is no “balance” or “integration” or “interdependence” between the holiness of God and the evil that exists in the world.

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

​

 

[Patriot]

Is the idea of chi compatible with the Christian faith?

Question: "Is the idea of chi compatible with the Christian faith?"

Answer: Chi (also spelled ch’i or qi) can be defined as “the energy force that gives life to all things.” The idea of chi comes from Taoism, which teaches that there are spiritual and health benefits to developing and strengthening one’s inner chi. This is done through meditation, exercise, and other techniques. Traditional Chinese medicine, acupuncture, and some martial arts like Tai Chi have an ultimate purpose of balancing and enhancing one’s chi on physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual levels.

By definition alone, the idea of chi is not compatible with the Christian faith. A foundational doctrine of Christianity is that God created all things through Jesus (see Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1–4). It is God who gives life, and by God, through Jesus, all things are sustained (see Psalm 147:9 and Colossians 1:16–17).

Some may argue that chi is just a different term for the “life” that God breathed into Adam (Genesis 2:7). But we can’t transplant the term chi into the Christian faith because the philosophy behind chi (Taoism) is also incompatible with Christianity. For example, the Taoist view of “God” is that each person has his or her own definition of what “god” is, and each definition is perfectly acceptable—neither right nor wrong. In the Christian faith, God is not defined by people’s perceptions. Rather, He reveals who He is to us (see Jeremiah 29:13–14). While God is infinite and beyond full human understanding, He has revealed certain things about Himself and is able to be known personally. In Christianity, Jesus Christ is the only way to a real relationship with God (see John 14:5–7).

The idea of chi cannot be separated from the spiritual realm. When one engages with the spiritual realm, he or she will either encounter God or the demonic. In the Old Testament, God forbade Israel to engage in certain occult practices. This was for their own protection; the forbidden practices would have put them in contact with demonic forces (see Deuteronomy 18:9–13).

Seemingly innocent practices, like trying to balance or strengthen one’s chi, may in fact produce some perceived benefits—or at least no “bad” effects—but if those practices are not in line with a biblical worldview, then they are to be avoided. Chi is a counterfeit of the kind of life offered by Christ (see John 10:10).

Recommended Resource: Encountering World Religions by Irving Hexham

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is Islam, and what do Muslims believe?

Question: "What is Islam, and what do Muslims believe?"

Answer: Islam is a religious system begun in the seventh century by Muhammad. Muslims follow the teachings of the Qur’an and strive to keep the Five Pillars.

The History of Islam
In the seventh century, Muhammad claimed the angel Gabriel visited him. During these angelic visitations, which continued for about 23 years until Muhammad’s death, the angel purportedly revealed to Muhammad the words of Allah (the Arabic word for “God” used by Muslims). These dictated revelations compose the Qur'an, Islam’s holy book. Islam means “submission,” deriving from a root word that means “peace.” The word Muslim means “one who submits to Allah.”

The Doctrine of Islam
Muslims summarize their doctrine in six articles of faith:
1. Belief in one Allah: Muslims believe Allah is one, eternal, creator, and sovereign.
2. Belief in the angels
3. Belief in the prophets: The prophets include the biblical prophets but end with Muhammad as Allah’s final prophet.
4. Belief in the revelations of Allah: Muslims accept certain portions of the Bible, such as the Torah and the Gospels. They believe the Qur'an is the preexistent, perfect word of Allah.
5. Belief in the last day of judgment and the hereafter: Everyone will be resurrected for judgment into either paradise or hell.
6. Belief in predestination: Muslims believe Allah has decreed everything that will happen. Muslims testify to Allah’s sovereignty with their frequent phrase, inshallah, meaning, “if God wills.”

The Five Pillars of Islam
These five tenets compose the framework of obedience for Muslims:
1. The testimony of faith (shahada): “la ilaha illa allah. Muhammad rasul Allah.” This means, “There is no deity but Allah. Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” A person can convert to Islam by stating this creed. The shahada shows that a Muslim believes in Allah alone as deity and believes that Muhammad reveals Allah.
2. Prayer (salat): Five ritual prayers must be performed every day.
3. Giving (zakat): This almsgiving is a certain percentage given once a year.
4. Fasting (sawm): Muslims fast during Ramadan in the ninth month of the Islamic calendar. They must not eat or drink from dawn until sunset.
5. Pilgrimage (hajj): If physically and financially possible, a Muslim must make the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia at least once. The hajj is performed in the twelfth month of the Islamic calendar.

A Muslim’s entrance into paradise hinges on obedience to these Five Pillars. Still, Allah may reject them. Even Muhammad was not sure whether Allah would admit him to paradise (Surah 46:9; Hadith 5.266).

An Evaluation of Islam
Compared to Christianity, Islam has some similarities but significant differences. Like Christianity, Islam is monotheistic. However, Muslims reject the Trinity—that God has revealed Himself as one in three Persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Muslims claim that Jesus was one of the most important prophets—not God’s Son. Islam asserts that Jesus, though born of a virgin, was created like Adam. Muslims do not believe Jesus died on the cross. They do not understand why Allah would allow His prophet Isa (the Islamic word for "Jesus") to die a torturous death. Yet the Bible shows how the death of the perfect Son of God was essential to pay for the sins of the world (Isaiah 53:5-6; John 3:16; 14:6; 1 Peter 2:24).

Islam teaches that the Qur'an is the final authority and the last revelation of Allah. The Bible, however, was completed in the first century with the Book of Revelation. The Bible warns against anyone adding to or subtracting from God’s Word (Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:6; Galatians 1:6-12; Revelation 22:18). The Qur’an, as a claimed addition to God’s Word, directly disobeys God’s command.

Muslims believe that paradise can be earned through keeping the Five Pillars. The Bible, in contrast, reveals that sinful man can never measure up to the holy God (Romans 3:23; 6:23). Only by God’s grace may sinners be saved through repentant faith in Jesus (Acts 20:21; Ephesians 2:8-9).

Because of these essential differences and contradictions, Islam and Christianity cannot both be true. The Bible and Qur’an cannot both be God’s Word. The truth has eternal consequences.

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world” (1 John 4:1-4; see also John 3:35-36).

Recommended Resource: Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross by Norm Geisler

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is Islam, and What do Muslims Believe? | GotQuestions.org
65,123 views
•Aug 18, 2017

1.3K71


SHARESAVE




Got Questions Ministries

182K subscribers


SUBSCRIBED

What is Islam? What do Muslims believe? What is the Quran, and what are the five pillars of Islam? When it comes to understanding the differences between Christianity and Islam, or as some put it, Islam vs Christianity, it’s important to have accurate and clear answers. In this video, Pastor Nelson with Bible Munch, goes to the Bible to clearly answer those questions.

*** Curious about Bible Munch? Go check them out!

https://www.youtube.com/BibleMunch

 

[Patriot]

Who was Muhammad?

Question: "Who was Muhammad?"

Answer: Muhammad, or Mohammed, is the founder of Islam and is considered a prophet by Muslims and Baha’is. In fact, in order to convert to Islam, one only has to say, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet [or messenger].”

Muhammad (c. AD 570—632) was from Mecca, a city near the Red Sea in what is now Saudi Arabia. An orphan from childhood, Muhammad was raised by an uncle, a man named Abu Talib, and became a merchant. Muhammad was a religious man, often going on retreats to the mountains where he would pray. During one of these retreats, he reported being visited by the angel Gabriel, who supposedly gave Muhammad a revelation from Allah, the Muslim name for God. Muhammad reported having several other revelations from Allah as well, and Muslims regard him as Allah’s last and greatest prophet to mankind.

Muhammad proclaimed that “God is One,” that is, there is no Trinity and Jesus was simply another prophet, along with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and, of course, Muhammad himself. He also taught that complete surrender (the word islam means “surrender” or “total submission”) is the only way to please Allah. Muslims credit Muhammad with restoring the “true” religion of Islam to a world that had corrupted it.

Early on in his endeavors, Muhammad did not win many followers; many of the Meccan tribes were hostile to him and opposed his message. Muhammad moved north to the city of Medina for protection. After eight years of conflict with the Meccan tribes, Muhammad gathered 10,000 converts, took up arms, and marched against Mecca. He and his followers took over Mecca and destroyed all the pagan idols there. There was very little bloodshed or resistance from Mecca, and the city fell to Muhammad relatively easily.

From Mecca, Muhammad and his followers set out to destroy all the other pagan temples in western Arabia, and they succeeded. The rest of Muhammad’s life was given to the promotion and growth of Islam throughout the Arabic world. Sometimes Muhammad used his great wealth (from plundering) to bribe people into Islam. Other times, he used terrorism and conquest. Muslims swept through the Arabian Peninsula, conquering tribe after tribe. When approaching a city, Muhammad would offer terms of peace: accept Islam, the only true religion, and submit to Muhammad, and all would be well. If a city rejected these terms, Muhammad’s forces would proceed to sack the city. According to Abdullah ibn Umar, a companion of Muhammad, “Allah’s Apostle [Muhammad] said: ‘I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshiped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform all that, then they save their lives and property from me’” (Bukhari: vol. 1, bk. 2, no. 24).

Muhammad claimed to have continued to receive revelations from Allah until his death, and Muhammad’s revelations were compiled after his death and canonized into what is now called the Qur’an, the Muslim holy book. Other respected writings in Islam include the Hadith, which is a collection of teachings, deeds, and sayings of Muhammad; and the Tafsir, which is a commentary of sorts on the Qur’an.

Because of the content of Muhammad’s revelations, in particular the denial of God’s triune nature, the teaching that salvation must be earned by works, and the denial of the deity of Jesus Christ, Christians regard Muhammad’s revelations as false, coming from a source other than the One True God. Indeed, the differences between the God of the Bible and the Allah of Islam are too great to consider them the same deity, despite Muhammad’s proclamations that his revelations came from the God of Adam, Abraham, Jesus, et al. Allah’s “mercy” is dependent upon the right actions of his followers. The God of the Bible, in contrast, has always given His followers the promise of forgiveness dependent on His grace through faith, rather than on the ability of men (Genesis 15:6; Exodus 34:6–9; Psalm 130:3).

Recommended Resource: Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross by Norm Geisler

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

Who is Allah?

Question: "Who is Allah? What is the origin of belief in Allah?"

Answer: Allah is an Arabic word that means “God” or, more accurately, “the God.” In Western culture, it is commonly believed that the word Allah is used exclusively by Muslims to describe their god, but this is not actually true. The word Allah is used by Arabic speakers of all Abrahamic faiths (including Christianity and Judaism) as meaning “God.” However, according to Islam, Allah is God’s proper name, while Christians and Jews know Him as YHWH or Yahweh. When Arabic-speaking Christians use the word Allah, it is usually used in combination with the word al-Ab. Allah al-Ab means “God the Father,” and this usage is one way Arab Christians distinguish themselves from Muslims.

Before the inception of Islam, most Arabs were polytheistic pagans, believing in an unfeeling, powerful fate that could not be controlled or altered or influenced by human beings. Muslims regard Muhammad as the last and greatest prophet, and they credit him with restoring to the Arabs the monotheistic faith of their ancestors. Islam and Judaism both trace their spiritual lineage to Abraham, but the God-concept of Islam is different from that of Judaism and Christianity in some significant ways. Yahweh and Allah are both seen as omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and merciful. However, in both Judaism and Islam, God’s mercy is dependent, at least partly and many times fully, on man’s actions. The Islamic concept of Allah and the Jewish concept of Yahweh both deny the triune nature of God. They eliminate God’s Son, Jesus, and they also eliminate the Holy Spirit as a distinct Person of the Godhead.

Without Jesus, there is no provisionary salvation—that is, salvation is based on man’s effort rather than God’s grace. Without the Holy Spirit, there is no sanctification, no peace, no freedom (Romans 8:6; 2 Corinthians 3:17). Christians trust that by Jesus’ death and resurrection, along with the indwelling of His Spirit, sin is forgiven, the conscience is cleansed, and the human soul is freed to pursue God and goodness without the fear of punishment (Hebrews 10:22).

A Muslim may love Allah and wish to please Allah, but the question in his mind will invariably be “Is it enough? Are my works enough to merit salvation?” Christians believe that God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to provide an answer to the question “is my work enough?” The answer is, no, our work is not enough (Matthew 5:48). This is shocking to anyone who has been trying on his own to appease God. But this was the point of Jesus’ famous Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1–48). The Jews that Jesus spoke to, just like the Muslims who follow Allah, were trapped by the knowledge that nothing they did would ever meet God’s perfect standard. But Christ’s perfect life, atoning death, and resurrection did meet God’s standard (Hebrews 10:10; Romans 8:1–8). Jesus’ message to the Jews and His message now, to Muslims and everyone else, is “repent and believe” (Mark 1:15). This does not mean “stop sinning” and “believe that God exists.” It means “turn from sin and stop trying to please God by your own ability” and “believe that Christ has accomplished everything for you.” The promise to those who trust Christ is that they will become the children of God (John 1:12).

Allah offers no such promise. Muslims believe Allah will be merciful to them based on his evaluation of their performance. But salvation is never sure; it is never a promise. When the Western world looks with horror on things like jihad and acts of Islamic terrorism, they get a glimpse of the powerful fear that Allah instills in many of his followers. Faithful Muslims are faced with a terrible choice: obey the violent commands of an omnipotent deity whose mercy is given only to the most passionate and devoted followers (and perhaps not even then), or give themselves up as hopelessly lost and headed for punishment.

Christians should not regard Muslims with hatred, but instead with compassion. Their god, Allah, is a false god, and their eyes are blinded to the truth (see 2 Corinthians 4:4). We should be praying for Muslims and asking God to show them the truth, revealing His promise of mercy and freedom in Christ (2 Timothy 2:24–26).

Recommended Resource: Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross by Norm Geisler

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

I am a Muslim. Why should I consider becoming a Christian?

Question: "I am a Muslim. Why should I consider becoming a Christian?"

Answer: People often follow the religion of their parents or culture, whether Muslim, Buddhist, or Catholic. But when we stand before God on Judgment Day, each person must give account for himself—whether he believed in God’s truth. But among so many religions, what is the truth? “Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me’” (John 14:6).

True Christians are followers of Jesus. How could Jesus claim to be the one and only way to God the Father? Let’s find out in the Scripture, the Bible.

Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection

The Bible records how Jesus fulfilled prophecy when He was born to the virgin Mary. He grew up unique from any other human because He never sinned (1 Peter 2:22). Crowds flocked to hear His teaching and marvel at His miracles. Jesus healed the sick, raised the dead, and walked on water.

Of all people, Jesus did not deserve to die. Yet Jesus prophesied that He would be crucified and raised from the dead (Matthew 20:18-19). His words came to pass. Soldiers beat Jesus and put a crown of thorns on His head; people mocked and spit on Him; nails pierced His hands and feet into a wooden cross. Jesus had the power to save Himself, but He gave Himself, willingly dying on the cross (John 19:30). Three days later, Jesus rose from the grave!

Why the cross?
As a Muslim, you may ask, “Why would Allah allow His Prophet Isa to be mistreated and killed?” Jesus’ death was essential because . . .

• Every person is a sinner: “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Whether dishonoring parents, telling a lie, failing to love God best, or disbelieving God’s Word, we each have sinned against the holy God.

• The punishment for sin is death: “For the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23a). God pours out His wrath against unbelieving sinners by separating them forever in hell (2 Thessalonians 1:8, 9). As the just Judge, God will not overlook sin.

• We cannot save ourselves by good works: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9). This is a key difference between Christianity and Islam. Islam teaches that a person can earn paradise by keeping the Five Pillars. Even if possible to outweigh bad deeds with good deeds, the Bible teaches that “all our righteous acts are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6b). Even one single sin makes a person guilty of breaking all God’s law (James 2:10). Sinful humans can do nothing to merit heaven.

• God sacrificed His Son for sinners: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). God knew mankind’s sin kept them from heaven. God knew the only way the sin debt could be paid was by a perfect One paying the price of death. God knew He alone could pay such an infinite price. So God’s eternal plan was to send His Son Jesus to die in the believing sinner’s place.

Becoming a Christian
“Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31b).

As a Muslim, you may say, “Oh, I believe in Jesus. I believe Isa was a true teacher, a great prophet, and a good man.”

But you cannot say Jesus was a true teacher and yet deny His teaching that He is the only way, truth, and life (John 14:6). You cannot believe Jesus was a great prophet and yet reject His prophecy that He would die and rise again in three days (Luke 18:31-33). You cannot admit Jesus is a good man yet disbelieve His claim to be the Son of God (Luke 22:70; John 5:18-47).

You cannot consider becoming a Christian without realizing that Christianity excludes all other religions (Acts 4:12). The inescapable conclusion of Christianity is this: either Jesus bears your sin on the cross or you bear your sin in hell. “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him” (John 3:36).

As you search the Bible, may God awaken your heart to turn from your sin and trust in Jesus. You may respond with a prayer like the one below. Remember, the prayer does not save you. God alone can save! But the prayer may be your expression of the faith God gives you in the Lord Jesus Christ.

“Dear God, I grieve that I have sinned against You. As a sinner, I’m worthy of death in hell. But I believe You sent Your Son, Jesus, to die on the cross for sin and rise from the dead in victory. I now turn from following my own sinful desires and from trying to reach heaven through my own works. I trust in the Lord Jesus alone as my Savior from sin. I love You, Lord, and submit myself to follow You by Your Word, the Bible. Amen!”

Have you trusted Jesus as your Savior and Lord because of what you have read here today? If so, click on the "I have accepted Christ today" button below.

If you have any questions, please use the question form on our Bible Questions Answered page.

Recommended Resource: Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross by Norm Geisler

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!

 

[Patriot]

What is Roman Catholicism?

Question: "What is Roman Catholicism?"

Answer: The Roman Catholic Church portrays itself as the one legitimate heir to New Testament Christianity, and the pope as the successor to Peter, the first bishop of Rome. While those details are debatable, there is no question that Roman church history reaches back to ancient times. The apostle Paul wrote his letter to the Romans about AD 55 and addressed a church body that existed prior to his first visit there (but he made no mention of Peter, though he greeted others by name). Despite repeated persecutions by the government, a vibrant Christian community existed in Rome after apostolic times. Those early Roman Christians were just like their brethren in other parts of the world—simple followers of Jesus Christ.

Things changed drastically when the Roman Emperor Constantine professed a conversion to Christianity in AD 312. He began to make changes that ultimately led to the formation of the Roman Catholic Church. He issued the Edict of Milan in 313, which granted freedom of worship throughout the empire. When doctrinal disputes arose, Constantine presided over the first ecumenical church council at Nicaea in AD 325, even though he held no official authority in the churches. By the time of Constantine’s death, Christianity was the favored, if not the official, religion of the Roman Empire. The term Roman Catholic was defined by Emperor Theodosius on February 27, 380, in the Theodosian Code. In that document, he refers to those who hold to the “religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter” as “Roman Catholic Christians” and gives them the official sanction of the empire.

The fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of the Catholic Church are really two branches of the same story, as the power was transferred from one entity to the other. From the time of Constantine (AD 312) until the fall of the Roman Empire in 476, the emperors of Rome claimed a certain amount of authority within the church, even though it was disputed by many church leaders. During those formative years, there were many disputes over authority, structure, and doctrine. The emperors sought to increase their authority by granting privileges to various bishops, resulting in disputes about primacy within the churches. At the same time, some of the bishops sought to increase their authority and prestige by accusing others of false doctrine and seeking state support of their positions. Many of those disputes resulted in very sinful behavior, which are a disgrace to the name of Christ.

Just like today, some of those who lived in the leading cities tended to exalt themselves above their contemporaries in the rural areas. The third century saw the rise of an ecclesiastical hierarchy patterned after the Roman government. The bishop of a city was over the presbyters, or priests, of the local congregations, controlling the ministry of the churches, and the Bishop of Rome began to establish himself as supreme over all. Though some historians tell these details as the history of “the church,” there were many church leaders in those days who neither stooped to those levels nor acknowledged any ecclesiastical hierarchy. The vast majority of churches in the first four centuries derived their authority and doctrine from the Bible and traced their lineage directly back to the apostles, not to the church of Rome. In the New Testament, the terms elder, pastor, and bishop are used interchangeably for the spiritual leaders of any church (see 1 Peter 5:1–3 where the Greek root words are translated “elders,” “feed,” and “oversight”). By the time Gregory became pope in AD 590, the empire was in shambles, and he assumed imperial powers along with his ecclesiastical authority. From that time on, the church and state were fully intertwined as the Holy Roman Empire, with the pope exercising authority over kings and emperors.

What are the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church that distinguish it from other Christian churches? Whole books have been written on this subject, but a sampling of the doctrines will be outlined here.

Roman Catholicism The bishops, with the pope as their head, rule the universal Church. God has entrusted revelation to the bishops. The pope is infallible in his teaching. Scripture and Tradition together are the Word of God. Mary is the co-redeemer, for she participated with Christ in the painful act of redemption. Mary is the co-mediator, to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions. Initial justification is by means of baptism. Adults must prepare for justification through faith and good works. Grace is merited by good works. Salvation is attained by cooperating with grace through faith, good works, and participation in the sacraments. No one can know if he will attain eternal life. The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation. Christ’s body and blood exist wholly and entirely in every fragment of consecrated bread and wine in every Roman Catholic church around the world. The sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated in the sacrifice of the Mass. Each sacrifice of the Mass appeases God’s wrath against sin. The sacrificial work of redemption is continually carried out through the sacrifice of the Mass.

Biblical Teaching Christ, the head of the body, rules the universal church (Colossians 1:18). God has entrusted revelation to the saints (Jude 3). God alone is infallible (Numbers 23:19; Acts 17:11). Scripture alone is the Word of God (John 10:35; 2 Timothy 3:16,17; 2 Peter 1:20,21; Mark 7:1-13). Christ alone is the Redeemer, for He alone suffered and died for sin (1 Peter 1:18,19). Christ Jesus is the one mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions (1 Timothy 2:5; John 14:13,14; 1 Peter 5:7). Justification is by faith alone (Romans 3:28). God justifies ungodly sinners who believe (Romans 4:5). Good works are the result of salvation, not the cause (Ephesians 2:8-10). Grace is a free gift (Romans 11:6). Salvation is attained by grace through faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:10). The believer can know that he has eternal life by the Word of God and the testimony of the Holy Spirit who indwells believers (1 John 5:13; Romans 8:16). There is salvation in no one but the Lord Jesus Christ, “for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). The bread and wine are symbols of the body and blood of Christ, and He is bodily present in heaven (1 Corinthians 11:23-25; Hebrews 10:12,13). The sacrifice of the cross is finished (John 19:30). The once-for-all sacrifice of the cross fully appeased God’s wrath against sin (Hebrews 10:12-18). The sacrificial work of redemption was finished when Christ gave His life for us on the cross (Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 1:3).

These doctrines don’t date back all the way to Constantine, except for perhaps in seed form, but were slowly adopted over many years as various popes issued decrees. In many cases, the doctrines are not even based on Scripture but on a document of the church. Most Roman Catholics consider themselves to be Christians and are unaware of the differences between their beliefs and the Bible. Sadly, the Roman Catholic Church has fostered that ignorance by discouraging the personal study of the Bible and making the people reliant on the priests for their understanding of the Bible.

Recommended Resource: Reasoning from the Scriptures with Catholics by Ron Rhodes

More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!