"I can't believe in something that I don't fully understand, so I'm not a Christian"

A few people have said to me that the reason they don't read the Bible or choose to follow God and become a Christian is because they don't understand the Gospel. The basics of Christianity are really quite simple:

• God created everyone with a purpose and He wants a relationship you
• You have sinned, which means you have disobeyed God's plans for you, like every single person on the planet
• God is upset by this and as a just and righteous God, He must punish you accordingly - which means Hell
• But God will not give up! He loves you so much that He sent His only son Jesus to take the punishment for your sin
• The punishment for sin is death. Jesus, in his perfection, took it upon himself to die an excruciating, horrific death so that we could be forgiven of our sins
• He showed his power and glory, when God resurrected Jesus from the dead
• The price has been paid for us, so that if we believe in God, trust God, choose to obey God now and apologise with sincerity then we fail, we will be saved - we will live with God in Heaven and avoid being sent to Hell

(For a more in-depth explantion of that, you might want to see my posts on why God sends people to Hell and how you can avoid it here and here. You may also want to visit Got Questions?)

If you would prefer to watch a video explaining the Gospel message clearly and concisely, check this out, it's done in the format of spoken word poetry:

credit to Odd Thomas and WretchedRadio

But if at this point you're still thinking "ok, I get that much, but I'm still confused by stuff like Jesus being resurrected, the Trinity, etc" here's my answer to you: yes, it is complicated stuff! God's plan is divine, it has been made with his ultimate understanding and knowledge, with his foresight and hindsight. We do not have this.

It is not important that we understand the ins and outs of His plan entirely, we just need to understand the basics which I have just explaned. God guides us and helps us to understand. It takes time to build up a close communication with God, through Bible study and prayer, as it does with any relationship. But He will reveal himself and help you understand. He listens and waits for you.

Now before you jump to thinking this is a 'cop out', think of it like this: what do you currently follow or believe that you do not fully understand? Do you understand...

• How the internet works? But do you believe that the internet exists? Do you frequently use it?
• How your phone works? But do you blindly use that without understanding it?
• How gravity works? Yet you believe you will stay on the ground
• How the universe exists? The movements of the Earth in relation to the Sun and the moon? But you expect that we'll have day and night

It is possible to know how the things I have just listed work. It is possible to understand God's unique plan for our lives. But both are complicated. If that is not a reason however to shy away or refuse to investigate the workings of the internet, why is it a reason to turn from God? If you can blindly follow worldly things without fully comprehending, why do you reject doing this with God?

"How can God punish ME for the way HE created me?"

A friend asked me this week why God punishes us for our sins when he created us imperfect, meaning we will always sin even if we choose to follow Him and repent of our sins. The answer to this question can't be summarised too briefly and I will explain further, but to try and summarise: the reason is that in order to make us perfect and able to stop sinning against Him, God would had to have created us without free will. Since we have free will, we aren't perfect and will always sin, but we still have the choice (because of free will) to acknowledge that sin is wrong, turn from it and repent.

If that short version is a sufficient enough explanation, hopefully once I've explained it further it will make more sense. So stay with me!

God's desire for a genuine relationship with us is paramount to His creating of the world. He desires a deep, meaningful relationship with us. Think of it like a relationship you yourself have. You would not want a person (whether it be a parent/child/sibling) to love you and have a relationship with you for the sake of it - because you're there or because you're being forced to by someone. It is exactly the same for God. He doesn't want robots that are forced to love Him or follow Him, he wants a real relationship with children who love Him and follow Him because they choose to. That is why God gave us free will.

The reason He can punish us therefore, is because with this free will we all have the choice to try not to sin, to turn away as much as we can and to say we're sorry when we fail. If we do this, it is perfectly acceptable in God's eyes, we are doing what He has asked of us in the best way we can considering how He made us. To know this and to continue sinning with no remorse and no attempt at changing our ways, is to deny the plan God has created to avoid sin and punishment. That does warrant punishment.

He is not punishing us for the way we have been created, for our imperfection or for the fact we have once sinned, as he knows this to be the case before we are even born. God punishes us for turning away and refusing to adopt His plan of salvation - to wipe us of our sin and imperfection and to in future make us perfect. This way we can enjoy a true relationship with our Father and He with His children.

I leave you with this verse:
"He died for everyone so that those who receive his new life will no longer live for themselves. Instead, they will live for Christ, who died and was raised for them" - 2 Corinthians 5:15

Why The Theory of Evolution is Wrong - Hands Down

I warn you now that this post is going to be VERY long! On the plus side, I'm referencing where I'm reading the theory of evolution from and directly responding to each section of it. As much as you may think I'm "ignoring the facts", you can see that I'm not :)

So we all know in short, that the theory of evolution is the process by which it is believed humans and other animals 'adapted' to their surroundings and environment via 'natural selection'. This theory is accepted due to apparent 'evidence,' which is what I'll be focusing on. We know the theory, the flaws in the theory that come from the lack of evidence is what I'll be focusing on in this post.

Fossils

So one thing we're told is that fossils show how species 'evolved' from one type to the next. If you go to my first reference from Berkeley University you'll see a page about horse fossil samples. The page explains that these fossils show that the transitional forms predicted by evolution, did indeed exist. I disagree.

This shows similarites between animals that existed years ago and those that exist in modern day. Just because the fossils are very similar, this does not prove in anyway that the first one became the last. Showing a bunch of fossils together and saying they're the same thing doesn't tell me anything other than speculation.

Anatomy

On Berkeley University's page on evolutionary anatomy, you can read about animals and their dewclaws. The page claims that because animals like pigs have 'reduced dewclaws', this conclusively proves they once had more 'digits' that then became reduced. I wonder why they have made this assumption. For some reason it's talked about it as if it's common sense. For all scientists know, these 'reduced dewclaws' could have some purpose that hasn't been discovered yet. There was a time when science thought smoking was harmless, but now we know better. Maybe the same would happen there is scientists put more time, thought and research into it.

There is also a section on how monkeys and humans have similar chest structures. Actually I think that points more toward a creator than to evolution. There's a reason for their chests being similar as the page explains. It's to do with the need for their shoulders and arms to move. I think this shows a creator using the same blueprint, as it were, for both species. He knows what works for each kind of animal.

Comparative Anatomy

Again on my third reference from Berkeley, there is a page comparing the anatomy of a whale with that of a hummingbird. The page says, "Their bodies have been modified and parts have been lost through natural selection, resulting in adaptation to their respective lifestyles over millions of years". I'm thinking, 'Does this person hear themself?!' We're supposed to believed that naturally and accidentally modification occured in these animals? And people think I'm deluded for believing in a Creator? Interesting.

Secondly, just look at these two animals! Just because they both have ribs, skulls and hind limbs, scientists believe they're clearly related. Right.

Snakes with Legs
If you check out my fourth reference you'll read about how scientists think that snakes used to have legs, but evolved/adapted not to have them anymore. (Sounds counterproductive to me, but let's separate logic from opinion). Maybe the 'limb buds' spoken about, that can be observed in the embryo, aren't actually that for a start. We look kinda like sea horses with a long section sticking out our backsides when humans are embryos, so I guess we evolved from seahorses then? Because we look kinda similar as embryos? Plus, it's said "some" species, so where did the other snakes come from? The ones that never had legs? Since we seem to think everything had to come from something else?

Maybe, instead of one becoming the other, there were 2 different species of snake and one died out? But they were so similar to each other that you think one was a snake that evolved into a modern day snake. I'm seeing a continuous pattern here than in science terms, things observed to be similar must basically be the same, or were previously the same.

Whales with Teeth

This is pretty much the same thing as the snakes. A skull was found that looks like a baleen whale but it has teeth, when these whales actually lose the teeth they are born with. Firstly, let's review again that baby baleen whales have teeth that they loose. Maybe this is also a baby whale skull that didn't lose it's teeth yet? It could always have been that way for all they know. Or maybe this was an anomalie? These things happen. Just because you found one, doesn't mean you can say "All whales used to have teeth all the time. They don't know, so they must have adapted/evolved to lose them. For some unknown reason. Fact". Nothing has been proved there in terms of evolution.

Molecular Evidence

Berkeley's page on molecular evidence says "Roundworms, for example, share 25% of their genes with humans. These genes are slightly different in each species, but their striking similarites nevertheless reveal their common ancestry". Note there: striking similarities. Scientists are still using things that are similar to argue that said things were once the same. Still not buying it really.

It seems this whole theory of evolution business stems from someone really wanting everything to have come from the same origin. It's reminiscent of why we discredit Freud as a scientist. He had a theory and collected only evidence that would support the theory, rather than the other way around. (Evidence collected leads to a theory). We think Freud's evidence lacks scientific credibility, but not the theory of evolution. Again, very
interesting.

Natural Selection

When talking about dogs descending from wolves, this page says: "These observations demonstrate that selection has profound effects on populations and has the ability to modify forms and behaviors of living things to the point that they look and act very unlike their ancestors". Well isn't that convenient? Science says that some animals have different DNA, look different and act different, but they're still related. I see no logical basis for this argument at all. What science are they going on then to establish this 'relation?'

Ecology
If you'd be so kind as to click here, you'll see a page about sparrows that says: "House sparrows in the north are larger and darker colored than those in the south. Darker colors absorb sunlight better than light colors and larger size allows less surface area per unit volume, thus reducing heat loss—both advantages in a cold climate. This is an example of natural selection".

Here's a thought - maybe they were always like that and 2 different types of sparrow existed for that very reason previously mentioned. Why did the sparrows have to be the same and then change due to their environment? I think this just suggests a clever creator who made them that way. Why would they need to survive, or adapt, or evole, if they were pure accident? Furthermore, how could they?

It was previously mentioned that, "In any ecosystem there are finite opportunities to make a living. Organisms either have the genetic tools to take advantage of those opportunities or they do not". Well surely, everything would just die out? Firstly, for the reasons I just metioned, they surely would have no reason or capability since they were an accident as a result of primordial sludge. But this process we're told took millions of years. They would be dead before they could make those changes.

Consider this: my parents are fairly average height. I have 3 brothers who are all tall - over 6ft. My dad isn't. I'm not. My grandparents weren't tall, my great uncles weren't tall. It goes on. Where did that tall trait come from? Secondly, there is no guarantee that it will pass on to my nieces and nephews and it certainly didn't exist before (if at all) for at least 2 generations. Passing down traits is too sporadic to be "natural selection". A trait that doesn't appear to exist suddenly appears in 3 out of 4 children, yet a trait that is apparenly carried may never be passed on. Secondly, why did my brothers need to 'evolve/adapt' to be taller?

With this logic, We don't need to worry about global warming and carbon dioxide, because we'll all just adapt to breathe that instead of oxygen. We don't need to worry about smoking, drugs and alcohol because we'll all just adapt to deal with that too. No you say? Surely by evolutionary logic that is in fact true. It will just take millions of years. Meanwhile, in case you didn't notice, people are dying of these things before they can develop and pass on that trait!

Finally, these are all environmental factors and it's scientifically accepted that environmental factors can't
actually be passed on. E.g. if I can cope really well in the heat, doesn't mean my kids will. So how would environmental traits ever pass on? Even before we consider the fact that animals would die out beforehand.

Experiments
This page explains why species die out, not how they adapt or evolve, by using an example of fish. Evolution is still not proven by these means either.

Science Strikes Back

So now to conquer this error, scientists have come up with 'punctuated equilibrium'. The suggestion that these environmental changes happened rapidly, e.g. in response to flood or drought. So there you have it, if that's possible then we definitely don't need to worry about how global warming will affect human life! In which case, why did it take millions of years for other species?

Here's the proof: evolution supposedly occurred so quickly that there wasn’t time to leave any fossils as evidence. (AKA, there is none, since the previous sections of the theory relied heavily on fossils). Isn't that convenient? Once again. It seems again that the 'evidence' is being molded to fit the desired theory. The theory of punctuated equilibrium was proposed only as a way to explain the lack of fossil evidence for evolution.

To Summarise

There is no concrete evidence to support the theory of evolution. Thus, I will not support it, believe it, or force students in schools to learn and believe it. But for argument's sake, let's say evolution can be proved. What it will never prove, is that there is no God. If that's your excuse to deny the Lord, you'll have to try harder.

I leave you with this:

In his book 'Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth', Swedish embryologist Soren Lovtrup writes, “I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this is what has happened in biology… I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.”

(This section taken from an article by: The Evidence Bible)

A Moment of Struggle

As I've already explained, this is mostly a question/answer blog. Friends, classmates, co-workers, family, ask me various questions (sometimes repeatitively) and I write my answers up on here for them to read. Recently, people have continued to ask me questions but for some reason I haven't had the motivation to write my answers.

So instead, here is a slightly different type of post. I'll share with you what's going on in my head right now. I'm going through a moment of struggle. For the last 2 weeks I haven't wanted to attend Meeting. I felt tired and really like I couldn't face it, so I didn't go. Can you believe it? I spend a whole year at university wishing I could go to Meeting, I finally get the opportunity and I don't want to. On top of that, I've had difficulty feeling secure in my faith recently. I spent some time with some Muslim friends of friends who asked me about what I believe. I am interested in understanding Islam, but let me say now that I have no intention or desire to convert. My point is, that through speaking to them and hearing about what they believe, they know what that is and where they're going.

To explain that more clearly, they know what they believe about God, about angels, about the prophets, about salvation, about prayer. They asked me about Jesus, why he came to 'pay the price for our sins'. That made me realise that I have no idea why. It sounds fantastic that Jesus paid the price for our sins, died so we don't have to. But we still die. So what did that achieve? Why is the shedding of blood and death required for salvation and forgiveness? That wasn't the case in the Old Testament. If we still die, how come we aren't paying for our own sins at that point? It made me realise I don't understand this enough.

The Muslims I spent time with also knew what it was to be a Muslim. It wasn't just about believing, which they did, but also about praying, giving to charity, reading the Qur'an. I have no idea what a Christian should do in everyday life. That might sound stupid, but what I mean is in comparison to Jews and Muslims, what should a Christian do day to day? Read the Bible, ok. Pray... pray how? For what? When? How often? What else? Say you're sorry, ok. Then what? Be compassionate, give to charity, ok and what else? Christianity looks like a bit of a cop-out in comparison to other religions. Try to help out others, give to charity, volunteer, pray for your sins, forgive others and you are a Christian going to Heaven. Seems like you don't really do anything and you've got an easy way out compared to other religions. Christianity teaches that it isn't about works whether or not you are saved. But after you're saved, then what?

So right now, I'm a little confused. Unintentionally, these kind, friendly people have shaken my world. What I thought I understood and had complete faith in, isn't currently making enough sense to me. I need to know why there is a Trinity, why a human/blood sacrifice is needed to atone for sin, why we need a saviour when "the wages for sin is death" and we still die. Where 'original sin' came from and why these New Testament teachings don't seem to comply with Old Testament teachings. Until I do, I feel like a hypocrite. Trying to explain why Christianity is true when all of a sudden I don't understand it myself. And I hope the path I find to be true isn't influenced by the embarrassment of having to hold my hands up and say I was wrong.

My Issues with Organised Religion

I find that once religion becomes organised on a large scale, has its own building, own staff, official recognition, etc, it can often stray from its original purpose. I would like to say that not all forms of organised religion (e.g. churches, mosques, synagogues, etc) stray drastically from their truth, but from my experience most have to some degree. Even if they don't, religious establishments surely should be a place that people come to willingly and continue to be involved with WILLINGLY. These establishments should not be unnecessarily guilt tripping people or trying to force people into things. If these things happen, I feel it's extremely dangerous.

I'm going to expand on what I mean by that. In the Torah, which I think I have mentioned before that I have read multiple times in the original Hebrew and in English because I have my own copy, says that converts are welcome to the religion. People can be converted. The Jews were chosen because they were the first to accept the Torah, but so can others at any time. Jews should accept converts and Rabbis can convert gentiles to become as Jewish as if they were born Jewish. However, I am aware of some synagogues that won't convert people. They think for some reason no one can change to be Jewish because it's an ethnicity. If you're not born African you can't become African no matter what you do. The same goes for Judaism. Well, read your Torah folks because THAT'S WRONG. But but a Rabbi up on the bimah and get him saying that and before you know it, a whole congregation is holding incorrect views because the head honcho says so. In my opinion that's extremely dangerous. What if he decides all blond people should be excluded from services, are you gonna go along with that too cause he said so? Even though you know better?

You might think that's a bit trivial, but that's just one example of how something so plain and clear in the Torah can be changed by those in authority via organised religion. (If you want the specifics of where to find that info, please leave a comment). Another more serious thing in Judaism is that women ARE allowed to read from the Torah in public. However the Orthodox don't think so, so women are kinda pushed to the side in my opinion by being denied this honour.

In Christianity, eugh, where do I start. Like I said in my last post, I am a Christian. But there are many ways in which I've seen this religion improperly practiced. From my own experience, I was almost forced into baptism when I was about 16. Why? Because the church connected to my youth group (that's right, I never attended this church, just went to a youth group run by the church) seemed to have a hang up on how many new converts and members they could brag about. They didn't care about parental permission, or how long I'd been a Christian, or that I wasn't an adult by UK law, they just wanted me baptised after 1 class about it. From people that are supposed to be loving, caring and genuine, I was shocked at the guil-tripping and force tactics they used.

I also heard a preacher say in a service that "if you're a true Christian, you never sin anymore. If you're still sinning you have not turned from your old life". Again, the congregation go along with it because the minister says so. Well, if you read your Bible, you'll realise that if you NEVER sin then you are perfect. No one is or was perfect except Jesus himself. So now this minister's got  a whole congregation scared that they don't have salvation because he's the one in charge, so he must be right, when in fact he is clearly wrong. The most shocking thing I have heard recently of churches straying from the truth, was when a boy with cerebral palsy was escorted out of church for making "distracting noises". Did Jesus ever shun anyone with a disability? NO. I'm sure people who are there to listen to the Word were listening to the Word. I think people were probably more distracted by an innocent child being removed and excluded than by anything else. Appauling, that is not Christian behaviour.

But even if your church isn't doing things like that, tell me, is your church practising infant baptism? Because most seem to and that is completely unbiblical. Jesus and his disciples never baptised babies. The Bible says 'believe and be baptised' (Mark 16:16), a baby can't do that. You BELIEVE first and then you baptise. Does your church teach that you're not saved if you're not baptised? If so then they're wrong. They're trying to flaunt their members because if you recall, Jesus said to the prisoner beside him on the cross "I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). Was he baptised? No.

These are the common teachings in churches that are taught wrong, that people accept without question because of who the person teaching this stuff is. Many clever theologians, pastors, ministers, deserve respect for their knowledge but they are not always right. Some are misguided but some are deliberately doing wrong. We must be wary of this within organised religion. I don't think I even need to mention the many ways in which religion has been hijacked and used as a tool for political and other dangerous motives.

To try and summarise, people in organised religion can become power hungry and twist the religion for their own personal gain. Maybe to put their individual views across and get followers, maybe to get money through certain 'charitable causes', maybe to get a merry band of obedient followers, the reasons vary. So don't let them prey on your obedience if you're trying to do good.

My answer is, stick to people you know are believing what you believe, read your holy book so you go direct to the source. Don't take instruction and guidance from any one individual. Question everything. If those around you have nothing to hide they will gladly accept your questions and help you answer them. If they try to distract you or cover up the truth then you know you have hit a dead end, that they are after something else from you than your truth faith.

Why Are You Christian?

People ask me this all the time, often it goes something like "but you're smart, why do you follow a religion? It's a bit of an outdated waste of time isn't it?" Well, we can start then by why I believe in God. In short, I believe in God because I look at nature, I look at animals, insects, humans and see complexity and beauty in them. Similar to Paley's Watch (wiki it if you don't know what I'm talking about), I think they are all far too complex to have been an accident. I don't think life can come from no life. How can complex organs have developed from bacteria even over millions or even billions of years? Why would it even need to? How did humans get to such a high intelligence over animals? Why aren't they building skyscrapers?

You can prattle on all you want to me about evolution and adaptation but to be frank I think it's just as far-fetched as you think my idea of God is. But my hatred for evolution and adaptation is a whole other story that I will not go into right now. The second reason I believe in God is that I can feel God, not all the time, but it's happened before and it will happen again. It is called the 'numinous' by philosophers. (Again, wiki it for more info). The final in short reason is because I believe I have had a religious experience, not a silly near death experience kinda thing, just a supernatural God had my back kinda thing. Twice.

So that's why I believe in God. I think science can tell us a lot of things but it will never have all the answers, especially in regard to God because science is just what we know at the time to be correct. Why I believe in Christianity started with me believing in Judaism. I am trying to cut this down because it is a long story and I'm sure no one wants to read it. I have read the Torah in English and in Hebrew and it just felt true and I couldn't stop reading it. In my daily life I came across ways in which it was true. Prophecies in the Old Testament were proved true by accounts in Latin writings I studied in school. I learnt in science that at 8 days old a baby going through a circumcision is the perfect age, any sooner and it's dangerous, the later you leave it the more likely a complication occurs and the pain increases. God said 8 days old was the time for babies to be circumcised - no sooner, no later. Wanna tell me that's a coincidence being written over 5600 years ago? The Torah has not been changed either, which is why I learnt Hebrew, to see for myself. The Torah in my room right now reads exactly the same in Hebrew as the Dead Sea Scrolls. So don't try to bullshit me about it being edited later.

So after believing the Torah I researched why Jews believe we are waiting for Moshiach (the Messiah) and Christians believe he's been. This lead me to read Old and New Testament prophecies. (In the original Hebrew if you were wondering, to combat the "it's all been edited" issue). I found the prohecies to add up and if you're really interested, leave a comment that you are and I'll do another post on that. That lead me to be a Christian. Because I can see from reading the Bible and Torah alongside actual historical documents that Christianity is true, Judaism is true and Jesus is the Messiah, Yeshua haMoshiach.

On top of all that, I can feel it. When I pray, I feel like someone is listening. Things I've prayed for have panned out. No, asking to be rich or asking for a Tag Heuer watch doesn't count. I have experienced God, by following the Bible and believing in Jesus. I feel the Holy Spirit guiding me. I feel sure and at peace with what I have chosen.