Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs)Please recognize that this collection of information about Christianity is not meant to be exhaustive nor absolute.
It is an attempt to provide helpful responses to some of the common inquiries about Christianity. 1. How do we know there really is a God?NOTE: this section is best read with a Bible at hand. Have your own thoughts? Send to: slcc.email@juno.com
Question:
How do we know there really is a God?Answer
: The answer to this question starts not in a person's head, but in his or her heart. "Do I really want to meet God?" If a person is really seeking the truth, then there are some very valid reasons for believing in the reality of God. If not, there will probably never be enough proof to satisfy that person. For the sincere seeker, here are some ideas (note: the Bible never argues for the existence of God, it simply assumes it). We know there is a God for several reasons:1. Nothing in this world is able to explain its own existence; thus, there must be a Supreme Being in order to explain the world in which we find ourselves. If there is a creation, there must be a Creator (Romans 1:20). Theologians call this the "Cosmological Argument."
2. The characteristics of the universe and life on our planet are so intricate that the idea of chance or coincidence being the means by which such intricacy developed is impossible. If you would never assume all the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle could assemble themselves by just shaking the box, why would you assume that such amazing order and organization in the physical world occurred by means of random events? If there is a design, there must be a Designer (Romans 2:4). Theologians call this the "Teleological Argument."
3. People's own hearts tells them that there is a God. Otherwise they would not have asked the question in the first place. There is a basic inborn "guidance system" within every person of every culture and time period which enables them to sense right/wrong, fair/unfair, good/bad. It is an inner sense of "law" which must have been given by a greater mind. If there is a law, there must be a Lawgiver (Romans 2:14-16). Theologians call this the "Moral Argument."
4. You can't explain Christ Jesus unless God exists. The life, words, and works of Jesus are well documented in history for the honest researcher to see. If He was a real person, then it is crucial to determine the truthfulness of His claim that He was the divine Son of God. Jesus said (John 14:7-11) that His own reality was inseparable from that of God's. Christ, using the logic of C. S. Lewis, was either a legend, a liar, a lunatic, etc, or the Lord whom He claimed to be. If Jesus is a LEGEND and didn't really exist, then the insurmountable historical evidence for the actual existence of Jesus of Nazareth must be wrong and the large number of persons who swore to the events of his life must be part of a vast conspiracy. If Jesus was a LUNATIC who just "thought" He was God, could such a crazy person have preached the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), taught the temple elders at the age of 12 (Luke 2), or have been able to answer the questions meant to trap Him (Matthew 22:21)? If Jesus was a LIAR, would He have been able to back up His claims about Himself. His validation includes not only His personality (compassion, love, intellect), His sinlessness, His miracles (demonstrations of His power over nature itself), but also His resurrection, which had been predicted and was testified about by numerous eye-witnesses (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:26; 1 Corinthians 15:6). If Christ's claims are valid, then there must be a God, existing as the ultimate Reality. Go Back To Content List
A:
Other forms of this question are: "Human beings wrote the Bible, so there must be errors in it," and "Aren't there some pretty far-fetched stories and ideas in the Bible, like resurrections, a man being swallowed by a fish, future revelations, etc.?" The introduction to the answer is to say that while almost everybody has an opinion about the Bible, almost none of them has actually read all of it, let alone studied it carefully. Much of the criticism of the Scriptures voiced in society today comes from people who are repeating second or third-hand comments or opinions. A critic of any book should never reject that book unless he or she has personally read the book and has looked into the book to understand the book's purpose. The Bible has a two-fold purpose: to reveal God to the person who is reading it, and to assist that reader in beginning and building a personal relationship with God (John 20:30-31). There are, indeed, some very powerful reasons for trusting in the reliability of the Bible besides the Bible's own claims about itself (II Timothy 3:16-17, Hebrews 4:12, John 17:17, Mark 13:31, Psalm 19, Psalm 119). Here are four of those reasons:1. Archaeology, the study of ancient peoples, places and societies, supports the truth of the Bible. The more that is discovered about the geographical locations mentioned in the Scriptures, as well as particular events recorded by Bible writers, the more the Bible is shown to be accurate and reliable. The Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered in 1947, provided an incontrovertible testimony to the accuracy of the copies of the Old Testament people had been using for hundreds of years. Likewise, the examination of the ruins of Jericho verify the Biblical account of that city's destruction in the book of Joshua. Also, the long standing skepticism about the Hittites in the Old Testament, has been put to rest by many recent discoveries about their literature, culture and laws.
2. The consistency within the Bible itself testifies to its reliability. The collection of writings, known today as The Bible, took more than 1500 years to write. It was composed by at least 40 different human writers, from three different continents. There is a diversity of subject matter and contexts within the Bible which would equal a set of encyclopedias. There have been a myriad of copies made, originally by hand, and numerous attempts to erase the impact and existence of the Bible within various nations and cultures. All of this would speak against the possibility of human collaboration and collusion. Yet, in spite of all the factors just mentioned, throughout the entire Bible the same character of God is seen, the same plan for redemption and relationship with God, the same accounts of the future, the same doctrine of mankind--sin, forgiveness, grace, etc.--is consistent from cover to cover. This can be no accident.
3. Fulfilled prophecy is a potent witness to the Bible's truthfulness. At the time of it's completion, approximately 25 percent of the Bible was unfulfilled prophecy (some of which has come to pass since then, like the formation of Israel as a nation in 1948). There is an abundance of fulfilled fore-tellings which stand as powerful supports to the Bible's veracity. Remember, there is a 400 year gap between the conclusion of the Old Testament and Matthew's Gospel of Jesus Christ. Just looking into the Old Testament prophecies we find many statements about the coming Messiah, God's chosen redeemer. To have them all come true in the life of one person could never be coincidental. Consider these odds: to fulfill just 30 prophecies in one person would be more than a trillion to one. However, there were not 30 prophecies about Jesus given centuries before His birth; there were more than 300! And each was fulfilled just as prophesied.
4. The best support of the Bible's truthfulness, however, is simply that it works! In a real sense, the Bible doesn't need to be defended. It just needs to be read and put into practice. That alone will prove the accuracy of what it says (Psalm 1). Go Back To Contents List
A:
Other forms of this comment sound like, "If Christianity is true, why are there so many hypocrites in it?" or "I know someone who's a Christian, and he/she is no more moral nor ethical than anybody else." Sadly, this kind of statement is often made by someone who has been hurt or disappointed by a professing Christian. Three observations which can lead to a reasonable answer:1. In criticizing hypocrisy among Christians, the critic has to make sure he or she is talking about the real thing and not a non-Christian professing to be Christian. Any person or any group can "claim" to be Christian. Is the person or group being examined genuinely Christian? On what is the observation of the supposed hypocrisy based? Almost everything genuine also has counterfeits (jewels, money, etc.). We don't discard the genuine just because fakes exist.
2. True Christians don't claim to live perfect lives. An individual becomes a Christian by admitting that he/she sins and needs a forgiving Savior. Critics should try to recognize that just because there are hypocrites within the group called "Christians," it doesn't mean that every one of them is a hypocrite. Just because one traffic light is malfunctioning, it doesn't mean that all the traffic lights in town are dysfunctional. It would be foolish to reach such a universal conclusion.
3. If someone is really upset and disappointed with the religious hypocrisy in society, then they are in excellent company. Even Jesus was very outspoken about the issue all through the Gospel record. One person or one group's bad example shouldn't be allowed to separate a critic from investigating or getting to know Jesus personally. There are lots of situations in life where we find hypocrisy, but we don't let it keep us from meaningful lives. It is when one looks beyond the imperfections of God's human representatives, that the real message of the Bible, the grace of God and the Salvation of Christ Jesus becomes true. Go Back To Contents List
A:
In other words: How can two-thirds of the world's population be wrong? It's much too exclusive and bigoted to say that all the other religions of the world are wrong. After all, aren't all world religions really aiming at the same goal (eternal life)? It's like we're all climbing up the same mountain, just using different paths; or like a wheel with the spokes of all the different faiths connected to the same hub!" Let's analyze this objection to Christianity a little more in detail. Here are some well-meaning, but misguided ideas about this subject:1. "Those other religions are all so sincere! Therefore, we shouldn't say they are wrong." SINCERITY does not equal TRUTH! Just like well meaning football half-backs have carried the ball over the wrong goal line with all the gusto in the world, so can well-meaning followers of a particular religious system sincerely commit themselves to something that is not true. It is obviously possible to be "sincerely wrong."
2. "It is very narrow-minded to claim Jesus is the only means to get to heaven." Being NARROW does not equal being FALSE. We assent to very narrow minded concepts all day long. Cars run on gasoline ONLY! Airplanes out in the ocean land on aircraft carriers ONLY! Light bulbs glow because of electricity ONLY! The issue, therefore, isn't narrowness, but TRUTH!
3. "Jesus is OK for me, but that doesn't mean He's right for the entire world!" TRUTH is not the result of MAJORITY OPINION! Are there not some rules/laws/truths that are universal? Gravity is the same world-wide. Historical facts are true for everyone regardless of culture or time. No vote will ever change whether something is true or false. It either is or it isn't!
4. "It's unloving to say there's only one way to God. It is so intolerant to impose a set of beliefs on others." SHARING TRUTH does not equal UNKINDNESS. What would the consensus be if the United States discovered the truth about small pox vaccine, yet felt it shouldn't be shared with other peoples or nations? Do we really believe that medical science is best for the US, but witch doctors are more effective for people in New Guinea? Tolerance is certainly an admirable quality, but only when it comes to matters of relationship. Tolerance of false facts is a travesty!
5. Christ Jesus says he is the ONLY WAY to God. (John 14:6). If Jesus isn't truthful about Himself, then the other options are unacceptable! The unacceptable possibilities:
Jesus is a LEGEND and didn't really exist. However, the historical evidence for the actual existence of Jesus of Nazareth is insurmountable.
Jesus is a LUNATIC who just "thought" He was God. Could a crazy person preach the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), teach the temple elders at the age of 12 (Luke 2), or be able to answer the questions meant to trap Him (Matthew 22:21)?
Jesus is a LIAR. But he was able to back up His claims about Himself. His validation included not only His personality (compassion, love, intellect), His sinlessness, His miracles (demonstrations of His power over nature itself), but also His resurrection, which had been predicted and was testified about by a multitude of eye-witnesses (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:26; 1 Corinthians 15:6).
6. The notion that all religions are valid is logically impossible. The principle of logic known as "the law of non-contradiction" states: If two things are contradictory, either both are wrong or ONLY ONE of them is right. They CANNOT BOTH be right. Example: If person #1 claims that all pens write with blue ink, but person #2 says that some pens write with red ink, then either both are wrong or one of them is right. Obviously, in this case, #2 is right. Therefore, if Christ says "I am the ONLY way" and Mohammed (or anyone else) says, "There are some other ways to God," then either Christ is wrong and Mohammed is right, or Christ is right and Mohammed is wrong, or they are both wrong. But they CANNOT BOTH be right.
When people say that all religious systems are basically the same, they are saying that they know little or nothing about world religions. The real conclusion is: the reason so many people have problems with the God who is revealed in Scripture, is that mankind is terribly wicked and sinful; they don't want to be held accountable. They are in denial. However, denying the TRUTH does not make it any less TRUE! Go Back To Content List
Q:
Are miracles really possible?A:
Or, "How can a reasonable, scientific mind accept the miraculous?" A simple definition of a miracle: it has to be something more than just the spectacular, startling or rare; the event in question has to fall into the category of an "extraordinary event of supernatural power exerted in the natural world." It has to be great enough that natural human influence is insufficient to bring it about! Many people reject the possibility of the miraculous, not because of the evidence that may be present, but because of a naturalistic world-view which does not allow for the existence of a "miracle worker." Therefore, all observable events must (in their reasoning) have a natural explanation. They are in denial. However, denying the TRUTH does not make it any less TRUE!1. Miracles don't go AGAINST the laws of nature, they go OVER or BEYOND them! This ought to be good news to the skeptic or undecided observer of the miraculous. A belief in the reality of miracles does not require an intelligent person to abandon understanding of the laws of nature. It is just the recognition that there are some laws which supercede others (like the laws of aerodynamics taking precedence over the law of gravity). If God is the author of the natural laws which govern our human existence, then He exists and functions beyond those natural laws and can superimpose other, higher laws on them whenever He wishes.
2. Miracles are the natural activity of a supernatural being. If God is a supreme being who is above and beyond our dimension of reality, then we SHOULD expect Him to do the miraculous. Miracles are only supernatural to humans. To God they are quite natural and normal. Go Back To Contents List
A:
Why did God create so much suffering? Why do innocent people suffer? Why doesn't God stop the suffering which exists? Why would a God of love send people to a place of everlasting suffering, like Hell? These are all variations on the same question. Let's break the answer down into two sections: "What about suffering?" and "What about Hell?""What about suffering?" - Are there any good reasons for the existence of suffering in our world? A few possibilities:
1. God doesn't DESIRE anyone to suffer. When you take a look at the original condition of the world God created (Genesis 1 & 2), as well as the description of the place He is preparing for those who know Him (Heaven), it is obvious His wants what is good and wonderful for everyone. He even provides direct statements about this in the Bible (Psalm 9:9-10, John 10:10, John 3:17, Romans 2:4, Revelation 21:4).
2. God gave human beings FREE WILL, the ability or right to make their own choices. He did create a universe that began as suffering-free, but He could not violate His love nature and deny people free will. You can't have genuine love between people or people and God, without the choice to love or not to love. This automatically puts the "comfort level" of the world God created at risk!
3. Man (Adam and Eve in Genesis 3) chose to reject God's plan and therefore experienced the results of that choice, both spiritually and physically. When sinful behavior entered the world, creation was put into an "unnatural" condition, which then made suffering "natural." It is blatantly unfair to blame God for what humans bring upon themselves. That was true in the Garden of Eden, as well as today. Consider: thousands of people die each year of emphysema, 99 percent of them are smokers; a criminal high on drugs rapes and/or murders an innocent child; is God responsible for the acts of the wrongdoer?
4. Had God created humans with no choice the result would have been a "robot-like" life for us. It was indeed out of love that He provided life with the choice to do both wrong and right. People may complain that it is unfair to decree that suffering/discomfort/loss is the result of wrong choices, but the real injustice would be to remove the choice at all. And every choice, if it is a genuine choice, carries with it consequences. It has been suggested that each choice a person makes is a test of that person's character and wisdom. God loves everyone, but not everyone has chosen to love God.
5. A possible question might then arise, "Why not stop it now? Why doesn't God just remove all suffering?" As the late Christian author, Paul Little once asked, "Suppose God were to say that at Midnight tonight all evil will be wiped out. How many of us would be here at 12:01?" God cannot remove the source of evil without also removing those who suffer the consequences of it.
6. Many people assume that suffering is an enormous obstacle to knowing God. They often conclude that as long as their life has unreasonable or inexplicable pain/discomfort, they cannot believe or accept the message of God or the Bible. In reality, it may be that suffering offers a tremendous opportunity to seek God. He has proven to countless people down through history, that He is always ready to draw near to those who seek to draw near to Him. (James 4:8).
"What about Hell?" In an attempt to grasp the Biblical truth about Hell, rather than the mythical stories, intellectual/scientific reasoning, or new-age falsehoods, consider:
1. Hell is not a threat, it is a reality. God does not threaten people with the possibility of going to Hell, He warns them about it. If the bridge is out or the building is on fire, then a warning about that danger is an act of love, not a threat which is oppressive or manipulative.
2. God desires that NOBODY goes to Hell. (I Timothy 2:4, II Peter 3:9, Matthew 25:41). The original design of Hell was not for people, but for Satan and his angels! Satan and his followers in Heaven chose to rebel against God. On the other hand, God loves everyone and has reserved a place in Heaven for those who love Him. To go to Heaven, rather than Hell, God requires us to make a choice. He requires that we choose Him, to love Him. For those who do not choose God, the default choice is Hell.
3. Not everyone will escape the punishment of Hell. The belief that "we're ALL God's children" is a fallacy. We are all created by God, but all of us are not related to Him by personal faith. Sadly, there will be those of us within the human race who will not share in the blessings of Heaven. Just as a gardener has to remove weeds, lest He have no garden, so God must deal with those who reject Him and refuse the gift of His salvation. Hell will not disappear for anyone just by wishing or even believing that it is not there.
4. Hell is a place where evil is contained. Is it more loving to let a murderer roam the streets or to contain him? God, out of love and absolute righteousness, will ultimately contain and confine all evil. The most powerful reason to believe in and accept the reality of Hell is because Jesus Christ told us to (Mark 9:42-48). Author Dorothy Sayers in 'Creed or Chaos' put the problem of evil in this perspective: "For whatever reason God chose to make man as he is - limited and suffering and subject to sorrows and death - [God] had the honesty and the courage to take His own medicine. Whatever game He is playing with His creation, He has kept His own rules and played fair. He can exact nothing from man that He has not exacted from Himself. He has Himself gone through the whole of human experience, from the trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard word and lack of money, to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, defeat, despair and death. When He was a man (Jesus), He fulfilled the requirements of being a man. He was born in poverty, died in disgrace and thought it well worth while." Go Back To Contents List
A:
What may actually rest behind this question is an inquiry about what God is really like. People who sincerely ask this question (as well as any of the others in this section) should never be "put down" for their wanting to know more about the character of God. Other versions of this question may be: "What happens to babies, little children, or mentally handicapped people when they die? Do they go to hell if they never accepted Jesus? What about very religious people from other lands/cultures who may call their god something other than what Christians call Him?" Consider these Biblical truths:1. The Bible states emphatically, that God is totally fair and just. Therefore, it would be inconsistent with His divine nature to do something to or for a person which would be unfair or unjust (Deuteronomy. 10:17-18, 32:4). God would never judge someone against a standard that was contrary to either His great compassion or His great justice. That is the overriding, "umbrella-like" principle which must guide our understanding of everything else in the search for an answer.
2. The Bible also informs us that everyone in the world is provided with the same basic, general information about God (Romans 1:18-20). Regardless of a person's culture or civilization, God has generously revealed Himself to men via the creation around us, the circumstances of our lives, as well as a built-in guidance system called a conscience. Because of this basic, general revelation of God to all men, the Bible says everyone is ultimately without excuse when it comes to responding to Him.
3. The bad news, however, is that the Bible also teaches that this basic information about God is not adequate to bring a person to complete salvation (John 14:6, Acts 4:12). For genuine salvation there must be genuine faith in Jesus. So, how do people who do not live in an environment where Jesus is taught or preached get to hear of Him? It appears that God takes special initiative to respond to a genuine seeker, even when that seeker lives outside the circle of specific knowledge of God's salvation plan. It is as if God has obligated Himself to share the message of the truth with someone who responds appropriately to what limited information he/she may have about God (Proverbs 8:17, II Chronicles 16:9, Matthew 7:7-8, Psalm 14:2). Since God has required a man to know the specifics of salvation, He has taken it upon Himself to get those specifics to a man who is not born in an environment where that knowledge is readily at hand. There are many illustrations of this both in the Bible and in more contemporary history. To cite just a few: in Acts 8:26 we find the account of an Ethiopian man who had already begun to respond to limited information about God and Philip was sent to explain the plan and offer salvation to him. Further on in Acts 10, a man named Cornelius was likewise a sincere seeker. He may have been devout, but he was still doomed until God sent Peter to offer him the gift of eternal life. God took the initiative to provide the specific gospel message to people who were responding in child-like faith to the basic light of revelation and who had a longing to submit themselves to the "supreme being" they knew must be there. In more modern times, missionaries tell countless stories of people like Samuel Morris (his Americanized name), who was in a very primitive part of Africa longing to know the God of heaven. God used amazing means to connect this young man with a missionary who could tell him the true story of the true God. His biography is called "Samuel Morris: The March of Faith" by Lindley Baldwin. Other accounts of this kind of spiritual intervention by God can be found in the missionary literature of almost every established mission society or agency which works among unreached people. The fact is, God is faithful to bring the light of salvation to those who seek the light found in the world around them.
4. What about little children, babies and the mentally handicapped? If they die before they are able to understand and decide to accept Jesus, does God send them to hell? No, we know that God has an everlasting love and compassion for people like this. God isn't in the business of sending people to hell,. people make that choice themselves. They make their reservations in Hell by rejecting Jesus as their Savior. So, if a person is incapable of rejecting or accepting, the answer is found in what is known about the character of God, Himself. That He is merciful, generous, and loving, especially toward children, is indisputable (Matthew 18:1-6, Mark 9:36-37, 10:13-16, Luke 18:15-17). In fact there is quite clear scriptural indication that those who die in infancy go to be with the Lord (II Sam. 12:23). While we don't know everything that happens in the circumstances of these kinds of deaths, we do know that God is a God of love and compassion, as well as being totally fair!
5. What about the people in the Old Testament? They could never hear about, let alone believe in Jesus, because He hadn't even been born yet. However, even before Christ was born, the standard for salvation from God was still the same. It requires the recognition of sinfulness on the part of the seeker, a genuine turning to God as the forgiver of sins, and a trust in an innocent sacrifice as a substitute payment for personal sins. The big difference in the Old Testament was that the substitute payment had to be repeated over and over, in the form of lambs, doves and other "perfect" sacrificial animals. Jesus, the absolute "Lamb of God" eventually provided a "once-and-for-all" perfect sacrifice which will never have to be repeated. Go Back To Contents List
A:
Selwyn Hughes once said that you become what you behold. The premise of Dungeons and Dragons is to role-play characters who, if they are played according to the rules and with the stated aims of the game in mind, go around killing, casting spells, deceiving and being deceived, greedily searching for treasure, worshipping pagan gods or demons and living for themselves. Basically, the characters are evil beings. In real life, such people are condemned. Obviously black magic books were used as source or background material in creating the game. Demons, well described and illustrated (including pornography, the succubus), have names and powers copied directly from occult books. Some of the descriptions and spells are from the worship of real pagan gods. Drawings and descriptions of "magic circles" are the same as those used in real life by practicing witches and warlocks to summon up demons and do sorcery.If you "let in" the things you commonly find in the Dungeons and Dragons world, it may have a damaging effect on you. We are commanded to meditate on scripture (Joshua 1:8), think on good, healthy things (Philippians 4) and to be transformed in our thinking (Romans 12:2). It is very important that we are careful what we let in or don't let into our minds. We are to fix our eyes on Jesus, not the things of this world, and certainly not dark worlds full of evil, bloodshed and magic. Dungeons and Dragons worlds are designed to be captivating! Ask yourself: Who would like to have your mind infiltrated by such vile thoughts and concepts? Go Back To Contents List
If Adam and Eve were the first people on this planet, then how did the population become what it is without incest?A:
In Genesis 2:20, it says that when Adam looked at the animals, he could not find a mate - there was no one of his kind. In Genesis 3:20 it says, "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living." In other words, all people are descendants of Adam and Eve - she was the first woman. Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Genesis 4:1). His brothers and Seth (Genesis 4:25), were part of the first generation of children ever born on this earth. Even though only these three males are mentioned by name, Adam and Eve had other children.In Genesis 5:4 a statement sums up the life of Adam and Eve - "And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters." This does not say when they were born. Many could have been born in the 130 years (Genesis 5:3) before Seth was born. There could have been many descendants of Adam on the earth by the time of Abel's death
If we now work totally from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or other extra-biblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to have married sisters or there would have been no more generations! We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history.
Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20).
Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws which forbade such marriages. Originally there was no disobedience to God's law when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other.
Questions such as this one emphasize the difference between what we NEED to know and what we WANT to know. No one will lose their salvation because they cannot understand whom Cain married. There are many possibilities upon which to build answers with little more than speculation. God tells us what is necessary to live a life close to Him. The story of Adam and Eve, as well as Cain, Abel and Seth, gives us the basics of how we and the world were created. It also points out the consequences of letting our emotions get out of control, such as was the case with Cain. Pride and jealousy led Cain to murder his brother and was subsequently cursed by God. There are obviously lessons there for all.
As far as Cain's wife, we know that he had one and they had offspring. "And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bore Enoch." Despite how nice it would be to know more, what more does anyone NEED to know? Go Back To Contents List
Is the God we know really three gods? What is meant by The Trinity?A:
There is only one God. There are not separate "entities" of which you can count three. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, are all one God. The distinction is defined strictly in relational terms. The three "persons" aren't separate entities, but separate ways in which the one God exists. The Trinity is really a consequence of God's personal love. God is both lover and loved, Father and Son. (The Holy Spirit is generally associated with facilitating the relationship individuals have with God the Father or God the Son.) They are not physically separated, because we're not talking about parts. It's not like the north half of God is the Father and the south half is the Son. Everything God is and does involves Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each are distinguished only by their relationship, because they aren't separate entities so much as separate in ways in which God relates. Computer users experience systems where a single physical processor supports multiple virtual systems, and where multiple physical processors are combined into a single virtual system. All of these are examples of things that are in some ways are like a single entity and in other ways are like multiple entities. In some ways God is best thought of as one entity, and in other ways he best thought of as three entities. Go Back To Contents List What is meant by "Jesus Incarnate?"A:
The "Incarnation of Jesus" says that Jesus is God present with us in the flesh. "The Word became flesh" (John 1:14). In Him two things are going on: a real human life and God's presence. Jesus makes God visible to us, in His teachings, actions, death, and resurrection. God identifies with Jesus in such a way that God himself experienced death through Jesus. Jesus has a real human existence. He is not simply God animating a human body. While alive on earth, Jesus had a human will distinct from God's, though of course Jesus' will was always God's: "Not what I will, but what you will" (Mark 14:36). Jesus prayed to God and otherwise distinguished Himself from God on some occasions. On many occasions He also identified himself with God. It's clear that there is a distinction between a human being and the immortal, invisible God. Despite this distinction, the human being Jesus is the way God chose to be present with us. This distinction is also explored in the preceding Q/A about The Trinity. "Jesus Incarnate" also means that Jesus is still with us today. Go Back To Contents List Why is "666" the sign of Satan?A:
This comes from Revelation 13:18 "Here calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is a man's number. His number is 666." It is correct that in most modern editions of the Greek New Testament, the number is spelled out as "six hundred sixty-six" (in Greek, of course), however in the various manuscripts this appears in a variety of forms: "six hundred sixty-six," "666," "six six six," etc. Also, as pointed out elsewhere, in a handful of manuscripts, this number appears as "616;" in one manuscript it is given as "646." There has been some recent discussion of the representation of the number in Revelation. Even when Greek NT manuscripts use a numerical rather than verbal representation, they use three different symbols for the digits, chi=600, xi=60, and stigma=6 (stigma or digamma being an obsolete Greek letter). Six Hundred Sixty-Six, but not 666. (The letter for 6 became known as stigma because the form of writing it looked like the ligature, writing together, of the two Greek letters sigma and tau, roughly corresponding to our s and t. If not done carefully, it can even look like just a sigma, which would be an error.)Revelations, like the other twenty six books of the New Testament, was written in Koine Greek in the first century AD, and requires a look at how numbers were represented at that time in Greek. One early Greek numeral system, known as Attic numerals, started at Athens and used symbols for the key numbers 1, 5, 10, 50, 100, etc. Another system also existed (not surprisingly considering the independence and non-cooperation of Greek city states). This system, known as the Ionian or Milesian (from Miletus in Asia Minor), may have started in the sixth century BC. Greeks, like us, used a decimal system but, unlike us, they did not use a zero number. Thus, although it was a decimal system, it was not a place-value system. Therefore more symbols were needed than just the ten (including zero) which we use. To represent the numbers up to our 999, they needed 27 different symbols. For symbols they used the letters of the Greek alphabet, plus old, obsolete letters from previous alphabets and, somewhat confusingly, these were interspersed with the regular letters.
It is this mutiplicity of choice, along with possible confusions because of form, which results in the several forms of "the number of the beast." Incidentally, some modern apocalyptic fanatics (or "prophecy" students), who are most alarmed at the number 666 and worry about large computer-based control systems which the Beast will use, should perhaps worry about a hexadecimal based system (base 16) rather than the decimal (base 10) to calculate the "666" number. In the modern computer hexadecimal number system, six hundred sixty-six is represented as 29A.
The "secret symbol" of the ancient pagan mysteries connected with the worship of the Devil was 666. It is today the secret connecting link between those ancient mysteries and their modern revival in Spiritualism, Theosophy, etc. The number 6 was stamped on the old mysteries. The great secret symbol consisted of the three letters SSS, because the letter S (stigma) in the Greek alphabet was the symbol of the figure 6. The word "stigma," means "a mark," but especially a mark made by a brand as burnt upon slaves, cattle, or soldiers, by their owners or masters; or on devotees who thus branded themselves as belonging to their gods.
Some interesting speculations arise relative to 666. According to Arthur Weigall in Nero: In Greek the name "Nero" was "Neron," and his Greek subjects generally spoke of him as "Neron Kaisar," that is to say "Nero Caesar." In Hebrew, wherein certain vowels are not expressed in writing, the name is spelled "Nron Ksr;" and these letters correspond to the numerals 50, 200, 6, 50, 100, 60, 200, which add up to 666, the number assigned to the apocalyptic Beast.
Considering that Nero was the first Roman emperor to aggressively persecute Christians and blamed them for the burning of Rome in 64 AD, some years before John wrote the Book of Revelation, it can be logically argued that John was cryptically indicating Nero in Revelation 13:18. Contemporary commentators note the numerical value of these two names: William=97 Jefferson=400 Clinton=169 = 666; and Hillary=248 Rodham=249 Clinton=169 = 666.
More seriously, the Bible (Revelation 13:17) predicted almost 2,000 years ago that the beast would require everyone to have an identifying number. "No one would be able to buy, sell or trade without this mark." This could be in the form of a computer chip, credit card or identifying mark. In his article, "Coming Soon: Electronic Money" (Readers Digest, November, 1976), Ronald Schiller explains all the benefits of a cashless society. He concludes: "In this new totally electronic age, the enforcement of financial obligations will present few difficulties, since failure to pay up could be disastrous. The culprit might even be forced to undergo what Electronic Fund Transfer men call 'plastic surgery,' the cutting off of his bank cards. Economically speaking, this would make him a non-person." Without the "mark" a person will not be permitted to buy or sell! If an individual's ability to buy and sell could be suspended for not paying his bills, could it also be suspended for refusing to embrace the New World Order and its conflict resolving one-world religion? Go Back To Contents List
Christian are supposed to show tolerance, yet some who claim to be Christians often vilify people such as gays and lesbians. How can true Christians support such intolerance?A:
This is a very complicated question with many confusing factors and concepts which are often misconstrued. It is not a question which can be answered with just a few words or even just a few paragraphs.The question also illustrates how "tolerance" is often confused with "compassion." Indeed, Christians are commanded to be compassionate: "love one another" (John 13:34); "love your neighbor" (Matthew 19:19); and "love your enemies" (Matthew 5:44). At the same time it must not be assumed that love conveys approval nor that the person expressing love condones an action. Visiting a convict in prison is an act of compassion, perhaps even love, but that does not mean the visitor approves of the prisoner's choices which resulted in time behind bars. Similarly, sometimes parents have to express their love for a child in the form of "tough love."
The parable of the "Good Samaritan" (Luke 10:30-35) and Jesus metaphorically comparing compassion for the incarcerated, the hungry, the thirsty, the sick and the needy (Matthew 25:34-46), as the same as being compassionate towards Him, strongly emphasizes the requirement for all of us to be compassionate. "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love" (1John 4:8).
Note that in Matthew 25:46, Jesus states that those who fail to be compassionate, "...will go away to eternal punishment." Obviously the Lord will not tolerate those who fail to be loving and compassionate.
From that perspective, it is persons with homosexual proclivities who have difficulty tolerating true Christians. To fully comprehend this situation, it is necessary to understand several factors. True Christians are those who are fully committed to Christ Jesus and the Biblical principals of the New Testament. Unfortunately, some who are perceived as "Christians" are merely using a Christian facade to further their own ends or needs. Anyone can claim to be a Christian. The failure to make that distinction between the fully committed and those merely claiming Christian status, particularly by media representatives, further adds to the public's confusion.
Those who would use violence against homosexuals or even use harassment tactics, are not really acting as Christians. They may claim the Christian label, but they do not qualify for it. Such pseudo-Christians give true Christians a black eye! Such pseudo-Christians are deviating from God's design as certainly as homosexuals are.
So how about tolerance? Tolerance infers that we must put up with something we think is wrong. Well that just isn't good enough for those who partake of an "alternative lifestyle." They don't want us to just tolerate their behavior, now we are being told we have to accept it. It has gotten to the point that companies are being forced to train their employees on being accepting.
What is the homosexual element's argument? God says love everyone doesn't He? If we are to love everyone then we need to accept their way of life as okay, right? Is that what the Bible says? No! The Bible says that we are to treat them with love (gospel of peace) but not to accept what they are doing. In Revelation 2:6, God's instructions to the Christians at Ephesus about the Nicoaitians who were practicing "debauchery" was, "...hate the practices of the Nicoaitians." He didn't say hate the Nicolatians. He said hate their practices.
Claims by persons associated with the homosexual elements of western society are often exaggerated to make their views seem more valid. For example, they claim that ten percent or more of the population is homosexual. Unbiased studies have revealed that the true figure is more appropriately placed at between one and two percent; a significantly smaller segment of the population. Homosexuals also find advantage in muddying the public's perspective by erroneously claiming that Christians are intolerant. In reality, TRUE Christians ARE tolerant of persons with homosexual proclivities!
There may also be some confusion over the difference between a sin and a crime. A sin is doing anything contrary to what God has told you to do or not to do. A crime is breaking a law or ordinance decreed by federal, state or local units of government. Not all sins are crimes. On the other hand, with only a few exceptions, breaking a law is also committing a sin (the primary exceptions are laws which are contrary to God's word).
God commands us to obey both His law as well as "the law of the king" or we will "surely be punished" (Ezra 7:26); we are also to "submit" to the authority of our governmental leaders (Hebrews 13:17).
It is also necessary to distinguish between what is acceptable to God, acceptable to legal authorities and what is culturally acceptable. Phrases used to describe what is culturally acceptable often include "consenting adults" and "in private." Another phrase is "victimless crime."
The "victimless crime" phrase is often used in conjunction with prostitution. If a married man hires the services of a prostitute, he breaks his marriage vows and his wife (and possibly his children) is the victim. If the man contracts a venereal disease and takes it home to his wife, both the man and his wife become victims. Even if the man is unmarried, if he contracts a disease he is still a victim, as well as any subsequent sexual partners he may have (including a possible future wife).
The "in private" phrase has no meaning with God. Everything is done in His presence. The "consenting adult" phrase is also fallacious.
To illustrate how false both phrases are, consider two suicidal men who agree to kill each other in private by each shooting the other at the same time. If they are successful, there will be much pity shown towards them as well as their grieving friends and loved ones. The friends and loved ones are definitely victims.
If one or both botch the job, whoever survives will probable be charged with murder (if both survive, they could both be charged with attempted murder). Just because two adults consent to an action in private, it does not make the act legal. It certainly doesn't make it any less of a sin!
Trying to legislate morality can be difficult at best. One man's sin or guilty pleasure, may be acceptable to another. This is especially true of sexual morality. One sexual activity which is almost universally acknowledged as immoral (and often legally condemned), even in the liberal and culturally permissive West, is adultery. Even the majority of those who commit adultery concede that it is wrong!
Even heterosexual acts between unmarried consenting adults (fornication in some Bible translations) is frowned upon by God who cautions us to avoid sexual immorality (Corinthians 6:13). God knows that sexual relations between unmarried persons is fraught with pitfalls and injurious possibilities. The most easily recognized is emotional pain. Sexual acts are entangled with many emotional strings. Any couple whose relationship fails suffers some emotional pain. If the relationship includes a sexual relationship, all the greater is the possibility of significant emotional pain.
Then there is also the possibility of a child being conceived. Statistics show that the best possible environment for a child is a two-parent family. Divorce can be very traumatic to children. A child born to unmarried parents is in a similar situation, except the defacto "divorce" predates conception. Unmarried parents also tend to be young, often compounding emotional deprivation with financial deprivation for the child(ren). Such deprivations frequently extend to the parents as well as the child. God recognizes being fatherless as a curse (Exodus 22:24) and a situation needful of His special attention (Lamentations 5:3).
All persons want to be accepted by the culture within which they live. Homosexual members of western cultures are no exception. Several decades ago, western homosexuals began to become organized to achieve their goals. First came the effort to neutralize some of the negative terms used for homosexuals. Through the legal system they managed to get the use of terms like "queer" and "faggot" mostly eliminated from public usage. They also managed to institute the euphemism "gay" as a widely accepted alternative to "homosexual" for males.
Second is the multi-faceted effort to get their "alternate lifestyle" accepted as normal. This effort is sometimes referred to as the "homosexual agenda." The very term "alternate lifestyle" begs the question: Alternate to what? Homosexuals would have everyone believe that they mean an alternate normal. Christians would argue that "alternate normal" is a contradiction of terms. They would further argue that what "alternate lifestyle" actually means is an alternative to God's design.
Organized homosexual efforts have succeeded in getting their lifestyles included in laws and regulations which prohibited "discrimination." These laws and regulations were originally mostly applied to housing and employment. They seem perfectly logical and reasonable in relation to public housing or certain occupations. However, when applied to private property housing, property owners or landlords found themselves forced to provide housing to persons whose activities God said were perverted, detestable and sinful (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Jude 1:7; & Galatians 5:19).
Although equal employment opportunities in some professions, such as manufacturing, sales, health providers, etc., would seem logical and reasonable, the homosexual agenda did not stop there. If the discrimination factor was applicable to those occupations, it was also applicable to education, public service, ministry, scouting leadership, etc. That application is significantly different, considering that teacher, mayor, congressman, church leader, Boy Scout leader, etc., are all "role model" positions. The lifestyle of a person in such a position has the appearance of being culturally acceptable, particularly to the young as well as the naive liberal elements of western culture. Both the young and liberal elements also tend to sympathize with the underdog or minorities whom they view as socially deprived.
The homosexual agenda has found strong support among the liberal elements of western society. Liberals profess broad-based tolerance for all, but at the same time demonstrate themselves to be the least tolerant. They do not tolerate anyone who disagrees with liberal ideas or challenges liberal views. Instead of rising to the challenge and proving the validity of their views, liberals tend to resort to personal attacks aimed at discrediting the challenger. This is a typical tactic of those whose positions are on shaky ground.
Noted columnist Thomas Sowell warned, "Make no mistake about it, the political left is in firm control on campuses and in the media. Our students get a steady diet of the (liberal) vision of the world from elementary school through graduate school."
The success of the organized homosexual elements in pushing their agenda (with much assistance from liberals), has encouraged them to go on the offensive and use the "discrimination" element as a weapon to strike out at those who would resist the homosexual agenda. Persons of conscience, particular Christians, are labeled as homophiles or homophobes, gay bashers, hate mongers, etc. In other words, Christians are portrayed as the "bad guys," both legally and culturally. To a perverted mind, perverted justice may appear to be true justice. If you look at everything through a red lens, red flags will appear to be white.
With clear Biblical guidance that homosexual acts are immoral and detested by God, true Christians have no choice but to resist attempts to make the homosexual lifestyle an acceptable alternative within their communities. This also applies to many people of other faiths. However, true Christians are also required to be compassionate, even to those identified as sinners. Perhaps even especially to those who are sinners. True Christians acknowledge themselves to also be sinners and, except for the grace of God, would be condemned.
Western cultures are very tolerant as well as very compassionate, primarily because Christian principles are the basic guidelines for those cultures. Those principles command Christians to develop self-control and resist temptations which would lead to immoral acts (Colossians 3:2 & 5; 1st Timothy 4:3-5). Some Christians are more successful than others, but none are totally successful. That is why Christians have to depend on God's grace.
Tolerance and compassion are extended to many who have difficulty staying within the "normal" bounds of society. A person with alcoholic tendencies can be a fully accepted member of society if he or she develops the self-discipline and strength of character to resist the temptation or impulse to over-indulge.
To those who knew him superficially, Ted Bundy seemed like a nice guy. Educated and well-mannered, he was a very charming person. However, his exterior persona hid a sociopathic personality. If he had been able to resist his sociopathic urges and impulses, Bundy would have been able to live a long and useful life as a contributing member of society. But he lacked the necessary self-discipline and became one of America's most heinous serial killers. He was eventually executed for his atrocious deeds. Those who were close to Bundy at the end, say he turned to God for forgiveness.
A kleptomaniac has urges to take things not belonging to him or her. Such a person finds the temptation to steal difficult to resist. Most legal jurisdictions send "kleptos" to jail as thieves. While incarcerated, they may or may not receive treatment. With treatment most are able to develop the self-control necessary to live acceptably as a part of society.
Following the logic of the homosexual agenda, alcoholics, kleptomaniacs and serial killers (as well as those with a host of other conditions) should also be given the right to live their "alternate" lifestyles. Sound ridiculous? Absolutely!!! However, anyone who had predicted the current acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle back in 1950, would have also been labeled as ridiculous!
Some would say that we have become more enlightened as a society over the intervening years. Others might claim we have become more decadent. Perhaps there is some truth to both claims. Western cultures no longer kill nor imprison those who commit adultery. On the other hand, the standards by which our entertainment media operate have been steadily eroded over the past several decades. The organized homosexual elements have been very successful in getting their agenda imprinted on western entertainment media. Television shows now have main characters with homosexual proclivities who are portrayed as normal and acceptable.
It is not up to individual Christians to determine what is appropriate or acceptable. God has already done that! Homosexual behavior is regarded by God as immoral because it is a distortion of His created order; a practice contrary to nature. The sanctity of marriage and the family is to be protected against all manner of immoral conduct (Exodus 22:16-17; Deuteronomy 22:23-28; Leviticus 20:10-16). Scriptures speak explicitly against homosexual practice (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:26,27; I Corinthians 6:9,10; I Timothy 1:8-10). Therefore, true Christians regard homosexual acts as contrary to God's creation plan.
Persons with homosexual inclinations are accountable to God for their behavior (Romans 14:12). For those who have fallen into the practice, the grace of God is available and completely sufficient to forgive as well as deliver (I John 1:9; Hebrews 7:25; Luke 4:18; I Corinthians 6:9-11).
God's will is that Christians show persons with homosexual proclivities both tolerance and compassion. However, tolerance is to be extended only to the persons, not to the homosexual acts. It is the classic "love the sinner, hate the sin," situation. Compassionate Christians are commanded to encourage those with certain urges and impulses to develop self-control (1st Timothy 4:3-5). Because the practice is a distortion of nature, therapy may be necessary for healing to take place.
Is there an unbreachable wall between homosexuals and Christians? Although practicing homosexuals and non-Christian elements of western culture may perceive there to be a great wall, it exists totally in their own minds! Yet they often point to the perceived wall and blame Christians for its existence!!!
From the true Christian's perspective, no such wall exists. Nor does such a wall exists between Christians and other elements of society. In fact, many Christians are recovering alcoholics, repentant criminals and even persons with homosexual proclivities. In reality, ALL Christians have temptations, impulses and immoral urges with which they have to contend. It is HOW they deal with such elements of their sinful nature which determines if they are truly Christians or not.
The misperception of a "wall" exists because the homosexual elements want what Christians have. This is also true of the vast multitude of non-Christian elements in our society. Basically, true Christians live a lifestyle which is considered wholesome and is nearly universally accepted by society as a whole.
Even most non-Christians subscribe to a preponderance of Christian values. The Ten Commandments (which are not exclusively Christian), in one form or another, are almost universally accepted as desirable societal guidelines. Most non-Christian parents try to instill many Christian values in their children. How many parents want a child to grow up to be a liar, thief, adulterer, murderer, etc.?
Homosexuals want the same acceptance for their lifestyle as is extended to the lifestyle of Christians. What most homosexuals fail to realize is that the "Christian lifestyle" is just as available to them as it is to anyone else. What they don't understand is that Christians have their God-defined lifestyle because they are willing to strive to live according to His guidance. Homosexuals want the same advantages and acceptance for their self-defined lifestyle as Christians do for theirs, but most are unwilling to honor God's will to receive those advantages. Christian churches have a corporate responsibility to be God's agent of healing, ministering in love to those involved in homosexual behavior. This includes giving them support as they strive to live a life which is reconciled with God's creation plan (I Corinthians 2:7,8).
Unfortunately, there are those who would rather fight than consider the alternatives. They often strike out at those who do not agree with their choices. Those who attack the Christian lifestyle often do so out of jealousy, envy and ignorance. The appropriate Christian response is, "Forgive them for they know not what they do." This is the ultimate of tolerance and compassion which was originally spoken at a time when the ultimate of tolerance and compassion was needed (Luke 23:34)! It is that example, set 2,000 years ago by Christ Jesus, which Christians must emulate!! As Christians, they have no choice!!! Go Back To Contents List
Q:
A:
This page is still being constructed (NOTE the blank Q/A which are waiting for the next question to be inserted).
Please visit again in the near future. If you have a question, send to: slcc.email@juno.com