Analysis of Christianity Part 2 - "Believing in God is Only Logical"

(Previous: Part 1 – “Introduction: The Logic Behind Faith”)

In the Introduction (Part 1), I discussed about how a Christian’s faith is actually based on logic.  And the reason why those who dismiss faith can’t see how the logic of it all works is that they do not agree with two basic premises: that God exists and that the Bible is God’s Word.  In this essay, I would have to make the case that the premise of God existing is appropriate and valid.  Or to put it simply, to make the case that God exists.   I will also be writing in the future a section exclusively for the Bible, but I don’t need to defend it as a premise.  I already made the case on why the Bible is an appropriate premise for this series of analysis of Christianity in Part 1.

Let me start this part with a quote from a legendary movie franchise, the Matrix Trilogy, and a thesis from a brilliant French mathematician, to whom a law about pressure was named after.

MORPHEUS’ WAGER

"Then tomorrow we may all be dead, but how would that be different from any other day? This is a war, and we are soldiers. Death can come for us at any time, in any place. Now consider the alternative. What if I am right? What if the prophecy is true? What if tomorrow the war could be over? Isn't that worth fighting for? Isn't that worth dying for?"

That was a quote by Morpheus in a Matrix movie (from “Reloaded”, if I got it right).  I consider it as the ultimate epitomic quote of life scenarios in which the "you got nothing to lose anyway, therefore go all in" philosophy applies (I had talked about an application of this philosophy in the story on how I won a quiz bowl medal in college).      

(You know where this is going… ) The logic of this can be applied on the belief in God.  We will all end up dead anyway.  But what if God does exist?  What if there’s an afterlife?  What if it’s all true?  Isn’t it worth it?

This was Blaise Pascal’s point when he coined his Pascal’s Wager.  The main point (or one of the main points) of the thesis is summarized in this matrix:

So in a hypothetical scenario in which God does not exist, humanity – both Christians and non-Christians - will have the same end: no afterlife, just death – existence ceases.   However, in the scenario in which God does exist, there are two different ends: A Christian “gains all” (heaven) and a non-Christian gets “misery” (hell). 

Therefore, actually believing in God is only logical.  “Wagering” for God’s existence logically dominates “wagering” against God’s existence.  If God does not exist, the one who “wagered” for God’s existence will earn the same result (status quo) as with the one who “won the wager” – the one who “wagered” against God’s existence.  But if God does exist, then the one who “wagered” for God’s existence will earn a reward, while the one who “wagered” against God’s existence gets a punishment.          

HOWEVER, Pascal’s wager is incomplete and in some ways flawed.  This is because of three reasons: a) the format of the logic is actually applicable to arguing for faith in a God or gods in general and not actually exclusively applicable to argue for a Christian God (though, that was the intention of Pascal), b) belief in an existence of God is not enough to get the “reward”, that is not how Christianity works, and c) a Christian does not “wager” for God’s existence just because it’s the practical option even if he does not actually believe that God exists.  No.  A Christian believes and knows that his God exists.

But I start with this because this is something basic.  That in this context and perspective, when a Christian believes that God that can't be seen exists, it is not actually illogical as the world perceives. 

Moreover, since a Christian really believes in God and already knows the outcome of the battle, they, then, know that “it’s all worth fighting and dying for.” 

But, let us move on.  This time, we interrogate the “star witness” of God’s existence: Creation.

THERE’S A CREATOR BECAUSE THERE'S A CREATION

God’s fingerprints are left in his Creation.  Still, some (or most?) Men of Science deny it.   They say that it’s “illogical and ridiculous” to have just mere faith to believe that Someone that can’t be seen by the eye created the universe.  However, these people are the ones who have an illogical and ridiculous faith in their beliefs.  They have no empirical proof for their beliefs of the universe being created in a span of billions of years (contrary to the Biblical 6 days) or their concept of evolution.

“But we have mathematics,” they say, “By equation, we had arrived in a rational conclusion that the universe had expanded in billions of years.”  Unless they have empirical and testable proof of that, they really can’t validate anything.  It’s all theory.  And theory based on math does not mean it is always true to reality (see “Achilles and the Tortoise” paradox or Zeno’s paradoxes).  There are actually plenty of logical and scientific arguments that point the flaws of this “just happened” theory (in which, Big Bang is the most popular form), but, really, to claim that the universe “just happened” without cause or design defies common sense.  In the law of this universe, there has still nothing that had been observed that proves what “just happened” theory claims: that something from a chaotic bang can create an eventual purposeful order without being directed.

And it’s also what transpires in the evolution debate.  Abiogenesis (life existing from inanimate matter) or macroevolution (man descended from ape-like ancestors) has no empirical or testable evidences in any form.   Any “decent” arguments or points for evolution are all based on microevolution.  And microevolution can’t be associated at all with abiogenesis or macroevolution.  In microevolution, a living thing may “evolve” to adapt to environmental conditions, but it still has its nature intact – the toad might had become larger or had changed color, but the toad remains a toad, it did not evolve to become a lizard (which is macroevolution concept).            

Logically, these scientists that think that believing in a God that created everything is ridiculous are functioning with unsound premises.  Their premises or evidences are all based on “circle of information.”  It means that the books or articles arguing their point have references almost limited to each other.   They just source each other out.  Any first-hand or first tier evidences are just assumptions that their theory is the only workable model.      

But still, even if the arguments on an anti-Creationism perspective are incomplete and flawed, they are still considered “scientific” which puzzles me.  At least they should teach the Biblical point of view –which has some scientific evidences – with the same exposure as Theory of Evolution or Big Bang – which has a case that is as comparable to the “faith” on unseen data as proposed by Creationism.  Though, these scientific evidences for the Bible-point of view of Creation is not really that strong.  But that’s the point.  Why is anti-Creationism theories more accepted “scientifically” in our academic circles when its case is as strong or as weak as Creationism?  It is only fair for Creationism to get equal exposure as anti-Creationism.    

These scientists that deny the existence of God and insist that Creation just happened by cumulative chances and accidents of circumstance and situations are actually dwelling on ridiculous odds of clear impossibility.  Their point of view is comparable to – in the words of Ian Malcolm (protagonist of Michael Crichton’s “The Lost World) – “imagining that a tornado can hit a junkyard and assemble the parts into a working 747.”  Ridiculous compared to believing God created the universe.  In the dictum of Sherlock Holmes which say “if you eliminate the impossible (the odds of creation “just happening”), whatever remains, whether improbable (a Creator creating Creation), must be the truth,” this time, “wagering” for the existence of God begins to make more and more sense.  For something that appears to be a chaotic event to have a result of order, there must be an Engineer that planned and designed all the details.         

But these “science guys” will not at all surrender.  They are likely to point out…

HOW DOES THE BIBLE EXPLAIN DINOSAURS?
          

    

“What of dinosaurs?” they ask, “The evidences of existence of dinosaurs destroy the idea of Creationism.”  My reply is, “How?”

Anti-Creationism theories dwell on the premise that the universe existed for billions of years, while the Christian point of view of Creation (or Creationism) estimate existence of Creation to mere 6,000 years.  Now, since the fact that dinosaurs existed in the past is true, this is used as an argument against Creationism because evolutionists estimated that dinosaurs lived 235 millions of years ago and became extinct 65 million of years ago.  However, the dating methods on how they estimated the time are flawed (look it up!  Do not assume that carbon dating is perfect).  These methods rely on untestable assumptions as its factors to estimate the time.   Thus, different assumptions result to different results.  They are inconsistent, thus unreliable. 

In both carbon 14 dating and radiometric dating, the first step is to ESTIMATE – and when I mean estimate, it means just picking a random number you like – the age of time before running the test.  Then they will run the test.  You see the absurdity?  They operate in an unscientific manner of biasing the result by determining the desired result before starting.  It’s like using their conclusion to validate the premises of the logic instead of the other way around.    So, evolutionists would give the parameters of millions of years as parameters, and the method’s result would be something in that parameter.  Thus, they estimated dinosaurs to had lived hundreds of millions of years ago because they want to believe that dinosaurs had lived hundreds of millions of years ago.      

In the Bible, it is mentioned that all land animals have been created in the 6^th day – this would include dinosaurs (note: the "dinosaurs" like Pterodactyl [“flying dinosaur”] or Ichthyosaur [“sea dinosaur”] are technically not dinosaurs at all.  Only the land giant reptiles are considered dinosaurs.).  Thus, contrary to evolutionist view, humans did walk with dinosaurs.  In fact, what appears to be human footprints were found in limestone along with dinosaur footprints near the Paluxy River in Texas.  In the Bible, we can find creatures like “behemoth” and “leviathan” having the same descriptions with dinosaurs.  “Dragons” were also mentioned in the Bible, as well as ancient traditions and accounts.  Wouldn’t it be possible that these were references to dinosaurs?  Many of these descriptions would fit dinosaurs nicely

The idea of this earth existing for billions of years is already contradictory to the fact that our moon is a young moon.  If 14,300,000 tons of meteoric dust falls on the Earth each year, the same amount of dust will also fall on the moon each year.  In 5 billion years, it should be 137 feet deep.  But Neil Armstrong’s footprint only went 1/8 inch of dust.  Unless the Moon Landings are indeed a hoax, as conspiracy theorists point out, then this fact should destroy the idea that the Earth existed for billions of years.   Another fact: it would take 14 million years for erosion to wash away the continents, thus, if the Earth is at least one billion years old, it should had been eroded away at least 70 times over.

Now, let’s go to the question on how dinosaurs became extinct.  Meteors, volcanoes, etc. are all speculations.  Now consider a Biblical event called the Flood.  This could explain the fossils we find.  The swift burial in mud would ensure that most of the animals would be preserved into fossils.  But, still, the Bible said that God sent two – seven on some kinds – of every kind of animals into Noah’s Ark.  These include dinosaurs.  “But they are too large,” the evolutionist may point, “Not all kinds of dinosaurs can fit in the Ark along with the other kinds of animals.”  There are hundreds of dinosaur names, but in reality, there are probably about only 50 kinds of dinosaurs.  Many of those dinosaur names are just attributed to bones found which could be of the same kind of dinosaur.  This is like the fact that there are many breeds of dogs but they are all the same kind of animal - dog.  Take that all into consideration and it is very possible for dinosaurs to fit in the Ark.  Some dinosaurs still existed after the Flood (again, the reference of “behemoth” and “dragons” in the Bible and ancient accounts).   Extinction might had happened – not only to dinosaurs, but to other kinds of animals as well – because of difference in post-Flood climatic conditions and pre-Flood climatic conditions that they were not able to adapt to.   Consider also the other factors on documented extinction of animals: lack of food, diseases, and human activity.  Extinction had always been a part of the ecosystem.  Animals die out.  Why should the dinosaurs’ be a special mystery?

CREATIONISM VS. ANTI-CREATIONISM

I am not saying that Creationism has more scientific evidences than anti-Creationism theories like Big Bang and Theory of Evolution (but it is definitely logically sounder!).  But Creationism is as scientific – or as less scientific – as anti-Creationism.  My point is that the arguments brought by anti-Creationism are weak and not credible to use to deny God’s existence since it dwells on a “faith” itself. Creationism is operating in a premise of faith in an invisible God.  Anti-Creationism is operating in a premise of faith in unempirical and untestable assumptions  

GOD IS NOT FINITE

If they can’t win through Science, they will use Philosophy to dismiss God’s existence.  One clever argument to “disprove” the existence of God is the Omnipotence Paradox, which I had already explained as invalid in my essay on some manipulation techniques.  Same with science, those who deny God’s existence through philosophical logic use invalid premises which are inapplicable for God.  

Here is a very popular Internet anecdote (that is falsely attributed to Einstein’s experience as a student).  There are many versions of this story (and it has also been used to argue for other faiths like Hare Krishna).  It is purely fictional but we can derive valuable points from it.  The aim of Omnipotence Paradox is to argue that God can’t exist because an omnipotent God is logically impossible.  In this story, the professor follows the same clever (but flawed) line of thought as Omnipotence Paradox’s logical structure: that a God can’t exist since if he does, then he is evil. 

So, here’s one of its version (I combined ideas of two different variation of the anecdote to make it comprehensive for discussion):

An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God. He asks one of his new students – a Christian – to stand.

Professor: “You are a Christian, aren't you, son?”

Student: “Yes, sir.”

Prof: “So you believe in God?”

Student: “Absolutely, sir.”

Prof: “Is God good?”

Student: “Sure.”

Prof: “Is God all-powerful?

Student: “Yes.”

Prof: “My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then?”

(The student was silent.)

Prof: “You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?”

Student: “Yes.”

Prof: “Is Satan good?”

Student: “No.”

Prof: “Where does Satan come from?”

Student: “From...God...”

Prof: “That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?”

Student: “Yes.”

Prof: “Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?”

Student: “Yes.”

Prof: “So who created evil?”

(The Christian student does not answer.)

Prof: “Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?”

Student: “Yes, sir.”

Prof: “So, who created them?”

(Christian student still has no answer.)

Prof: “Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen God?”

Student: “No, sir.”

Prof: “Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?”

Student: “No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.”

Prof: “Yet you still believe in Him?”

Student: “Yes.”

Prof: “According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?”

Student: “Nothing. I only have my faith.”

Prof: “Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has with God.”

Student: “Professor, is there such a thing as heat?”

Prof: “Yes.”

Student: “And is there such a thing as cold?”

Prof: “Yes.”

Student: “No sir. There isn't.”

(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)

Student: “In fact, sir, cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460 F) is the total absence of heat; and all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat.”

(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)

Student: “What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?”

Prof: “Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?”

Student: “Once again you are wrong, sir, darkness does not exist, either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present.  Darkness can’t be measured.  If it can be, you would be able to make darkness darker.”

Prof: “So what is the point you are making, young man?”

Student: “Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.”

Prof: “Flawed? Can you explain how?”

Student: “Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, does evil exist, then?”

Prof: “Of course, as I have already said. We see it every day. It is in the daily examples of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.”

Student: “Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light.”

(The professor was, this time, the one silent)

Student:  “Do you teach your students that they evolved from apes?”

Prof: “If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.”

Student: “Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?”

(The Professor shakes his head, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)

Student: “Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?”

(The class is in uproar.)

Student: “Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?”

(The class breaks out into laughter.)

Student: “Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. Therefore, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?”

(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.)

Prof: “I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.”

Student: “That is it sir. The link between man and God is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving and alive.”

The professor made the error of logical arguing against God’s existence by using an invalid premise that God is something finite and measurable.  God transcends creation and time, and he alone has the wisdom to know what the ends of things are.   Man can only grasp as much as what the present condition is, he can only state it as it is, but he can’t really judge it as a good thing or a bad thing.  So, men’s concept of good or bad might not be the same as what God thinks as good or bad.  The professor’s concept of good is (physical) life and bad is (physical) death.  However, death is not an actual opposite of life as a substantial thing by itself, since it’s actually the absence – not opposite – of life.  Then, branding life as good and death is bad crumbles in its logic.  Can the professor really determine if his brother’s death by cancer is a bad thing?  If there is an afterlife, his brother could have now escaped suffering and now experience eternal peace in the hands of his Maker – and that would be a good thing.  Thus, the professor can only state the event as it is: that his brother died of cancer, nothing more and nothing less.  He can’t really judge it as good or bad.  His concept of “good or bad” is not the same as God’s concept of “good and bad.”

The second idea of bad or evil – as presented by the professor (The first is his brother’s death) – is of it being the manifestation of immorality, crime, hatred, violence, etc. exercised by mankind in this world.  Now, the student had already presented the idea of an infinite and immeasurable God by invalidating his professor’s line of argument of using a premise of duality.  The student already established that some ideas or terms exist because it is the state of absence of something.  The student now used this established standing to dismiss evil as a concrete form by itself as an opposite of good when it is actually the absence of good.  Now since there is evil, then there is a God.  Evil existed in mankind because of God’s absence in their hearts.  Very much the idea of what the Fall brought in the nutshell.             

    

Thirdly, the student destroyed the professor’s argument that only something empirical is actual truth by applying it to the latter’s belief in evolution (I had already argued earlier that belief in evolution is just as a faith as a belief in an invisible God) and the existence of his brain.  His conclusion: faith in the existence of God is not ridiculous, then.    

Every philosophy that argues that God does not exist operates like Omnipotence Paradox and the professor’s arguments.  They operate in premises that are contradictory to their ideas or the premises they use are inappropriate.

CONCLUSION: GOD EXISTS

By all the arguments I presented above, to believe in God’s existence is only logical.  And nobody can have the credibility nor has the right idea to dismiss that believing in God is something silly.  For them to dismiss God’s existence, they should have a concrete explanation or idea about a non-existence of God to prove things –which they do not have.  They also have “faith” in untestable premises to use in their arguments. 

Atheism – or unbelief of God’s existence – is just ridiculous.  Atheists ridicule faith when they themselves also operate with faith.  Atheism actually needs faith itself to believe that a God does not exist.   In fact, an atheist requires a greater amount of faith to believe that a God does not exist than a Christian who believes that God exists.  It takes more faith to believe in Nothing rather than Something.  Christians’ belief in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God serves as a concrete “Deus Ex Machina” answer to every difficult question of life existence and purpose.  Atheists, however, have to believe in… nothing, thus, the answer to life questions is: life has no purpose.  Atheists have to believe that order can rise from chaos without someone ever directing it with purpose, that uniqueness of individuals can come from disorder, and that a design can happen without a designer.

Just judge for yourself what do you think is the more ridiculous kind of faith.  Christians have faith on a God that created and designed everything.  Atheists have faith that Creation existed from nothing and, without direction, developed as we know it today.  Thus, atheists believe that "a tornado can hit a junkyard and assemble the parts into a working 747” (which is something proven to be impossible in reality).

God exists.  The evidences are overwhelming. The argument that God exists is better than the argument that a God does not exists.  Anybody who thinks otherwise are fools (Psalm 14:1-2).

   

(Technically, this essay is like an extension to the Introduction [Part 1] since it still does not deal much on Christianity’s beliefs itself.  But Part 3’ll do it, starting with the basics: Part 3 – “Basics”)                 

Read More

Analysis of Christianity Part 1 - "Introduction: The Logic Behind Faith"

I have been planning to write an essay about everything about Christianity for some time now.  But in the draft inside my mind, the mental manuscript is long for an essay.  That’s why I keep on postponing.  Too lazy.  But I finally decided to start it.  In a piece-meal basis.  Since it’s too long for one essay, I’ll do it in installments.  By writing in parts, it would allow me to write and leave it off when I tire off, and then pick it up again when I get motivated to continue.  I could start and stop at my convenience.     

So, let me start it…

 

Christianity has always been a fascinating subject to me.  Maybe because I had grown up in a Christian environment and it became my religion.  However, I am wary to call it a religion.  Religion, for me, is a human invention.  I even dared once to call it evil.  Religion is invented by humans to serve as a medium or tool to articulate worship in a way that would be convenient or beneficiary to them.  Therefore, there are many religions and many invented kinds of gods, because different people design a religion to be in sync with their own interests – to justify the actions they want to commit or to obtain benefits like power and money.  Even if morality exists in a religion, it is more so for the reason of convenience or practicality of the order brought by morality and not because they know and love the truth.                      

Christianity is more than a religion.  It was never designed to be man-centered but it was designed to be God-centered.  God himself authored it.  It is only concerned with the Truth and not convenience.  Of course, Christianity, to be able to be organized for humans, has to be practiced through the flawed mechanisms of Religion.  Therefore, throughout history, Christianity was vulnerable to being treated like other religions – mere tools for some people’s interests and convenience.  But the core message of Christianity is Truth.  And Truth will always prevail.  The Christian churches can become flawed, but God is unflawed.  So if we focus on God, since Christianity is God-centered, the light of the Truth will go through the darkness of the flaws and distortion that organized religion could bring and had brought.  

My intention, then, on writing about Christianity is to argue the point that it is not a mere religion.  That it is something more.   And that its message is the Truth.   This “Analysis of Christianity” is Christian apologetics in some sense, but I want to consider it as a series of essays that would – as what the title suggests –analyze Christianity.  This early on, I will note that this is my analysis (or parts of analyses) of Christianity and might not be the approach or interpretation or idea of some other Christians.  But this is what I believe in and what I perceive Christianity to be.  And I will write about it my way – Bernel-style.  I might err (if ever) in my arguments or analysis but I hope this would not be taken against the message of Christianity.  Christianity’s message is truth, and it doesn’t mean that if someone fail in making a concrete case for an objective truth, then the truth becomes false.  No.  Objective truth remains truth, even if someone fails to prove it.  But I will definitely do my best to be concrete and correct, and not err.  For this, I would use two basic foundations in my approach in discussing Christianity: to be biblical and logical.   

The Bible is the Word of God.  There is no higher authority than the Word of God.  It is the basis of every true Christian belief, philosophy and doctrines.   And how can we be sure that the Bible is indeed the Word of God?  The greatest proof we need is… well, because the Bible says so!  “Every Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16).  And since the Bible is God’s Word, and since there is no higher authority than God’s Word, the affirmation for itself is valid.  It seems to be a “begging the question” logical fallacy and appears to be a shallow or an ineffective argument in the eyes non-Christians, but, really, if the Bible would need its affirmation from an outside source, then it is no longer the “highest authority”, and therefore is not God’s Word.   So, by proclaiming itself that it is the Word of God, the Bible indeed proved that it is the Word of God. 

Now that we establish that the Bible is God’s Word, then it is a very sound foundation or source of evidence to support the points I will make in this series. 

As for being logical, well, faith is actually based on some form of logic.  The general assumption is that faith and logic does not mix well.  But I don’t think so.  C.S. Lewis said that faith requires both rational thinking and imaginative ability.  That is because faith is both a matter of logic and emotion.  There’s no such thing as “blind faith” for a Christian.  Remember that Christ does not “blind eyes” but “opens eyes.”  Leap of faiths made by Christian have logical bases.  They jump because they know that God can/will catch them.  With the fact of God’s strong arms as basis, Christian does not fear taking a leap to the unknown. 

I believe that logic is a valuable but limited tool for analysis and other thinking functions.  Limited in a sense because it is dependent on the perfectness of the premises of its argument.  Thus, if premises are false, it would usually give a false conclusion.  That’s why logical mathematical fallacies and logical errors exist.  It may follow a logical form, but it gives false conclusions.   Logic, in its design, is perfect.  It only commits errors because of any errors of the factors it is dependent upon and its wielder.  And humans, being imperfect, can err in wielding logic.  I believe that even if an argument follows a logical method, but if it follows a false premise, the argument should be dismissed as illogical.  Logic – as it’s designed by God – should always operate in correct premises, because its aim is to find truth. 

This world perceives Christians as “illogical” because they believe in an invisible Being, but those who criticize Christianity are actually the ones that function “illogically” since their premise is wrong.  Those that “logically” dismiss the Christian faith as ridiculous and illogical are actually functioning in a false premise of the denial of God’s existence, or the denial of the Bible (the Christianity’s foundation of its beliefs) as God’s Word, or both.  Christians, however, operate in the correct basic premise in their logic that God exist and that the Bible is the Word of God.  But how can I be sure that a Christian’s premise is correct and complete and theirs – the ones who dismiss Christianity or deny God’s existence – is not?  Well, it all comes down to the fact that it is God who opens eyes, and only when God opens someone’s eyes would it make sense to him or her.  And it is God who “opens the eyes” of Christians that enabled Christians to – not only believe – but to KNOW the Truth.  Non-Christians can’t really dismiss this claim: that Christians know that what they believe in is true because of a personal encounter with God.  How can they dismiss it when they haven’t encountered it?  It's like two men - A and B - that think that vanilla is the best ice cream flavor in the world.  Then, A got a taste of "cookies and cream" flavor and discovered that it's the best flavor in the world.  Now, A insists that "cookies and cream" is the best, but B still thinks it's vanilla.  The only way for B to objectively dismiss A's claim - that the "cookies and cream" flavor is superior to vanilla - is for him to have a taste of "cookies and cream" first before passing judgement.  In the same way, the only way to invalidate the Christian premise is for non-Christians to have the same “encounter” that Christians claimed to have experienced and then after it, they were not able to see the truth of the Christian premise.  There was never a case of someone having the encounter of getting his or her “eyes opened by God” but failing to see the correctness of the Christian premise.      

Let me give an illustration:

There’s a community of people that are all color-blind and has no concept or knowledge that they are color-blind.  They think that everything is just gray, white, and black.  One day a stranger – an eye surgeon – arrived in that community and he picked a man and told him, “I will give you a normal sight; you will no longer be color blind.  You will be able to see colors.”   And so the surgeon did operate the man’s eyes, and then left him. 

After the operation, the man finally saw and realized that the world is not black, white, and gray.  But it is red, blue, green, yellow, pink, etc.  He was delighted and excited and went to his friend and told him the story.  He took a flower and said, “Look at this sunflower!  It’s colored beautifully yellow!” 

But since his friend is color-blind, he dismissed it, “You’re ridiculous.  It is definitely gray.  How can you say it’s a color called yellow?  And what surgeon?  There is no surgeon.  I don’t need surgery, I’m seeing the sunflower just fine.” 

Now, the truth is the sunflower is indeed color yellow, but the friend would not be able to see this, and he’ll not be able to grasp the concept of yellow since he never encountered or saw it before.   His concept is the colors that only exist are white, gray, and black (the flawed logical premise), when there are actually many different kinds of colors (the correct logical premise).  Moreover, he doesn’t believe in a surgeon or that he needs surgery since his eyes are “just fine” (just like how a spiritually blind person functions) according to him.
 

How can the man make an argument to prove to his friend that the sunflower is yellow?  His only option is to use the premise of someone that can see colors (which is the correct premise) - that, indeed, there are many kinds of colors (even if the friend thinks otherwise) and that the sunflower is yellow.  The man can’t abandon that premise since it’s a truth.  So, his arguments would be based from that premise, even if it seemed ridiculous to his friend.

But the friend will not see the validity and truth of this until the surgeon reveals himself to him and perform surgery on him to give him normal eyesight.  And when he finally can see colors, then he would see that the sunflower is indeed yellow. 

This may sound ridiculous, illogical and biased to the ears of non-Christians.  But that’s just the point, they will never really get the logic of it until the Surgeon operates on his or her eyes for them to see that the premises – Christian principles – that Christians use are correct. 

You might not be convinced by the arguments, but this is how this will work in this series: a logical discussion WITH Christian truths as premises.

(Before we move on to topics on Christianity, let us first prove the validity of the basic premise that God exists.  So, next in line: Part 2 – “Believing in God is Only Logical”)

Read More

Top 10 Bible Characters

In an essay I wrote entitled “Movies I Want Hollywood to Make, Keep On Making, or Start Making Again”, the stories in the Bible are included in my enumeration of the kinds of movies I like to see made.  The stories in the Bible are so epic, so awesome, and so thrilling, with deep and larger-than-life characters, that they seem to be works of fiction… except that they happened for real.  

I was a kid when I was an avid reader of Bible stories, so you can imagine how these characters impressed a kid like me.  I will not detail everything and every story about a character but only the things that made him stand out.  Let me enumerate my top ten characters of the Bible…

 

10.) & 9.) ELISHA & ELIJAH

(if you notice, that is not Elijah and Elisha, but Obi Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker… since, it’s almost hard to find a “official” picture for Bible characters, I will sometimes use pop culture icons as allusion to the Bible characters instead.  So, example, just as Obi Wan and Kenobi were master and apprentice, this was also the relationship of Elijah and Elisha.)

Elijah and Elisha were prophets during the time of the Kings of Israel and Judah, so they were mostly tasked to carry the Lord’s angry messages to a rebellious land which forgotten the Lord.  Being able to boldly rebuke entire mobs and even kings would take badass courage indeed.  All prophets at that time carried this responsibility. Some were even killed when they deliver God’s message of warnings of punishment and rebuke, which the people did not want to hear.  Elijah and Elisha were two of the prophets that were not killed (though were also persecuted) because of carrying “bad messages”.  And among the prophets of that time, Elijah and Elisha (sorry Isaiah and Jeremiah) were the two that fascinated me the most.    

So, let’s start with Elijah…

Elijah, with the God-given courage of a prophet, with no fear of death or punishment, would just suddenly barge in Israel’s throne room, to confront and rebuke King Ahab of Israel and Queen Jezebel a.k.a. “the most evil bitch in the Bible.”   Elijah would always get on this wicked couple’s nerves, but would strangely go away unharmed from these confrontations (that’s Providence’s protection!). 

One time, Elijah, representing God, challenged all 450 priests of the idol Baal in a duel to determine who the real God is.  The challenge was this: the two parties would make an offering (animal meat sacrifice) to their respective god and whoever answers with fire is the real God.  So, the priests of Baal, in elaborate ceremony, prepared their offering, and chanted and danced for hours.  Meanwhile, Elijah was on the corner ridiculing and trash talking at the Baal priests: “Hey!  Make your voice louder!  Maybe Baal is asleep! LOL!”  By mid-afternoon, Baal’s prophets gave up.  So, Elijah prepared his altar of stones for God and then ordered men to build a trench around it.  Then, he asked them to fill the trench with water and to soak the altar as well as the meat with water!   Then he called out to God and God sent a big fireball to eat it all up – not only the sacrifice but the water and stones as well!  Oh, by the way, this duel has something on the line, not only for determining the real god, but the lives of the participants were on the line as well.  Thus, the prophets of Baal were slaughtered.  Well, if religious debates are settled like this nowadays, we would never be confused regarding religion (just kidding, people). 

Later the same day, Elijah would outrun a chariot.  I kid you not.  Read your Bible to be acquainted with the entire story.              

Elijah was also the famous Bible character who was fed by bread-carrying ravens each day.  And, of course, he's the guy who went to heaven with style.

  

Elisha was the only one who waived Elijah off on his departure for heaven.   Before Elijah left, he took Elisha under his wing first and trained him to be his successor.  And Elisha became as badass as his master.

Elisha is most known for healing the Syrian General Naaman from his leprosy by making him bathe in the Jordan River seven times.  But the stories I liked most about Elisha were when Elisha’s prayer summoned Heaven’s army of chariots of fire and when he summoned bears to maul the youths who were insulting him.   Even when Elisha was already dead, he continued to show some awesomeness, as the mere touch of his bones can revive a dead person.  Don’t believe me?  Again, look it up in your Bible.

8.) HOSEA

We also can find some fun romance stories in the Bible.  Jacob working for seven years for Rachel, and when he got conned to marrying Leah, he worked another seven years for Rachel, and “they seemed unto him a few days, for the love he had to her.”  That line says it all.  We also have Isaac and Rebekah, which story proved that “love at first sight” does happen.  But not as this world perceives it.

But the best of all of these romantic love stories is Hosea’s love to Gomer.  Hosea is a prophet of God.  Gomer is a whore.  And by God’s will and command, Hosea married Gomer.  Now, you understand the “Pretty Women” reference.   But this is much more interesting since Hosea is a prophet, a man of God.  By today’s standard, that’s like a missionary marrying a call girl/hooker! 

You might think that this is the type of story in which, prior the marriage, love converted Gomer to live a new life after “falling in love” with Hosea.  Quite the contrary, Gomer left Hosea after their marriage – and after boring some children – and returned to her whoring and adulterous ways.  Hosea had to “divorce” her for infidelity.   But in the end, Hosea has to “buy her back.”    And again, in modern times, that is like after the pastor married her, she cheated on him and the pastor still accepted her back even if it would cost him!  Ponder on the absurdity. 

Well, you might say that Hosea only did all of these because God commanded him all the way.  This is true, but I doubt that Hosea would ever put up with it if he did not love Gomer.  And that’s why Hosea fascinated me… his life story, his love affair with Gomer, is as unique as a love story can be. Really, can any love story top that?  I am a cynic when it comes to this romantic love stuff, but Hosea’s love for Gomer just touched me.  Its analogy is one of the factors that made me appreciate what is the real importance and message of marriage (the perfect matrix and analogy to the Church’s relationship with Christ).  The Hosea-Gomer love story was meant as an allegorical illustration for God’s love for His people, both referencing to the conditions during the time of the Old Testament Israel and, ultimately to prepare the concept of what Christ did for His Bride, to the New Testament Church.  Because their story is an analogy to the relationship of Christ and Church, we can assume that Gomer finally realized, accepted and returned Hosea’s love, since the Church/Bride responds to Christ/Bridegroom with love.  

So Hosea is number eight because I find what he did for love was outrageous and unparalleled but special, and just made me realize how outrageous and unparalleled but special God’s love really is.

7.) MOSES

Moses, the first leader of the Hebrew nation, gets the number 7 spot. 

The early part of his life story seems like something that came out from a TV soap.  The Israelites at that time were staying in Egypt and were slaves of the Egyptians.  The pharaoh was worried since the Israelites were rapidly increasing in population, so he ordered that every Israelite baby be thrown to the Nile to be eaten by crocodiles.  Horrible thought, picture wailing babies get tossed to be shredded and devoured by crocs, and the Nile becoming scarlet from it. 

Anyway, Moses’ mom, instead, placed baby Moses in a basket and then set him afloat on the river Nile, while Miriam, the big sister, while hidden from sight, was tasked to watch the basket moving along the river. In a twist of fate (if there is such thing), the daughter of the pharaoh was bathing in the river and found the baby Moses.  She decided to adopt him and wondered aloud on who might be able to take care of the baby.  Miriam revealed herself and volunteered her mother and their family to do it.  So, in the end, Moses’ mother got to raise Moses – who is now a Prince of Egypt, since a princess adopted him.  Very much like a TV soap opera. 

His life as an adult continued to be dramatic.  When he was 40 years old, raised and trained and educated as a Prince of Egypt, he encountered an Egyptian slave overseer punishing a Hebrew slave.   And in his anger after witnessing the maltreatment, Moses killed the Egyptian overseer.   Eventually, Moses fled to the land of Midian when he realized that the pharaoh might punish him for what he did.  There, he managed to become a shepherd for a priest named Jethro and married one of his daughters, Zipporah.  After 40 years, God talked to him through the now legendary Burning Bush incident.   Moses returned to Egypt, and with the help and company of his brother Aaron, tried to convince the pharaoh to let the Jew slaves go.  After the infamous Ten Plagues of Egypt, pharaoh finally agreed to let the Israelites go. 

Moses would lead this nation of nomads, which was a stubborn and rebellious lot, to journey towards the Promise Land.  Pillars of fire and cloud, Golden calf fiasco, orgies, several rebellions, manna from heaven, low flying quails, battles, lots of complaining by the people, the development of the Ten Commandments and the Jewish Law, the earth swallowing those who displeased and rebelled against God, snakes streamed the encampment, continual wickedness and lack of appreciation by the Israelites… all these and more happened under Moses’ leadership of the Hebrew horde.  Because the Israelites continued to sin and murmur against God, they spent 40 years (another 40 year span in Moses’ life chapters) travelling in circles in the desert, until all the first generation Israelites, except Caleb and Joshua, died.  And only then, with the second generation of Israelites, were the Jews permitted to enter the Promise Land.  Moses himself did something wrong (the “striking instead of whispering” incident) that disqualified him from entering the Promise Land.  So he left the leadership of Israel to Joshua, who is another awesome Bible character but was not able to make this list, though another “Joshua” would take the number one spot.          

  

So that’s the summary of the interesting things that happened to Moses’ life story. 

And, oh, aside from his dramatic life story, this epic event was a major factor why Moses made it to this list:

6.) DANIEL

Daniel was among the exiles of Judah that were sent to Babylon after the Chaldeans crushed Judah.  Like Joseph, Daniel was given by God the ability to interpret dreams.  As a result, that’s a major reason he became an invaluable adviser to King Nebuchadnezzar (which I also have to point out, had encountered God, realized his greatness, and humbled himself before him) of Babylon.  When the Persians conquered Babylon, he became a friend of King Darius and he was appointed as a high ranking adviser.  

The most popular anecdote of Daniel was the incident on the Lions’ Den.  Coming out unscathed from a den of lions is so awesome!  To those who are not aware of the story, here is a brief summary: Some of the king’s advisers, who were jealous of Daniel, decided to set him up.  They tricked the king to pass a law that no one should honor or bow down to any god or man, except to the king, for thirty days.  Whoever breaks it was to be thrown to the lions.  So as expected, Daniel ignored this law and continued to pray and bow to his God.  Thus, though against his will, the king sent Daniel to the lions’ den.  But Daniel came out unharmed from the den the next day, since God protected Daniel.  The king was overjoyed and sent the plotters and their families to be thrown to the lions instead.   Then King Darius decreed that all the people of the Persian kingdom shall honor the God that Daniel worships and serves.

Daniel’s best buds, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, had a similar experience before Daniel had the Lions’ Den experience, in which this immortal and powerful quote was delivered: “If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up."  I just add this here since I love this story about Daniel’s friends (look this particular story up, it’s worth it).

5.) GIDEON

Before the Spartans’ 300, the Jews had the first legendary 300.  And they were led by this man Gideon.

Before the reign of the Kings, just after Joshua successfully led the nation of Israel to conquer Canaan, the young nation experienced persecutions and plundering from neighboring countries and surrounding roving tribesmen when they forget about God and then start practicing wicked things.   God then would send a “Judge” – a champion – to lead and save them from their foes.  One of them was Gideon.

The bad guys who were terrorizing Israel that time were the Midianites.  And when an angel of God told Gideon that God wants him to lead Israel to beat the Midianites, he initially didn’t believe it.  However, after asking for signs to confirm that God indeed chose him, Gideon gained courage and believed.  So, he gathered the leaders of Israel and the nation assembled 32,000 men.   But the Midianite army was still bigger than Israel’s.  A lot bigger.  But instead of gathering more men, Gideon went on to cut back the militia’s numbers.  This was to show that a victory is not because of their might, but God’s.   First, Gideon asked that whoever was afraid to fight should leave and go home.  All but 10,000 left.  However, Gideon thought that this was still too many.  So he asked them to drink from a brook.   Most of them were careless, putting their faces down to the river to drink.  But 300 kept their heads up, on the lookout for danger, as they scoop water by their hands to drink.    These 300 were the only men that were allowed to join Gideon’s army. 

The 300 is definitely the nation’s elite, since they were the only ones that had the sense and battle instinct to keep alert.  With the elite 300, Gideon put his God-inspired strategy into motion.  He commanded the 300 to surround the Midianite camp stealthily at night.   At Gideon’s signal, the 300 smashed pitchers that contained torches, blew their trumpets, waved more torches, and shouted the battle cry, “The sword of the Lord and of Gideon!”  Then the Israelite army charged down towards the camp, 300 against thousands.  With the stillness of the dark night suddenly broken by the noise and light from Gideon’s army, the Midianites were startled and begun to panic.  The Midianite army thought that they were surrounded by a bigger army.  They were in chaotic panic in the night’s darkness that they even attacked one another.  So, with the Midianite’s panic totally for Gideon’s advantage, the 300 defeated the bigger Midianite army.

Gideon would be my most favorite Judge if not for…

4.) SAMSON

Before Samson was born, an angel of God prophesied to his parents that Samson would grow up to save the nation of Israel from the Philistines (the bad guys in this chapter of the Judges era).   His mother gave a promise to God that Samson was going to be set apart and dedicated to God, symbolized by never cutting his hair and never drinking strong drink (the Nazarite Creed at its core). 

When Samson grew up, he became to be a man of much strength.  He was even able to kill a lion barehanded.  Samson would be a falsely motivated Judge, but nonetheless, fulfilled the prophecy that he would destroy the Philistines. 

For instance, he decided to marry a Philistine, and during his wedding day, he gave a riddle, wagering for rich shirts and robes, for his guests to answer.  The Philistines can’t answer the riddle, so in desperation, they blackmailed Samson’s wife to tell them the answer.  By the time that the answer is due, the Philistines had the answer to Samson’s riddle.  Realizing that he was tricked, that they got the answer from his wife, he became furious.  He indeed gave robes to the Philistines he wagered against, but they were from other Philistines that he had slaughtered. 

When Samson’s anger cooled, he decided to go back to his wife.  But he discovered that in his absence, the father of his bride gave her to his best man.   Samson was angered again and decided to set afire to the Philistine fields by letting lose several foxes with flaming torches attached to their tails.  In retaliation, when the Philistines realized that it was the fault of his wife and her father that Samson was angered, they set afire to the home of Samson’s father-in-law with him and Samson’s wife still in it.  Samson was so furious that he killed those responsible.

For this, the Philistine army demanded that Samson’s people should hand over Samson to them or they will massacre their people.  To avoid this, Samson agreed to surrender, to be bound, and to be handed over to the Philistine army.  When Samson was at last in Philistine hands, his enemies thought that they had won.  But when Samson caught a glimpse of a donkey’s jawbone, he suddenly burst out from his binds, and grabbed the jawbone.  And with this weapon he slaughtered a thousand Philistine soldiers. 

Let me repeat that, if you miss the awesome badassery of what happened.  Samson – one man – killed one thousand soldiers – again, one thousand soldiers – with just a donkey’s jawbone as weapon.   What a body pile.

Sometime later, in a Philistine city, the Philistines tried to trap Samson by closing the city gate.  If you are aware of how cities are back then, you know that they are surrounded by thick walls, and their city gates are heavy-duty and gigantic.   But at midnight, as Samson decided to leave, he broke the city gate and carried it off!

But, eventually, we all know that Samson was finally beaten by the whore, Delilah.  She tricked a love-sickened Samson on revealing the secret of his strength, that he was dedicated to God and made a promise that he would never cut his hair, and when he does, would be weak as any man.  So with this information gotten from Delilah, the Philistines chained him when he was asleep, cut his hair, and when he woke up, blinded him by gorging out his eyes.

He was then made to grind grain in a prison.  But, as time passed, his captors did not notice that his hair had grown again.  In the feast of the god of the Philistines, Dagon, Samson was brought at the temple to be mocked by his enemies.   But Samson got himself towards the pillars of the temple, and with a final prayer to God, broke the pillars as the foundation of the temple broke.  The giant temple of the heathen Philistine idol crashed to the ground.  Samson died, but he also took thousands of his enemies with him.

Samson made several wrong decisions, but these were used by the Lord to bring his purpose to fruition: to destroy Israel’s enemies, the Philistines.

3.) PAUL

In a sense, New Testament guys’ adventures are not that “exciting” compared to the adventures of the Old Testament guys.   It also holds true with Paul, though his life is still dramatic.  He once persecuted Christians, then in the road to Damascus, he encountered the Lord Jesus Christ, and that’s where it started.   Being named Saul, he changed his name to Paul.  He became a zealous and prominent preacher, missionary, and early Church leader.  He brought to life a boy that fell asleep in one of his sermons and fell down the window.  Got mistaken for Hermes, the Greek god.  Healed people, including a demon possessed fortune teller.  Got imprisoned more than one time.  Sang praises to God when in prison.  Wrote letters while in prison.  Made tents as livelihood.  Traveled mostly by foot in his mission work.  Got bitten by a poisonous snake, but never died or even became ill.  Got shipwrecked.  And several other adventures as well.

But I rate Paul this high, not majorly depending on his life story, but his life’s work.  Paul would write several letters to the early churches, and these letters are the most articulated piece of literature on Christian doctrines.  Up to modern times, most of the Christian doctrines are based on these epistles.  It goes without saying that Paul is intelligent.  Prior to being a Christian, he was a well educated scholar of law and academics.  If we equivalent it to modern times, he is someone that has several MAs and PhDs, as well as being a lawyer.  Thus, his intelligence showed when he discussed and interpreted Christianity, using perfect analogies and references, hypothetical cases, and logical arguments, in his fluent writing.  He’s a sort of C.S. Lewis, only that we can trust that Paul never made some mistakes in his case for Christianity.       

Arguably, Paul is the greatest of the apostles.  Humble enough to declare that he is the “least of the apostles” makes my point.

2.) DAVID

David’s life is like something that has been taken out from an adventure novel.

As a kid until he was in his teens, David was a shepherd to his father’s sheep.  And he was good at it, protecting them from bears and lions (oh, he killed them.  Imagine that).  During this time, he was anointed by Samuel the prophet to be the next king of Israel.  But he was never a braggart about it.   Aside from being anointed as a future king and being a bear-and-lion-killing badass shepherd, David was also an excellent singer and musician (the harp being his instrument).  He was so good that he was even called upon by King Saul for a gig in his palace. 

Then, came the incident with Goliath the Giant, and we all know how it goes.  With just a slingshot, David knocked the giant out and beheaded him.  This catapulted him to become King Saul’s champion and a national hero.  But the king was really jealous of David’s success and thought of ways to get the latter killed.  Several times, he tried to plot on ways to kill David, but Saul failed on all of them.  So, eventually, David fled from Saul and became an outlaw.  Many great fighting men joined up with David.  He and his men would had some adventures, including beating off Amalekite raiders, and at the same time, David would continue fleeing from Saul, and even though he had, several times, got the chance to kill Saul, he did not do so.

Saul would fall in a battle against the Philistines, and David would assume the throne.  However, Saul’s youngest son, Ishbosheth, crowned himself king as well.  Thus, Israel erupted on a civil war.  But in the end, since David’s forces are stronger, it left Ishbosheth with few followers, this led two of his officers to betray and kill him.  So with Ishbosheth out of the way, David was undisputed king of Israel.   As a king, David made Israel a military power, conquering lands and making Israel an empire.        

Okay, let me again interpret David’s life to modern times’ standard to explain further if you didn’t grasp the badassery of it.  It was like David was a cowboy in his youth, became a rock star, saved his country from terrorists singlehandedly, which propelled him to be the no. 1 Navy SEAL of the country, had many successful missions, became a legend, but corrupt and jealous politicians set him up for a crime he did not commit, he fled a la Jason Bourne-Evelyn Salt, became a mafia boss with strong members in his famiglia, elected as president and led his country, then after a brief Civil War, made his country powerful and rich and crushed all its opponents. 

David was not perfect.   His major sin was when he committed adultery and then plotted to get the husband killed.  Though David repented, his sin would lead to many crises in his family including incest, rape, murders, and a plot to overthrow David.

But, still, David is the one that was called “a man after God’s own heart.”  He realized that God alone can make him feel secure, happy, and satisfied, thus he had a very close relationship with God.  This reflects on his psalms.   And that is the main lesson we can derived from David’s life: only God can satisfy.  David had experienced all the things a man wants.  Adventure, talents, power, sex, richness, etc.  But all of these failed to compare to the joy David found with his God.  (David’s son, Solomon, would also reach this same conclusion in his life.)

          

1.) JESUS  

Like I said, the other “Joshua” in the Bible got the number one spot (“Jesus” was the modern name for “Joshua” at that time.  Both names mean "deliverer").  Plenty of good stories in the Bible, plenty of legendary characters, but God is the real main character of the Bible.  And Jesus is God incarnated as human.    

The world was never the same when he arrived.  His birth separated an age of before his birth and after his death – BC and AD.  Old traditions, concepts and cultures were destroyed, and new traditions, concepts, and cultures were founded in him.  Miracles, revolutions, murders, charity, and wars were done in his name.  Religions were created, delivering and distorting his message.  It can’t be denied that his impact to this world was great.

Jesus’ life is the most dramatic and touching story in the Bible.  It’s also the most important.  He was humbly born in a manger, was a carpenter’s son and then a carpenter, unknown and unpopular for the first thirty years of his life, and only after being baptized by John the Baptist he started his ministry.  He performed miracles, healed the sick, raised the dead, casted out demons, multiplied loaves and fishes, stilled storms.  He ate, he drunk, had fun, played with children, joked, partied, hang out with sinners, and grant forgiveness.  He taught about God and morality, talked philosophy and law with teachers, psyched out and offended religious leaders, told fictional stories with morals called parables, made friends and followers, made enemies, made admirers, made haters.  He fasted, was tempted by the devil, felt hungry, felt anger, felt thirst, got hurt, got tired, got sleepy, probably sang and danced, felt sad, felt happiness… he experienced human emotions and situations.  He was praised and honored, he was cursed, he was betrayed, he was denied, he was tortured, he was humiliated, and he was crucified and died.  But he rose again and ascended into Heaven.  And he would come back for His people, to establish His kingdom and to judge humanity. 

Jesus brought the message of the Gospel.  HE is the GOSPEL.   He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

One great thing about Jesus is how he picks those he wants in his team.  It doesn’t matter who or what one is.  Sex, race or social status does not matter.  He picked tax-collectors, fishermen, whores, criminals, teachers, shepherds, magi.  He picked ordinary people.  He picked sinners.  And he changed these sinners and gave them new lives… and missions from the King.  All these Bible characters – whether from the Old or New Testament – were like that.  Ordinary people.  Sinners.  But he made them special and relevant.    Gave them grand missions and purposes.  Made their biographies exciting and glorious. 

So, indeed, it is a great honor to be picked by Jesus.  And it doesn’t end with these Bible characters.  Up to now, Jesus picks people for his team.  Regardless of past, present, sex, status, or race.  Ordinary people.  Sinful people.   He gives them extraordinary lives and transforms them to saints.  Just like the Bible characters.   

Read More