I’d like to begin this short post with an apology: I’d like to apologize on behalf of Christians who have, throughout history, done some pretty rotten things supposedly in the name of Jesus Christ. The Crusades? Witch hunts? Inquisitions? Priests who molest? Televangelists who scam? All sinful and awful, and Jesus is appalled that such things have come to be associated with Him and His church. While some of these sort of tragedies have been exaggerated (most notably the witch hunts, see Six Modern Myths chapter six) that doesn’t make them any better, and I wish to say, on behalf of 99% of all Christians who are living today and who have ever lived, that we agree with you that these actions are awful, immoral, and un-Christlike. As trite as it may sound and in fact may be, it pains me deeply when I read about these things, and I am truly sorry.

That said, what do such bad things done by Christians prove about the truthfulness of the Christian faith? The answer is: not much. First of all, Christians do not claim to be sinless; in fact, we recognize that although we become new creations in Christ, we remain fallen people in a fallen world, and therefore the threat of succumbing to temptation is ever-present. Second, there are approximately 2.1 billion Christians in the world. With such a huge sample size, should we be surprised when we learn that a small percentage of them do really bad things (molest children, swindle, etc)? Thirdly, how do the actions of a small portion of Christians which contradict the teachings of Jesus and the Christian faith prove anything regarding whether the Christian faith is true or not? In fact they do nothing to prove that the facts of the Christian faith are untrue.

I know this is difficult to accept if you have been personally wounded by the church generally, or a particular Christian person specifically. But please try to keep in mind that any person who acts contrary to a set of principles maligns themselves, but not the principles that they have chosen to disobey. Does the fact that certain NYPD officers are racist and commit immoral acts mean that all police forces should be disbanded? Certainly not, because their actions are contrary to what a police officer should be.

So please, don’t discount Christianity because of the worst “Christians” that you know … or even the best ones! After all, based on Christianity’s own teachings, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23) and that “the whole world is a prisoner of sin” (Galatians 3:22), but by God’s grace “Jesus came to take away our sins, and there is no sin in him” (1 John 3:5). For more on this subject, please see my post “Good people“.

Thank you for your time.

Peter Kreeft, professor of philosophy at Boston College, includes on his website a great essay called Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ. It’s somewhat inappropriately named, however, since most of the essay (it’s actually a chapter from one of his books) actually focuses on refuting alternate theories about what happened at/after Jesus’ crucifixion. Here’s an excerpt from his introduction:

The question is this: Which theory about what really happened in Jerusalem on that first Easter Sunday can account for the data? There are five possible theories: Christianity, hallucination, myth, conspiracy and swoon.

Thus either (1) the resurrection really happened, (2) the apostles were deceived by a hallucination, (3) the apostles created a myth, not meaning it literally, (4) the apostles were deceivers who conspired to foist on the world the most famous and successful lie in history, or (5) Jesus only swooned and was resuscitated, not resurrected. All five theories are logically possible, and therefore must be fairly investigated—even (1) ! They are also the only possibilities, unless we include really far-out ideas that responsible historians have never taken seriously, such as that Jesus was really a Martian who came in a flying saucer. Or that he never even existed; that the whole story was the world’s greatest fantasy novel, written by some simple fisherman; that he was a literary character whom everyone in history mistook for a real person, including all Christians and their enemies, until some scholar many centuries later got the real scoop from sources unnamed.

Read on for more. Highly recommended.

Further reading:

• Facts Concerning the Resurrection - Resurrection expert Gary Habermas examines the facts that historians (including skeptics) agree upon and what we can conclude from them.

Please indulge me as I proceed to conduct a bit of a thought experiment. Note that if I quote the Bible, I am not doing so in an attempt to prove that the Bible is true (that would be a circular argument) but rather to allow it to speak for itself as to what it really claims.

The question to ponder is: How can Christians claim that all human beings are “sinners”? Isn’t that just being unnecessary pessimistic? Aren’t people essentially good?

Yes, people are, in a sense, “essentially good”. But Christians use those words in a slightly different way. To say a person is essentially good means that since people are made in God’s image (that is, resemblance, likeness) we never are able to fully erase that essential quality, regardless of how much we may deface it.¹ Essential goodness in this sense means that we cannot entirely remove or escape our divine worth; since God has given us this worth, it is not within our power to expunge it.

However, a more widespread expression of “essentially good” has a different meaning. What does it mean to be good, in this context? That is, what is the most important thing? It seems that in this popular worldview, the most important thing is that you should be nice to people. In our society (and most churches, for that matter) this is the most important thing. I mean, of course it is … right? What else could be more important … ?

As it happens, Jesus was once asked this very same question by the religious leaders of His time: What is the most important thing?

… but before we consider Jesus’ answer, consider this short parable:

A man was walking by a river, when suddenly he heard a splash, and saw a woman flailing her arms in the water. The man recognized that she could not swim. He knew that she would surely drown in the fast moving water. Throwing off his coat, he dove in the river, grabbed her arm, and dragged her to safety.

For saving her life, the man was lauded as a hero, and the tale of his act of valor began to spread. Observers called for the man to be awarded a medal of honor, and a reporter even interviewed the man for the local paper.

However, the next day’s newspaper told the rest of the story. When asked why he saved the woman, the man answered “I don’t care about the woman herself. I only saved her because she owed me a hundred dollars. I’m an expert swimmer, and I knew that if she drowned she would never be able to repay my money. Frankly I couldn’t care less if she drowned.” The townspeople were aghast, and no one ever spoke again of awarding him a medal of honor.

Now, why do we react differently to the story after hearing the man’s intentions? The act itself does not change, and although the act is not entirely negated, it seems in a sense tainted by the man’s motivations. The man could no longer be considered a hero. It seems as though if a person does a right act for a wrong reason, we are innately (and rightly) repulsed by it. Motivation matters. For example, a person who commits manslaughter receives a lesser sentence than one who commits first degree murder; what differs is their motivation. So we can agree that motivation for an act can change the worthiness (or unworthiness) of the act. Let’s keep this fact in mind.

Back to Jesus. When Jesus was asked what was most important, He answered by twice quoting the Old Testament:

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” (Matthew 22:37-39)

Notice what is first: Loving God. This is what Jesus said is the most important thing. Loving God = #1. Loving your neighbors (by which Jesus means all people, even your enemies) is #2. Still important, you understand, but secondary. And according to Jesus, our #2 flows from our #1: our acts made in love for God will likewise be manifest in love for others, but the reverse is not necessarily true. John explains further: “This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome.” (1 John 5:2-3)

If Jesus is right (this is how Jesus argued, not me) how can we be “good” if our motivation for acting ignores what Jesus claimed is most important? How can a person be “good” if their motivation is all wrong? How can a person be “good” if they ignore God?

Some will say, “But I believe that God exists. Just not in the Christian God.”

Notice how Jesus responded to temptation, by quoting the Old Testament: “Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.” (Matthew 4:10, Luke 4:8) He didn’t say to worship any ‘ol god, but to worship the Lord. There are many false “gods” in the world, but only one God. I am reminded of James’ admonishment: “You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God. Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror.” (James 2:19, NLT)

Back to our original query: Are we basically good? Generally nice guys/gals? Mostly free from sin? That’s like asking if a glass of water that’s been repeatedly spit in is still “mostly good to drink”. As Paul said, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23) Sorry to be blunt, but sometimes doctors have to be blunt in order to begin a process of healing. Jesus Himself noted “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Mark 2:17)

Trying to ’save ourselves’ (by our own effort) won’t work, either. I know that’s counterintuitive in our culture, because we’re always told to do it ourselves. But how can someone drowning in quicksand pull themselves out? The good news (that is, the “gospel”) is that we don’t have to save ourselves. In Jesus Christ, God Himself came into our world in the flesh in order to save us from ourselves and certain death, and show us the way. Paul explains:

You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:6-8)

Maybe you’ve never been inside a church and your life (I know I avoided churches like the plague before I started following Jesus) and have never considered this before. Or maybe you grew up in a church but never heard any of this before. There are a lot of terrible churches out there, but that doesn’t affect one bit the truthfulness of what Jesus said and did.

No matter where you’re coming from, what you’ve just read is something worth thinking about. Anyone who says all the religions are basically the same has never really grasped what Jesus was offering: Good people don’t go to heaven. Forgiven people do.

All that remains is to accept God’s offer of grace.

Thanks for listening. Please feel free to read my story or contact me.

Further reading:

• More about Jesus - Includes a brief Flash presentation and plenty of links.
• Experience forgiveness - Begin your life anew today. It really can happen.
• Just Stop and Think - A 15-minute streaming video with more things to think about. It may change how you look at the world.
• Is the New Testament reliable? - Read some of my previous posts to learn why it is.

1 Thanks goes to Rev Victor Shepherd for his way of stating things so eloquently.
Note: Bible quotations are from the NIV or TNIV unless otherwise noted.

“At this gathering [the Council of Nicaea],” Teabing said, “many aspects of Christianity were debated and voted upon - the date of Easter, the role of the bishops … and, of course, the divinity of Jesus … until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet … a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal.” (Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code, Chapter 55)

The Da Vinci Code repeats a common claim: That Jesus never claimed to be God, and this belief was made up by much later followers. Let’s take a look at just one way that Jesus claimed divinity: He accepted worship.

First, Jesus (quoting the Old Testament) claimed that God is the only legitimate object of worship: “Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.” (Matthew 4:10; Deut 6:13).

Second, Jesus accepted worship many times, including just a short time later when the disciples all worship Him (Matthew 14:33). Additionally:

Jesus accepted worship from Thomas (John 20:28); all the angels are told to worship Jesus (Heb. 1:6); wise men worshiped Jesus (Matt. 2:11); a ruler bowed before Him in worship (Matt. 9:18); a blind man worshiped Him (John 9:38); Mary Magdalene worshiped Him (Matt. 28:9); and the disciples worshiped Him (Matt. 28:17). [source]

Note carefully what we never find Jesus saying. He never corrected anyone by saying something like “Woah guys, you’ve got it all wrong, I may be a good teacher but don’t worship me!”

Third, in Acts we find the early Christians doing exactly what Jesus didn’t do, objecting strongly when people try to worship them. In Acts 10, Peter goes to visit a man named Cornelius, where we read: “As Peter entered the house, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet in reverence. But Peter made him get up. “Stand up,” he said, “I am only a man myself.“ (Acts 10:25-26) This is exactly what we don’t find Jesus saying! A similar example occurs to Paul and Barnabas in Acts 14:11-15.

To state this briefly:

• Jesus claimed only God should be worshiped.
• Jesus accepted worship.
• Therefore, the earliest Christians considered Jesus divine and Jesus affirmed their belief.

All of this accords with what was preached in the early Christian church. In fact, the usual tenancy that often needed to be corrected was to emphasize Jesus’ divinity at the expense of His humanity!

The only way to attempt escape from this conclusion is to argue that the New Testament is not an accurate historical record. Now, besides the fact that the earliest records we have of what Christians believe are the New Testament documents, there are also many other good reasons to believe the New Testament is an accurate historical record.

Further reading:

• Jesus: A Biblical Defense of His Deity - Online version of a book which defends Jesus’ claim to deity.
• The Historical Accuracy of the Gospels - Dr Craig L Blomberg gives reasons to believe the historical accuracy of the gospels.
• Jesus? Who is He? - A quick Flash-based presentation for your kind consideration.