| FLOYD HAYES |
| RELIGION |
| WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF SPIRITUAL TRUTH? |
| I suspect that all religions have some truth, but I reject the notion that all are equally valid approaches to the truth. If God indeed exists, surely one religion has a more accurate concept of who He is and what He wants than any other religion. But how do we know which? Which religion? As a married man, I am faithful to my wife. As a father, I am partial to my son. As a member of a family unit, I am loyal to my parents, brothers and sister. I am proud of the educational institutions I attended, the institutions that employed me, the denomination that nurtured me and the country of my birth. But though I pledge allegiance to all of these individuals and institutions to a varying degree, my highest allegiance belongs to somebody else. The only individual I would ever render complete homage to is God. But which god? The god of the Sun, which provides the source of my energy? The god of fertility, which helped conceive me? The god of Capricorn, under whose sign I was born? Humans render allegiance to many different gods, but what all gods but one have in common is that they were created by somebody else. In ancient times, the Hebrews were unique in that they worshiped the "creator" God, who often declared "beside me there is no god" (e.g., Isaiah 44:6). As far as I'm concerned, the only individual ever worthy of my homage is the one who created me and everything else. All other so-called gods are not worthy. Assuming that there really is a God who created us and cares for us, surely He would have attempted to communicate with us. But if so, how? Many wish to impose a particular religion or brand of religion on others, which I believe is morally unjustified. I firmly endorse the free market of religion in which anybody can buy or sell wherever and whenever they wish. But although many of us live in a "free" country with a relatively free market of religion, few of us take advantage of our freedom to shop around. When it comes to employment, most individuals periodically seek a better, higher paying position, either through a promotion or with a different employer. But when it comes to religion, many are content with the religion they were nurtured with and refuse to shop around for something better. However, why should we settle for what we already have when there just might be something even better? Others hunt for a bargain, seeking the religion that requires the least amount of effort to be saved. But if we truly love God, we should search diligently for truth--and even after we believe we've found it, we should never be completely content with what we've already found. We continually should be seeking deeper for truth. Because of the Bible's accuracy with historical events and prophetic predictions--especially about a "messiah" who would die for our sins (for more information, click here)--I feel confident that the Bible is the so-called "holy book" that most accurately portrays God. And because Jesus Christ is the individual who best matches the predictions of a messiah, I believe Christianity is the religion that best represents the truth about God. Essentially all other religions profess that salvation is earned through our own efforts. But Christianity is unique in its belief that because of our inherent sinful nature, we all deserve the wages of sin--death--and there is nothing that we can do to earn salvation. In contrast with other religions, Christianity teaches that salvation was purchased for us by the blood of Christ, who once died the death that we deserved. Through faith in Christ, we are freely offered full communion with God--if only we choose to follow Him. Sources of truth. Assuming Christianity is the true religion, why are there so many versions of Christianity and which is the most accurate? The many denominations of Christianity differ primarily in their interpretations of scripture, though some differ very little--if at all. Although I believe we eventually will be judged by our deeds rather than by what we believe, if we truly love God we will want to do His will and will earnestly seek to know His will. Furthermore, those who do not sincerely seek to better understand God risk being deceived. To know God's will and to avoid being deceived, we must diligently search for truth from the correct source. Some believe they should follow the teachings of their church leaders. But should this be our ultimate source of truth? Jesus warns us to "Take heed that no man deceive you...many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many" (Matthew 24:5, 11). The teachings of mere men, no matter how pious they may appear, should never be trusted implicitly. Some are readily convinced by those who use miracles to demonstrate God's power. But once again, Jesus warned us about "false Christs, and false prophets" who would "shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect" (Matthew 24:24). Furthermore, in His revelation to John we are warned by Christ that before He returns, a world power would arise that "doeth great wonders" and "deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast" (Revelation 13:13-14). Clearly miracles can be used by God's adversaries to deceive us. Some appeal to tradition as the source of truth. But Jesus rebuked those who "transgress the commandment of God by your tradition" and lamented that "in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men" (Matthew 15:3, 9). Obviously certain traditions are contrary to the commandments of God and cannot be trusted. Some rely on messages delivered from dead friends or relatives, who supposedly have access to inside information while enjoying the blisses of heaven. But God explicitly forbade communication with the dead, stating "Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them" (Leviticus 19:31). Isaiah (8:19) asked, "And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?" Surely we should seek truth from God--not the dead, whose messages may be attributed to demonic imposters. If truth is not reliably revealed by the teachings of leaders, those who perform miracles, longstanding traditions or messages from the dead, then what is the ultimate source of truth? The answer is simple: God's word! As Peter declared, "...all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever" (1 Peter 1:24-25). Most Christians consider the Bible as God's inspired word. But which parts of the Bible? Are we free to pick and choose which parts of the Bible--such as the New Testament alone--to believe? Paul, in his letter to young Timothy, insisted that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Timothy 3:16- 17). I concur with Paul that all scripture--not just the parts we want to believe--are a reliable testimony from God. As far as I'm concerned, the litmus test of truth is stated in Isaiah 8:20: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." I hesitate to accept any religious doctrine as the gospel truth unless I find it to be consistent with all of the word of God. But how do we interpret the Bible when it seemingly contradicts itself? Some use this point to argue that the Bible is inconsistent and cannot be trusted. But if the Bible is assumed to be the truth, there can be no contradictions because truth cannot contradict itself. Applying this principle, the best solution is to compare scripture with scripture to decide where the weight of the evidence lies. Once this is accomplished, the texts seemingly contradicting each other can be more accurately reinterpreted. Some argue whether the Bible should be interpreted literally or symbolically. However, in my view the Bible should always be interpreted literally unless an obvious symbol is employed. Examples of symbolic portions of scripture include the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation (for further information, click here) and the parables of Jesus. In these instances, the symbols are intended to be discerned only by those seeking earnestly to know the truth. As the prophet Daniel (12:10) concluded, "...the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand." |
| To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. -Isaiah 8:20 |
 |