Links
This page has been alive since July 1997. There is a range of opinion here with many repeating themes. I think a personal summary is appropriate now. This entry is about this web page and how it fits into what I believe. This place has taken me by surprise, not only by the level participation but also by the effect that it has had on me. It has forced me to come to terms with the issues brought up here. It has never been my intention to convince anyone of my views. For me this has been a place of learning and self-expression.

I’ve added a bunch of links to this entry. The links are only links in my mind. They may support what I say, they may oppose it, or they may say what I say with a different perspective. You may not agree with the way that I linked to a statement or you may think that I should have linked to an entry that I didn’t. I think that the links make this entry a little more interesting. If you have any problems with them let me know. If you go to a link use your browsers "Back" button to come back to this entry. Also, the links seem to behave better after the referenced page is loaded once into your browser. If you end up at the top of a page push the "Back" button and try the link again.

Twelve Days
Almost 100 K (out of 184 K at this point) of this page came to be because of Macross. I have read that 100 K several times trying to really understand it. Macross kicked the hornet’s nest and a few of us buzzed out to sting. He repeated that he wasn’t really debating and that he and Daniel were talking about different things. So, why did he put so much into the page? I’m guessing, but I think he wanted to spread the gospel and keep it within the context of science, religion and the movie. He also did it because I asked him to. He seemed a little perplexed about my purpose for creating the page and wondered why I would ask the questions that I did especially if I were a true Christian. I responded in email that I felt like I knew the answers and I just wanted him to teach us his views. And he did.

The absolute truth that steps on toes
Macross repeatedly defined the truth as God. This is an echo of "I am the way, the truth, and the light". Daniel and Macross both used philosophy to define the truth. I agree with the concept of absolute truth. Daniel and others brought forward the fact that religion is full of contradicting doctrine. He and Carl Sagan have used the argument " they can’t all be right so they must all be wrong". This is a reasonable point. I have to wonder how the absolute truth fits into Christianity. The only thing that many of us agree on is the divinity of Jesus. He is absolute truth, but I have to ask: Is that enough? The majority of Christendom would say "yes". It’s not enough for me. There are some very important "salvation hinged" issues that we don’t agree on, like baptism for example. Other issues like priesthood administration and the very nature of God are not agreed upon. The Bible teaches in several places (try John 17) for us to be unified, but yet the only absolute truth there appears to be is Christ’s divinity. If truth is absolute and Christianity contains the truth then why don’t we agree? Somebody has to be wrong. I can’t believe that the Savior would spend three years teaching the gospel and then have it turn into a gospel fruitcake. We are left with no choice but to say "I have the truth" or "my church is true". Or, that the only absolute truth contained in all of Christianity is "believe and be saved" or in other words, the divinity of Jesus. I have already stated that this doesn’t work for me so here it is: I believe that I belong to the only true church on the face of the earth. Not only is the truth God but so are his teachings. There is no other way around it and still remain in the realm of absolute truth. I have to believe that I have it, or at least most of it. If I didn’t think that way I would be compelled to think like the agnostics who have expressed themselves here. I believe that Christ and his teachings are absolute truth.

I’m reading The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan. It’s been great so far. If I understand Sagan correctly, science tells us what is most likely correct within the framework of our current understanding. "Most likely" is not absolute. This does not imply that science is not truth, but it does imply that it may not be. Science never has claim on absolute truth. It only has claim on what could be the absolute truth. So, once again, it is silly for me to mix science up with religion. By throwing science into the mix with religion I open the possibility that the mixture is incorrect (assuming that religion does have claim on absolute truth). On the other hand science is very likely to be correct. I have to agree with Christian on the concept of creation science. But I must confess that all of this speculation is interesting, so I’ll probably toy with it a little more. Based on what I’ve read in past entries I would guess that Christian would disagree with my assumption about absolute truth and religion and say that faith is the "pollutant" in the mix. If Sagan were reading this he would probably think the same.

Are we free?
Another concept that lies at the foundation of Christianity is the issue of freedom. How can this possibly an issue? Obviously we have free will, right? Natural selection and science say otherwise. They say that we are just glorified amoebas who react to the stimulus around us. Our brains consist of a bunch of chemicals that have been arranged by our life’s experience. Even emotions like love and awe are products of natural selection. I’ve heard it put this way: If we were provided with the exact same chemistry (which includes genetic code) and provided the exact same experiences of life, our choices would be exactly the same. Which means that we have no choice. That is an interesting train of thought. Unfortunately there is no way to prove that are not free. Like Atheism, to believe that we are not free is a belief of faith. As long as we exist within the framework of time we will never really know if we are free. The only way to really know would be to travel back in time and watch the events unfold and make the comparison. I’m reminded of the Uncertainty Principle and quantum physics mentioned by Hawking. I don’t claim to fully understand it, but from what I do understand just our observation can change the way that an event unfolds. So, what does any of this have to do with Christianity? Freedom is the reason for the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We have to be free to sin. We must be free to choose to follow the Savior and thus be saved. We could say that it sure looks like we are not free or that science says that it is unlikely that we have freedom, but "unlikely" doesn’t cut it for me. My faith is for free will, not against it.

I believe that we are free to the point of choosing our eternal destiny. One of those unique doctrines of my religion is that of the pre-earth life. I believe that we existed before we were born. We were free even then while we were living with our Father in Heaven. There was an event that occurred in the pre-existence called "the war in heaven" that we all participated in (Revelation 12:7-12). The issue at stake was freedom. In a nutshell: Satan wanted to force us back to heaven and he and his followers fought those of us who wanted to be free to choose and thus allow for the Atonement. Satan was cast down to the earth where this war continues.

What about people who are mentally handicapped or those who have mind altering head injuries? Jesus Christ will judge us relative to no one but our selves. We will be held accountable for what we can be held accountable for. Fortunately he is our judge and as one who has experienced all punishment for sin his judgment is just. Children who die while children will also be saved through his Grace. What about the choices of the billions of regular people who have never heard of Jesus? How free are they? How can they make a choice that has never been presented to them? Another unique doctrine in my religion is the idea that our probationary period will last until the final judgment that occurs at the time of the final resurrection of everyone. During the time between death and resurrection we will be in a place called the spirit world. If we have not had the opportunity to make the choice on earth we will be given the opportunity to make it there. I’m not pushing these unique doctrines. My point is that everyone, sooner or later, will be able to make the choice literally between life with God and life without him. In my opinion we are free. I agree with Macross, what a sad state of existence if we are not. As I said about truth, if I somehow came to realize that we have no freedom I would be compelled to a state of agnosticism.

Can Finite comprehend Infinite?
A recurring theme in Christianity, one repeated by Macross and others, is that the power and beauty of God are his infinities or his "omni-everythings". Our "finite human thinkings" can never comprehend God so why bother to even try? Let’s just worship his infinities and not concern ourselves with his infinite, incomprehensible nature. In my mind there is no question that God is not bounded by the 4 dimensional state defined by Einstein (if Einstein is correct, which he probably is, maybe...). He may indeed be full of infinities, whatever they are, but does that imply that we will never comprehend him? In our current state of existence I don’t think we can comprehend God, but that doesn’t mean that will we never comprehend him. John 17:3 states "And this is life eternal, that they might know God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent", (I think I could just stop right here and my point would be made). Eternal life is defined as the comprehension of God. What does that say about us? Can finite comprehend the infinite? By the Grace of God we can comprehend God. Besides, who said we are finite? With that unique doctrine of a pre earth life there is an "implied infinity" to our existence. As beings that can reach a state of existence where we will comprehend God, what does that imply about our potential nature? Food for thought that I’m not going to touch...

Personal Revelation
"Jesus is God because it says so in the Bible". Daniel and I have both made reference to the self defeating circular argument that seems to be a reason for faith in Christ. The "reverse engineering" concept has also been mentioned here. I have also heard (but not here), "It’s been around for thousands of years, it must be true". Don’t get me wrong, I believe that the Bible is the word of God. I have quoted from it several times (but it’s only a book, I don’t worship it). I just think that the reverse engineering and circular arguements are feeble attempts at proving the existence of God. I’ve said this before: My faith is based on personal revelation. The third member of the Godhead is the Holy Ghost and it is his mission to testify of Jesus Christ. In Matthew 16:15 Jesus asked Peter: "But whom say ye that I am 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, But my father which is in Heaven. " I'm not exactly sure what "flesh and blood" means but I’m guessing that it has to do with physical evidence or proof. Jesus stated that even Peter’s faith was based on personal revelation.

OK, so that puts a dragon in Peter’s garage and I suppose that I have one in mine too, but I’m not trying to convince you that it’s there (not anymore, I can’t). By faith’s very definition I can never show you the dragon in my garage and expect you to see it. Christ is revealed through personal revelation. This "one on one" revelation comes through humility, prayer and study, which are all individual acts of faith.

Why the Universe?
It has been stated by me and others that God must exist because the universe is big and beautiful (after all, this place is just a sub site on Keith’s Astrophotography and Astronomy Page). Scriptural references have been made and testimonies born of the awesome sites in the sky. I think God made the universe observable so that we would wonder about him, but not so that we could prove that he exists. If we do believe in God, the order and beauty of the universe becomes a reinforcing frosting on the cake.

I believe that God the Father and in his Son Jesus Christ are real. With that comes peace, understanding and above all, hope. That doesn’t mean that life is easy or that I float around in a blissful state. It only means that I have hope of wonderful things to come. I’m entitled to that, everyone is. God is a loving father. He has provided us with freedom and the ability to overcome our wrong choices. His work is to bring us back to him and give us what he has. That’s what a loving father would do and that’s why the universe exists.