Religion

Bad Experience? This is a commonly asked question, which often betrays a pre-supposition: having to go to church is tantamount to a life sentence in prison. Many people like the idea of a personal connection with God, but that’s my experience, right? What does my spirituality have to do with a load of other strangers? There may be many reasons that you could think that. It could be that you were brought up going to a church which frankly made joining a crown green bowling club seem exciting (I can relate!!). It might be that you had a bad experience with some Christians before, that left you feeling hurt or rejected. Does this mean you should reject church for good? 'This is not an optional extra for those that are extra keen. We all belong in the local church. This is where we will thrive, to accomplish what God has made us for!'

It is sadly true that people from different religions have sometimes, naively or otherwise, falsified the truth claims in other religions in order to make a mockery of them. This type of crude propaganda is unloving, unreal, and divisive. In order to be able to assess the validity of each religion, one must be willing to investigate with humility, not only for the sake of learning, but also out of respect for those of other faiths. The question presupposes, however, that in order for one to judge the truth claims of a religion one must experience that religion. But what is meant by ‘experiencing’ a religion? There are two main categories of experience that I think are being referred to; knowledge of the doctrines of that religion, and a supernatural experience of God. Knowledge of doctrine There is much in the knowledge or understanding of different religions that can be tested. Some primary questions might be: Do they cohere with history and human experience? Does the belief system explain human origins? How does it deal with the problem of evil? And so on. These questions are helpful in ascertaining the validity of a world-view.

Originally there was only one Church, founded by the apostles. This was, from time to time, challenged by various groups who claimed to represent 'true' Christianity, but which rejected key teachings of the faith, an issue which I hope to touch on below. In 1054 A.D. the Church split into Eastern (Orthodox) and Western (Catholic) churches due to divisions over the precise relationship of the Holy Spirit to the other persons of the Trinity (the Filioque controversy) and the authority of the Pope/Bishop of Rome. The Western church was further split into Roman Catholics and Protestants at the time of the Reformation, and splits along denominational lines (especially among Protestants) have continued ever since. It could be argued that this disunity is a barrier to the credibility of the Christian message. Not all disagreements are of equal importance

Introduction Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and not merely a human teacher. This central idea has long been challenged by opponents of Christianity, and opposition has again, in recent years, come to prominence with the appearance of books such as The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. Jesus was a man Of course, at the very outset of this discussion, it is worth remembering that Christians also believe that Jesus was a real flesh-and-blood man. There were some early teachers (such as the “Docetists” and “Gnostics”) who denied this, arguing instead that Jesus merely appeared to be human (see, for example, section 93 of the Acts of John). It is curious to see such documents being referred to as evidence of early Christian belief in a merely human Jesus (see, for example, pages 231 and 234 of The Da Vinci Code), when this is something that their authors denied. The Council of Nicaea of 325 A.D.