| Q&A concerning my Beliefs |
Home - Articles - News - Q&A - Quotes - Books - Links - Contact me
(Stay tuned, there's more to come!!)
I am a panentheist. Panentheists believe that God "is an inner
Presence and Power that permeates, saturates, or infuses the universe and
everything in it (including the world and humanity, nature and human nature)
from within." We, also, believe that God transcends the
universe. Panentheism has been described in the following manner, "The
Universe is an extension of God, but God exceeds the sum of the objects within
the Universe."
Unlike theism, as embraced by the Abrahamic Religions (Christianity, Islam, and
Judaism), I do not believe that the Diety is personal;
therefore, it is not subject to humanlike emotions, characteristics, and
limitations.
There is no compelling reason for me to believe that God wrote the Bible, or any book for that matter. Human Beings write books while God create universes. God's primary revelation to humankind is the Universe itself and its governing laws. My spiritual knowledge and understanding has been enhanced by reading sacred writings and inspirational literature; I can certainly benefit from the knowledge and experiences of others; however, no religious institution, or set of sacred writings has a monopoly on the truth. Since God lives in me, and in all creatures, I don't need a "Special Revelation;" I can use my own reason and intuition to ascertain truth and to understand spiritual principles.
Interestingly, Christians, Muslims, and Jews all believe in the same God, they just can't agree on which book he wrote.
My spiritual journey began when I converted to Christianity at the age of 12. In my teen years, I was sincerely dedicated to Christ and had a deep hunger for spiritual knowledge. When the church opened for weekly Bible studies and church services, I was always one of the first persons in the door. Some of my fondest memories are from early church experiences.
Two years after my conversion, I became a licensed minister in the Churches of God in Christ -- the largest black pentecostal denomination in the USA. While other teenagers were involved in sports, social events, and school activities, I was preaching the gospel and teaching the Bible to people who were 3 times my age. I preached at youth services and large denominational conferences; I held revival services and conducted door-to-door evangelistic campaigns; I even taught Christian apologetics to college students for an organization called the "InterVarsity Christian Fellowship."
Eventually, I developed an interest in studying scholarly books on theology, apologetics, and philosophy. It was while reading the works of liberal scholars that I began to open my mind to new ways of thinking with regards to the Bible. As I studied issues such as "The Synoptic Problem," the "Documentary Hypothesis," and "Textual Criticism," my belief in biblical inerrancy began to erode. Interestingly, these subjects were never mentioned in any of the churches that I have attended.
I also developed a healthy interest in Science and Astronomy. The "Big Bang Theory" and the theory of Evolution were fascinating! Many of the scientific concepts that I learned contradicted the biblical doctrines that I grew up with. It became obvious that if I were to remain rationally consistent, I would either have to abandon science or modify my beliefs; of course, I chose the latter.
My gradual isolation from Christianity was not only a theoretical level, I was becoming increasingly perplexed over unanswered prayers, and from observing how many of the Pentecostal preachers that taught me about the power of faith and divine healing were becoming afflicted and dying of terminal illnesses. I often heard about miracle stories from others but never observed miracles in my own life. There was a huge gap between what I grew up to believe and what I was actually experiencing in the real world. While Christianity was comforting and inspiring, there were credibility issues that needed to be addressed.
Christianity's doctrine of Redemption presupposes that humankind has fallen as a result of Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden. This concept is referred to as the "Original Sin." It states that regardless of how morally good a person is, he, or she, is condemned to eternal death, because of our collective fallen state; therefore, we must seek salvation through the redemptive sacrifice of Christ, who died on a cross to reconcile humanity with its Creator.
Since I do not accept the Creation Story of Genesis as being literal, I reject the premise upon which the doctrine of redemption is based-- namely the "Original Sin." The concept of appeasing angry gods through offering human and animal sacrifices was very common among ancient religions. In fact, it was widely practiced for many years prior to the development of the Abrahamic religions.
I do not accept the premise that humankind is in a fallen sinful state. The Cosmos and the human race was never perfect. Humanity is slowly evolving, both intellectually and morally. Man is basically good, but is far from being what we would define as morally "perfect." There are many reasons that people commit immoral acts, and it's not because malevolent spirit creatures are possessing or influencing them; it is largely based on a combination of biological, environmental, and social influences. Our brains are not perfect; our genes are not perfect. A person can mentally snap due to excessive stress, anxiety, and depression. What a religious group sees as "demonic" activity may actually be malfunctioning brain chemistry. Certain regions of the brain may have never developed properly, or may have become defective for various reasons, including drug or alcohol abuse. Personality defects can be caused by faulty brain regions. As science maps the various areas of the brain we are discovering the biological links to behavior patterns.
Evil acts can also result from environmental influences and societal pressures as groups compete for Earth's limited resources.
This is one of the most intriguing questions of our era. Unfortunately, after over a century of scholarly debate and research on the issue, there are still a lot more questions than there are answers concerning the person and work of Jesus Christ. Our problem is that we lack credible information. There are very few sources of historical and biographical information, outside of the Gospels, concerning this extraordinary person. I refer to Jesus as "extraordinary," because no other person in history has generated such a profound impact on the religious development of humankind.
Although we can piece together bits of information about the historical Jesus through analyzing the gospels, please understand, we are not dealing with reliable historical literature. The gospels are in a distinct literary class of their own. Their writers are all anonymous and are describing events that allegedly occurred over 30 years prior to their recording of the details. Furthermore, they are not eyewitnesses but rely heavily on earlier sources and oral tradition to compile their books. Upon close examination and comparisons of the Gospels, scholars have come to the conclusion that the writers are more interested in wooing audiences to their own theological perspectives than they are in preserving accurate historical and biographical details. Each writer adds his own slant to the story, never hesitating embellish on the story or to modify the facts when they deemed it necessary.
My views concerning Christ are based not only on the Gospels, but on my assessment of the scholarly debates that have occurred over the last century. I've also been influenced by contemporary writings.
I view Jesus not as "God in the flesh," but as an extraordinary Jewish rabbi, and philosopher. He came not to establish a new religion, but to reform Judaism of his day. It's very possible that he viewed himself as the Jewish Messiah who would deliver Israel from her persecutors, and would establish the Kingdom of God on the earth.
Many of the principles that Jesus taught were not new, but he certainly had an eloquent way of expressing them. He used parables to make profound spiritual principles simple to understand for the average listener. In his teachings and discourses, Jesus exposed religious hypocrisy, promoted inner spirituality, emphasized the principles of love, forgiveness, self-sacrifice, and never failed stress the importance of reaching out to those who are less fortunate.
In my opinion, Jesus did not view himself as God. This is a position that was later conferred upon him by the Church. Yes, but what about the resurrection, virgin birth, and miracles? There are too many parallels between Christ's deity, resurrection, virgin birth, and miracles and that of contemporary and earlier pagan gods and traditions for me to take them literarily. I believe that these elements were later incorporated into the Gospel in order to compete with contemporary pagan religions.
Most religions teach some form of afterlife, whether it be a return to earth in a terrestrial body through reincarnation, or an ascent into heaven in an immortal, resurrected body. However, from a scientific perspective there is very little, if any, evidence to support belief in an afterlife. Science simply does not support the concept of an eternal soul.
With that said, some researchers believe that the study of Near-Death experiences (NDE's) may give us some insight into whether human consciousness continues when the brain ceases to function. So far, the results of such studies, though fascinating, has been ambiguous and inconclusive.
I do not lend much credibility to the mythological concepts of heaven and hell as presented in the Bible and other in ancient religious literature. Interestingly, the earliest biblical writers believed that human beings descended into a place called Sheol, where the soul would sink into a deep sleep and no longer enjoy full consciousness. The concepts of heaven and hell were incorporated into Judaism as a result of the influence of other religions of other nations, such as Zoroastrianism.