The existence of other beliefs is often one of the most difficult things for the Christian world to deal with. It can be hard to find a tangible difference between them and Christianity, and the problems within the Church don't help with Christianity's promotion. I understand why many are not prepared to deal with them since I've struggled with them also, but I believe my experience thus far has produced some information that may be able to change how people understand them.
I think one of the biggest misconceptions about being a Christian is that it's just a simple matter of making an oral declaration on what you believe at a moment in time, but afterwards it's a lot less relevant what you're doing with your time. Perhaps the misunderstanding of this is in the common teaching of how one becomes a Christian, with so much emphasis on a single prayer being the proof of one's eternal security. I believe this approach can work, but I also think that for many it has led to a misunderstanding of what is expected of a follower of Christ. The Bible teaches that a Christian's life should involve a consistent turning from sin and a constant striving for improvements in holiness and good works, and I believe these are absolutely mandatory components in each person's belief system, regardless of how the person understands the goal of salvation to be attained (1 Thessalonians 4:1).
The belief that one will be saved by verbal affirmation alone can tempt one to become complacent in the pursuit of spiritual improvement, but I believe Christ warned us about this very thing (Matthew 7:21). The belief that Jesus is the mediator between man and God means next to nothing in itself: it only gives the believer the title of "servant". But we know that there are two kinds of servants, the profitable and the unprofitable, with the unprofitable receiving the same reward as the unbelievers.
Besides good works, one of our most important responsiblities is building our faith. But because of the overwhelming amount of separation in the Church, I think many believers are living a life that actually shelters them from living by faith. For most, their lifestyle does not require that they go anywhere near other religions, so-called "Christian cults" (Mormonism, for example), other denominations, or anyone else who has different beliefs than themselves. Because of this, I think that many believers, though seeking to do the right thing, are hardly living by faith at all. Our faith means little without some trial to test it, but many people live in an environment where there is no such trial. How can your faith be tested living in a country that doesn't care what you believe, and going to a church full of familiar people who also believe what you believe? Within one's church, it's also easy to physically avoid a member who's beliefs differ from yours, and if you can't physically, you could still avoid faith by not talking about those beliefs. If witnessing to the unruly, it's usually assumed they were brought up believing the Bible, and if they weren't, you can always separate from them.
The presence of an opposing belief can show how much faith a person really has but for many, the only beliefs they can stand to be around are their own. Yet we know the Bible tells us that we should eventually be able to deal with the presence of other beliefs (Ephesians 4:14). *Without acting on his faith, a believer won't be able to deal with another religion or other Christians. I believe each of us should eventually have a personal way of responding to the other beliefs in the world and not by hiding from them, and that this way should be attained from our own experience, meaning not from a tip given to us.
We know that bad behaviour from the Church can turn a person away from Christianity, whether the person is a curious onlooker or is familiar with it. But I don't think that every one that dismisses the faith does so because of a wilfull refusal to deal with the work: I believe some people must see a real demonstration of Christianity or they honestly cannot believe it. At some point, we've all tried our best to honestly judge the value of something only to determine it to be worthless, but later have our conclusion changed only by seeing a blatant display of its value. I think this process is in the nature of how information is learned. Except for a handful of things we pretty much know from birth, the worth of things must be shown to us by our environment. So it makes sense that not everyone can see the value of Christianity by rhetoric, from Bible verses, from spiritual theories and the like, and not because of their own stubbornness but because these explanations just don't make sense to them (a "hands-on" learner rather than a "book" learner, for example) . *I believe that if believers don't show these types the value of Christianity, they have no reason to believe it (John 10:37, 15:22). It's a sobering thought that our actions can make people that could've believed the Gospel unable to do so. This is another incentive to increase our faith.
To help those that struggle with other religions, I will share what I believe I understand about the situation. It is commonly accepted that there is some truth in all religions, but at the same time there is often resistance to them, as if they carry a different "brand" of the truth as does Christianity. But we know the Bible teaches that there is one God, so there aren't different brands of the truth. *I believe Jesus Christ was sent to be the completion and unification of the truths present in all other religions, which were meant to be temporary (Matthew 5:17, John 10:16, 11:51-52, Galatians 3:22-26, Romans 10:4). So there is no competition with the truth seen in other religions but all the same truth, and that truth has merely been translated into Christianity. For example, Buddhism teaches what it calls "The Middle Way", a medium level of exertion in the pursuit of righteousness: the Bible also teaches this (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17, Romans 12:6-8, 1 Peter 4:11, 2 Corinthians 8:12). Some religions teach of the value of pain as a way to purity; this is also in Christianity (Acts 14:22, Philippians 1:29). So I believe the reason why Christianity is the "one true faith" is because it's the perfection of all religion rolled into one. I think the role of Jesus was to take the truth in every religion, fill in the gaps, put these perfected truths all into one place, *and provide the payment for sin which no religion's works could accomplish.
I don't believe being raised around Christianity gives any advantages over those who were not; there is only responsibility. *The Christian doctrine shouldn't be thought of as something that we give to the rest of the world as if we're doing it a favor: it does not "belong" to those who believe it or are currently following it. Whoever believes this doctrine has a responsibility to properly represent it to others to the best of his ability, including non-believers (Romans 11:20-21).
For many non-Christians trying to do what's right, it may be that the main realization they must have is that their own works are inadequate to save them. I believe if any of them should be guilty of anything, it could be summed up in that they stopped their pursuit short of completion. But just to show that the believer has no advantage over them, the same threat applies to us: we know that we cannot "draw back". I believe that in the life of anyone trying to do what's right is the same consistent turning from sin; there is just a difference in the nature of the turning. It's kind of like the effect of a magnet: the nature of the attraction for some objects is that they must turn to face the magnet, rotating up to 180 degrees, while those already facing it (the Christian) will keep being pulled in the same direction, but it's the same force that's drawing all of them equally. I believe we are all striving for the same standard: the pursuit of the same God, the same pursuit of holiness, and faith in the man called "The Son of God".
Since there is now one faith, I see the past religions as the forerunners to Christianity. I think it's similar to an old technology vs a new one: a lot of beta versions of a program released at different times/places versus the final, officially released completed version. As a concept, the need for the change from old to new also makes sense: if product A was in location A, product B was in location B, product C was in location C, and a location D that contained products A-D came along, there's no longer a need to go to the old locations. The old ones were good and it was most appropriate that they were used because it was the best that was available at that time, but when something more complete arrives, they shouldn't be used anymore (1 Corinthians 13:10). Similarly, I believe we are no longer to be split among various religions but all under one faith, one standard to strive for, which is Christ. Believing this could help people respect other religions while staying rooted in Christianity as the religions could be seen as additional witnesses of the truth of God (Acts 14:16-17): good for learning, being from God, but as having been discontinued as many see the Old Testament.
I think an extension of the idea of different brands of the truth is also seen in concerns that another religion can "steal" Christian principles and use them to promote itself. For example, I've seen a Christian website that stated in its terms for registration that no post containing any part of its "Statement of Faith" could be used to argue in favor of another religion. I used to wonder myself how this concern should be resolved. *But now I believe the solution is to encourage this very thing. We know that a Christian is not to judge others but to follow the teachings of Christ and trust in God beyond this. But what makes sense about this is that if all of the principles of Christianity were applied to that religion, it's now Christianity! It's well recognized in the Church that the identity of a Christian is not known by a title or by his words, but that a follower of Christ is known by his works. So if anyone does the works of a "Christian" (as described in the Bible) and verbal affirmation means little, I don't believe their righteousness is lost over not giving an oral pledge of alliegiance to Jesus or from having a different name, should either remain in the end (Acts 10:34-35).
This text does not mean to imply that the Church was living a lie up until now. Each believer's standing in the eyes of God is determined by his own faith, whether he believes he is living as a Christian should. But if anyone believes this is new information that is true and relevant, I think you can no longer continue at the same level of performance. Also, for any who want to dismiss this text over a different interpretation of certain verses, I've included my beliefs to confess them to others and because I believe this information can change the condition of things in the Christian world because it did for me. As for others' interpretations, I think there are many ways to reach these conclusions and that any way is a good way. But a true examination of the relevance of a belief should not come from whether a scriptual interpretation agrees with another person's interpretation but from one's actions and the spirit behind them (2 Timothy 3:16-17). This text doesn't come in the spirit of pride to merely provoke or accuse the Church nor to exalt myself but to add to the situation, in the spirit of obedience, something that I believe is lacking and can help solve the problems that are well known to everyone, and also to remind each member of the body of Christ to do their part in helping to solve these problems (as I am also trying to do).
I think one of the biggest misconceptions about being a Christian is that it's just a simple matter of making an oral declaration on what you believe at a moment in time, but afterwards it's a lot less relevant what you're doing with your time. Perhaps the misunderstanding of this is in the common teaching of how one becomes a Christian, with so much emphasis on a single prayer being the proof of one's eternal security. I believe this approach can work, but I also think that for many it has led to a misunderstanding of what is expected of a follower of Christ. The Bible teaches that a Christian's life should involve a consistent turning from sin and a constant striving for improvements in holiness and good works, and I believe these are absolutely mandatory components in each person's belief system, regardless of how the person understands the goal of salvation to be attained (1 Thessalonians 4:1).
The belief that one will be saved by verbal affirmation alone can tempt one to become complacent in the pursuit of spiritual improvement, but I believe Christ warned us about this very thing (Matthew 7:21). The belief that Jesus is the mediator between man and God means next to nothing in itself: it only gives the believer the title of "servant". But we know that there are two kinds of servants, the profitable and the unprofitable, with the unprofitable receiving the same reward as the unbelievers.
Besides good works, one of our most important responsiblities is building our faith. But because of the overwhelming amount of separation in the Church, I think many believers are living a life that actually shelters them from living by faith. For most, their lifestyle does not require that they go anywhere near other religions, so-called "Christian cults" (Mormonism, for example), other denominations, or anyone else who has different beliefs than themselves. Because of this, I think that many believers, though seeking to do the right thing, are hardly living by faith at all. Our faith means little without some trial to test it, but many people live in an environment where there is no such trial. How can your faith be tested living in a country that doesn't care what you believe, and going to a church full of familiar people who also believe what you believe? Within one's church, it's also easy to physically avoid a member who's beliefs differ from yours, and if you can't physically, you could still avoid faith by not talking about those beliefs. If witnessing to the unruly, it's usually assumed they were brought up believing the Bible, and if they weren't, you can always separate from them.
The presence of an opposing belief can show how much faith a person really has but for many, the only beliefs they can stand to be around are their own. Yet we know the Bible tells us that we should eventually be able to deal with the presence of other beliefs (Ephesians 4:14). *Without acting on his faith, a believer won't be able to deal with another religion or other Christians. I believe each of us should eventually have a personal way of responding to the other beliefs in the world and not by hiding from them, and that this way should be attained from our own experience, meaning not from a tip given to us.
We know that bad behaviour from the Church can turn a person away from Christianity, whether the person is a curious onlooker or is familiar with it. But I don't think that every one that dismisses the faith does so because of a wilfull refusal to deal with the work: I believe some people must see a real demonstration of Christianity or they honestly cannot believe it. At some point, we've all tried our best to honestly judge the value of something only to determine it to be worthless, but later have our conclusion changed only by seeing a blatant display of its value. I think this process is in the nature of how information is learned. Except for a handful of things we pretty much know from birth, the worth of things must be shown to us by our environment. So it makes sense that not everyone can see the value of Christianity by rhetoric, from Bible verses, from spiritual theories and the like, and not because of their own stubbornness but because these explanations just don't make sense to them (a "hands-on" learner rather than a "book" learner, for example) . *I believe that if believers don't show these types the value of Christianity, they have no reason to believe it (John 10:37, 15:22). It's a sobering thought that our actions can make people that could've believed the Gospel unable to do so. This is another incentive to increase our faith.
To help those that struggle with other religions, I will share what I believe I understand about the situation. It is commonly accepted that there is some truth in all religions, but at the same time there is often resistance to them, as if they carry a different "brand" of the truth as does Christianity. But we know the Bible teaches that there is one God, so there aren't different brands of the truth. *I believe Jesus Christ was sent to be the completion and unification of the truths present in all other religions, which were meant to be temporary (Matthew 5:17, John 10:16, 11:51-52, Galatians 3:22-26, Romans 10:4). So there is no competition with the truth seen in other religions but all the same truth, and that truth has merely been translated into Christianity. For example, Buddhism teaches what it calls "The Middle Way", a medium level of exertion in the pursuit of righteousness: the Bible also teaches this (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17, Romans 12:6-8, 1 Peter 4:11, 2 Corinthians 8:12). Some religions teach of the value of pain as a way to purity; this is also in Christianity (Acts 14:22, Philippians 1:29). So I believe the reason why Christianity is the "one true faith" is because it's the perfection of all religion rolled into one. I think the role of Jesus was to take the truth in every religion, fill in the gaps, put these perfected truths all into one place, *and provide the payment for sin which no religion's works could accomplish.
I don't believe being raised around Christianity gives any advantages over those who were not; there is only responsibility. *The Christian doctrine shouldn't be thought of as something that we give to the rest of the world as if we're doing it a favor: it does not "belong" to those who believe it or are currently following it. Whoever believes this doctrine has a responsibility to properly represent it to others to the best of his ability, including non-believers (Romans 11:20-21).
For many non-Christians trying to do what's right, it may be that the main realization they must have is that their own works are inadequate to save them. I believe if any of them should be guilty of anything, it could be summed up in that they stopped their pursuit short of completion. But just to show that the believer has no advantage over them, the same threat applies to us: we know that we cannot "draw back". I believe that in the life of anyone trying to do what's right is the same consistent turning from sin; there is just a difference in the nature of the turning. It's kind of like the effect of a magnet: the nature of the attraction for some objects is that they must turn to face the magnet, rotating up to 180 degrees, while those already facing it (the Christian) will keep being pulled in the same direction, but it's the same force that's drawing all of them equally. I believe we are all striving for the same standard: the pursuit of the same God, the same pursuit of holiness, and faith in the man called "The Son of God".
Since there is now one faith, I see the past religions as the forerunners to Christianity. I think it's similar to an old technology vs a new one: a lot of beta versions of a program released at different times/places versus the final, officially released completed version. As a concept, the need for the change from old to new also makes sense: if product A was in location A, product B was in location B, product C was in location C, and a location D that contained products A-D came along, there's no longer a need to go to the old locations. The old ones were good and it was most appropriate that they were used because it was the best that was available at that time, but when something more complete arrives, they shouldn't be used anymore (1 Corinthians 13:10). Similarly, I believe we are no longer to be split among various religions but all under one faith, one standard to strive for, which is Christ. Believing this could help people respect other religions while staying rooted in Christianity as the religions could be seen as additional witnesses of the truth of God (Acts 14:16-17): good for learning, being from God, but as having been discontinued as many see the Old Testament.
I think an extension of the idea of different brands of the truth is also seen in concerns that another religion can "steal" Christian principles and use them to promote itself. For example, I've seen a Christian website that stated in its terms for registration that no post containing any part of its "Statement of Faith" could be used to argue in favor of another religion. I used to wonder myself how this concern should be resolved. *But now I believe the solution is to encourage this very thing. We know that a Christian is not to judge others but to follow the teachings of Christ and trust in God beyond this. But what makes sense about this is that if all of the principles of Christianity were applied to that religion, it's now Christianity! It's well recognized in the Church that the identity of a Christian is not known by a title or by his words, but that a follower of Christ is known by his works. So if anyone does the works of a "Christian" (as described in the Bible) and verbal affirmation means little, I don't believe their righteousness is lost over not giving an oral pledge of alliegiance to Jesus or from having a different name, should either remain in the end (Acts 10:34-35).
This text does not mean to imply that the Church was living a lie up until now. Each believer's standing in the eyes of God is determined by his own faith, whether he believes he is living as a Christian should. But if anyone believes this is new information that is true and relevant, I think you can no longer continue at the same level of performance. Also, for any who want to dismiss this text over a different interpretation of certain verses, I've included my beliefs to confess them to others and because I believe this information can change the condition of things in the Christian world because it did for me. As for others' interpretations, I think there are many ways to reach these conclusions and that any way is a good way. But a true examination of the relevance of a belief should not come from whether a scriptual interpretation agrees with another person's interpretation but from one's actions and the spirit behind them (2 Timothy 3:16-17). This text doesn't come in the spirit of pride to merely provoke or accuse the Church nor to exalt myself but to add to the situation, in the spirit of obedience, something that I believe is lacking and can help solve the problems that are well known to everyone, and also to remind each member of the body of Christ to do their part in helping to solve these problems (as I am also trying to do).
