Pavol Mikula
Ever since people have been asking questions connected with religion, existence of God, eventually gods and the way they deal with human problems. But the problem is if there is a satisfactory answer to this question. If there were not a satisfactory answer to religion related questions, there would not be any sense in dealing with it and the only acceptable solution to human problems would be a sheer illusion and escape from reality. So, how can we get to those answers, how to find them? Why have we not succeeded yet in finding them? Cannot we think logically? Let us think for a while about the last question. The basis of logics is deduction. Having a certain number of statements allows us to use them for creating new statements, judgments or simply consequences. Those can be used for creating other consequences, which leads to a formation of a deductive system. Consequence is correct if we used correctly the laws of the logics and if our presumptions were correct. We are able to ensure the first thing. However, there are insuperable obstacles when dealing with the second thing. Going back from consequences to presumptions, we get to statements that are not consequences of any other propositions of the system. Their correctness is not based on presumptions or the logics of deduction. They are called axioms. If we want to think logically, we have to start with accepting a system of axioms. The correctness of our deductive system will naturally depend on whether the accepted axioms are correct. But what does mean that they are correct? In real life we need that our judgments agree with reality. It can be reached only if we make sure that all axioms of the system will agree with reality. But how could we find a system of axioms describing in a true way the whole universe and everything that objectively exists? How to put together such a system? Even such a field like physics has not worked out a system of axioms. If the axiomatic system of geometry and arithmetic consists of several tens of axioms, physics would need many hundreds of them. If we add to this other fields, then the deductive system would have to have countless number of axioms, that would have to be absolutely true (without any exception), which from a long-time perspective is for a man an unrealistic requirement. The practical consequence of this is that our judgments about phenomena, about a world that surrounds us and moreover about ourselves is doubtful and often false. Moreover, everyone makes judgments on the basis of collection of “axioms” gathered from various sources. There are no scientific criteria on the basis of which we could verify that a deductive system of Mr. X is more correct than that of Mr. Y. And this consequently leads to what we know as the confusion of languages and the chaos of the world that we observe. Moreover, it leads to formation of thousands of opinions, movements, coalitions, fractions, philosophies, fronts, unions, organizations, religions, sects, clans and gangs; where every mentioned group follows its own deductive system based on its own invalidated axioms and firmly believes that their approach is exceptional and the only correct. People struggle with many basic problems and all goes for the fact that they themselves are not able to solve them. Where could we find a deductive system providing correct answers and giving a chance to solve these problems and giving instructions for a reasonable, organized and happy life? The mankind has been solving this problem for thousands of years. Many people think that a solution to this problem does not exist and the seeking is just a mere vision and a dream. Yes, the solution definitely surpasses human possibilities. If we reckon only with them, the situation is hopeless. If the world has been created, there must be someone who can say something to it. If a man has been created, there must be a creator that knows him. If there is a goal of our existence, it can be the Creator that has something to say to it.
The question whether God exists and where He is from cannot be answered with certainty. We can say that a Creator probably exists. Moreover, it is evident that the fact there is a Creator does not mean automatically that He is willing to communicate with us. And above all, this argumentation does not justify authenticity of any church or religion. Finally, it is not sufficient to believe in the existence of a Creator, but religion must have sense for a man to make him seek a Creator. If we admit that there is a Creator willing to communicate with us, it is important to realize that there are several possibilities in the relationship between a man and a Creator: We are not equal partners for a Creator and it is Him who defines conditions for starting a relationship with a man and a man can decide if he wants it or not. It is very probable that a Creator is not an oppressor and does not want to harm us. It is little probable that He is ambitious because He would not care for ambitious worshippers. But it is probable that He is demanding about partners and does not care for bootlickers.
The fact that a Creator exists is very probable on the basis of what we can see. If I admit that He cares for us, we cannot say that there is not a God’s message for a man. If there is a God’s message, then it is necessary to know it and verify it. Therefore, it is obvious that it is necessary to seek if there is a God’s message. The first thing that comes to our mind can be that indirect Creator’s message could be a product of creation, which is matter. The relationship between a Creator and a man can be similar to the relationship between matter and a man. Matter has its laws, always follows them and similarly, God has given us certain laws and he obeys them. The ideal teacher in this respect is matter that can show us how to think correctly. Matter can teach us things that will help us reach psychological qualities necessary when seeking a true religion. These psychological qualities can be for example the ability to admit and respect reality, to control our behaviour, to recognize deviations from a correct behaviour and to find defects in our thinking.
If we take into account a direct Creator’s message, then it can be a message communicated directly to people, which can have a form of a contract or a sacred book. The problem is that for Christians the sacred book is the Old and New Testament, for Muslims it is the Koran, for Mormons it is the Book of Mormon, eastern religions have their own sacred books as well and even many sects have their sacred books. In such a situation it is not easy to critically compare and evaluate all possible “messages”. I have chosen one of the hypotheses of the message – The Bible, to which certain circumstances that I do not consider evidence, but a certain subjective guidance, have led me. The truth is that I grew up in a Christian family, although in a nominal one. When I asked a Creator to reveal Himself to me, He sent me a person that taught me to read the Bible and understand it. Later the appeal of the Bible grew stronger when I found out that it did not only offer and promise to a man wonderful possibilities but that it also said that a Creator is willing to give under certain conditions a proof of His existence and confirm a contract with His creature. It means that He is willing to verify His message visibly and not only on the basis of subjective experiences. And it is something that sacred books of other religions do not offer. Logically, if possibilities that the Bible offers and promises were not likely to achieve, the Bible would stand against itself. Let me say a few things that came to my mind when thinking about these things.
John 10, 37-38: „Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. But if I do it, even though you do not believe me; believe the miracles that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father". Jesus does not force us to believe something that we cannot verify. For me it also means that if I do not get a proof about the teaching, I do not have to believe. On the other hand, Jesus refuses to give evidence (Matthew 16, 1-4; Mark 8, 11-13; Luke 12, 54-57) about things that do not need evidence or things that are possible to deduce from the teaching or when He wanted to irritate hypocrites. The following texts also refer to it: John 5, 31: „If I testify about myself (i.e. without any other evidence), my testimony is not valid" and John 8, 17-18: „In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two men is valid. I am one who testifies for myself, my other witness is my Father, who sent me". When I thought about stories of a centurion from Capernaum (Matthew 8,5-10; Luke 7,1-10), a woman subjected to bleeding for twelve years (Matthew 9,18-22; Mark 5,25-34), a Syro-Phoenician woman (Mark 7,24-30) that were praised for having faith I came to conclusion that a good faith comes from a well-thought view of reality, of Jesus and of his deeds. Jesus also recommends making conclusions from authenticity of deeds and from one’s own trying out (see Mark 9, 38-40: „We saw a man that was not one of us and he does a miracle…"). It corresponds with Jesus´ reaction: "...O unbelieving and perverse generation. How long shall I put up with you?..." (Matthew 17, 17; Luke 9, 41), when disciples get rebuked for little faith after not being able to heal an obsessed boy. If faith were just a gift, how could Jesus dare reproach them? If we go through gospels and find passages speaking about faith, we do not find any hint made by Jesus that faith is a gift. Surely, Jesus admits faith without any evidence, based just on the authority of John the Baptist (see John 5, 33-34), but it is a lower quality faith. Today the situation is dramatically different then it was in Jesus´ times. Today, there are plenty of denominations, a few major religions and they all have their authorities. On the basis of what authority should we decide? Just natural sciences teach us not to rely on the authority of people, but on observed facts.
Matthew 13, 1-9; Mark 4, 1-9: A parable of the sower is a wonderful model of how to deal with information. The Bible is a document that contains important information. Offers and promises contained in the Bible are worth our attention. If they are just mere promises then the whole Christianity makes no sense. Or it does make sense and then it is possible to achieve what the Bible promises. It is also what the Bible through Jesus´ lips speaks about. It depends on the reader of the gospel; on the way he understands it and keeps it, because then he chooses what sort of life he will live, for example a troublesome life (Smyrna type - Revelation 2, 8-11), a troubles-free life under protection (Philadelphia type - Revelation 3, 7-13) or a life with an effective self-defense (e.g. Thyatira type - Revelation 2, 8-29).
Matthew 25, 14-30; Luke 19, 11-28: In the parable of the talents God the Creator requires that a person with a certain talent should gain more, and if possible the maximum. There are no limits. In Revelation 3, 14-21 the Bible says that a „lukewarm" person after accepting advice and making repentance („the one who will win") can go as far as to sit next to Jesus on His throne. It is logical, that while gaining more talents, one has to work on himself and grow. Why? Many biblical passages are sealed up (Revelation 10, 4; Revelation 22, 10; Isaiah 29, 11-13 and others), but I need to understand it. If I do not understand the Bible, I do not either understand God the Creator and therefore I cannot fully follow his commandments and conditions and do as He recommends. To do so, I need to improve my ability to distinguish in order to be more sensitive to His remarks about me or others (so that I were not subject to the rebuke: “How that you do not recognize of your own accord?”). In order to acquire new things I need to become a better person that is able to have a contact with God the Creator and that can, consequently, ask God to keep His promises. Then I can avoid problems, be happy, and have a healthy self-confidence (not inferiority complexes). The personal development is a continuous process.
Matthew 15, 14; Luke 6, 39; John 9, 41; Isaiah 29, 9: These and other biblical texts warn us against a mental blindness („Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit"; „If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains"; „Be stunned and amazed; blind yourselves and be sightless..."). These texts make us sure that blindness in religion is a serious problem. The question of blindness has something to do with sin, suffering and level of faith. And it is also a consequence of blindness that we overlook so many things clearly expressed in the gospel as if they did not exist. Blindness is something that the Christian teaching does not deal with, despite the fact that so many current and past problems of Christianity are due to mental blindness. It is a widely known fact that mental blindness exists. How many times we say: “How could have I not seen this?” Blindness brings suffering, decreases level of understanding of a possible God, the Creator. It is also true that it lowers responsibility of a man (ignorance does not make a sin, but the ignorance of law does not excuse us, see also Luke 12, 47-48). The blindness can even be followed by the words: “Woe to…” (Mt 23, 16-31). It is necessary to realize that we do not know a lot of things and that we need to grow and not only to be good. Blindness impedes growth. A healthy-thinking person reckons with a certain level of mental blindness in order to be able to absorb and develop new views, models and results of understanding and also correct wrong views. If I reckon with blindness and do something about it, then I also have a healthy self-confidence and a notion of a God that is better than I am but offers to me to grow continually. It is something that we are not normally used to. In other words: “I want to grow” is one thing and the other is “I have to do something” and, at the same time “I also have to watch myself”.
Finally, we can say that according to the Bible a preacher has to prove his identity and that if he does not prove his identity, he is not to be believed. A person has a right to ask for proofs. They can believe on account of “other people’s testimony” but it is a lower-quality faith and it often stems out of necessity. What is ideal is if people gain proofs themselves. In John 1, 12 we read that Father offered to us to become children of God and in John 14, 12-14 Jesus asks us to do what he was doing and even greater things. We can assume that God wants people to take the most initiative.
The author of the text is a scientist. He is grateful for inspiration to his ex-colleague Dr. J. Kajfozs and the Prague priest B. Bílý.