The Christ Test
Can the new Christ unite the doctrine of world religions?
Perhaps the most difficult conflicts in doctrine regard heaven and hell in contrast with the concept of reincarnation. Each religion explains the nature of the afterlife and beforelife as part of the way in which the universe works. A spiritual explanation of the universe is important for the practice of a particular religion, but it cannot be the absolute explanation since we have limitations in what can be understood. Just as electromagnetic energy can be harnessed, generated and used, the essence of spirituality through Grace and Love can be part of our lives. Even so, no one knows why electromagnetism exists or how it came to be just as no one can ever know the precise nature of God and the purpose behind the universe. Any description of the universe, no matter how scientific, lacks as much understanding as can be found by simply explaining, “God made it that way.”
There are many new ideas coming from all aspects of society that are directly attacking religious doctrine. Evolution, genetics, physics, medicine and many other sciences are chipping away at beliefs just as Galileo’s model of the universe began to compromise the Christian doctrine placing the earth at the physical and spiritual center of God’s perfect universe. And Galileo’s ideas were only the start of moving that center from the Vatican to a point unimaginably far away in time and space. Through science there are explanations that may be used to understand the nature of the soul, God, heaven and hell. Yet, all of these are strong departures in physical description from Christian doctrine - even though the spirit and essential nature are supported. Is it more important to find agreement in the description of the soul or to prove that a soul (in some significant form) actually exists?
Evolution of Religion Through Science
On many of the most divergent concepts, all religions are facing equally disruptive conflicts from new scientific discovery. As beliefs are found to be substantial metaphors for physical reality, science will validate the core of these beliefs despite some great readjustment that must be done to details. What must be understood is that the conflict that keeps Eastern religions and Christianity from meeting is not from theologians, but the acceptance from both sides of the new scientific evidence that ultimately unifies the factual or greater reality on which all religions are based.
The conflict between various religions and science can be illustrated simply. If someone says the sky is blue a lot of people will agree, particularly those who live in a climate where the sky is clear. If someone says the sky is dark and filled with stars many will agree, particularly those who live where the days are short and spend a lot of time awake at night. If someone says the sky is filled with gray clouds those that live in a rainy climate will agree. Even when the sky is not as someone says, people can accept it as doctrine because the sky seems a particular way most of the time and that becomes the assumed “natural state.” If three theologians from the various groups meet, they might argue insistently that the natural state of the sky is one way or another. Within any religion, the doctrine uses examples of the natural state of the universe to describe the character of God and the means by which each person finds salvation. Any time the description of the natural state of the universe is changed through new scientific discovery, there are repercussions in religion as new debate over doctrine ignites.
When scientific explanations about the weather, planetary orbit and the reflection of sunlight in the sky are offered, fundamentalists will reject or misrepresent science since the new explanation of the natural state does not offer a direct metaphor for their doctrine. Some people become disillusioned with their religion without the kind of “proof” made obvious by a “natural state” that agrees with theology. In this way new ideas from other cultures and scientific discovery function as an infection to any particular religion. Yet, the science forces the theologians and believers to reexamine their beliefs to root out politics and hierocracy while reinforcing the fundamental Truth. In the end it is faith that reawakens above the shifting of doctrine.
At some point, when each religion adjusts to scientific discovery they find a common ground in explaining the nature of God and the universe. Science homogenizes doctrine and provides the opportunity to see through the differences between people of different cultures. Tolerance of other religions maintains prejudices while acceptance opens the way for the Love of God to unite people in True faith.
Scientific Proof of God
In many areas the scientific explanation of the universe is just beginning to mature and there will be many centuries before there is anything like a proof of God. Yet, in the last twenty years science has revealed far more about the nature of the universe than ever could have been previously guessed. And the new discoveries are transforming the perception of humankind in monumental ways. Only the advents of language, agriculture, economics and science together have had equal impact on humanity as have had the discoveries and innovations that have begun in our lifetime. Everything is changing in so many extraordinary ways that all but very few can even imagine the outcome. A greater unity of the world’s religions is inevitable. The Christ will not unite doctrine or provide leadership through religion; He will only awaken us to the beginning of the new age in which new knowledge will make obvious to everyone the Truth of God.
The Christ Test Main Page
Should the new Christ perform miracles?
Should the new Christ be Christian?
Are you crazy if think you are Christ?
Should the new Christ teach Christianity?
Can the new Christ unite the doctrine of world religions?
Should the new Christ teach something new?
Should the new Christ begin a new religion?
Should everyone know the new Christ?
Should the new Christ be my personal Savior?
Should the new Christ be a man who
lives as God, teaches as God, loves as God and works as God?