Questions d'un Jeune ex-catholique : Les vérités méconnues de la foi Catholique

Récemment, une personne proche m'a partagé une série de questions qu'elle a reçues de la part d'un jeune protestant Rwandais ayant quitté l'Église Catholique. Ce dernier, s'interrogeait sur les fondements des croyances Catholiques et leur raisons d'être. Dans ce blogpost, je vais aborder ces questions brièvement et clarifier certains aspects de la foi Catholique, afin de répondre à ces préoccupations légitimes et souvent mal comprises.

......................

1) "Où est-il écrit dans la Bible que nous pouvons prier en nous appuyant sur la Vierge Marie et les Saints ?"

Réponse 1: Dans le livre de l'Apocalypse, nous trouvons une description des saints au ciel, représentés par les 24 vieillards (littéralement traduits du terme grec "presbuteros", signifiant anciens). Un ange est également mentionné, portant les prières des saints, qu'il présente à Dieu. Cela offre une image symbolique de la manière dont nos prières sont apportées devant Dieu par les anges et les autres saints célestes. Cette représentation souligne l'idée que les prières des fidèles sont soutenues et portées au ciel par l'intercession d'autre saints:

• Apocalypse 5:8-10: "Et quand il eut pris le livre, les quatre êtres vivants et les vingt-quatre vieillards se prosternèrent devant l'Agneau, ayant chacun des harpes et des coupes d'or pleines de parfums, qui sont les prières des saints. Et ils chantaient un cantique nouveau, disant: Tu es digne de prendre le livre et d'en ouvrir les sceaux; car tu as été immolé, et tu nous as rachetés à Dieu par ton sang, de toute tribu, langue, peuple et nation."

• Apocalypse 8:3-4 : "Un autre ange vint, et il se tint sur l'autel, ayant un encensoir d'or; on lui donna beaucoup de parfums, afin qu'il les offrît, avec les prières de tous les saints, sur l'autel d'or qui est devant le trône. La fumée des parfums monta, avec les prières des saints, de la main de l'ange devant Dieu.” 

On trouve également l’histoire du grand prêtre Onias, qui a eu une vision du prophète Jérémie. Bien que mort depuis plusieurs siècles, Jérémie continuait à prier pour le peuple juif. Il s'est écoulé environ 400 à 500 ans entre la mort de Jérémie (vers 570 avant Jésus-Christ) et la rédaction du livre biblique des Maccabées (entre 124 et 63 avant Jésus-Christ). Cet épisode montre clairement que les saints, même après leur mort, peuvent intercéder pour ceux qui sont encore sur terre:

• 2 Maccabées 15:12-16 : "Voici ce qu'il vit: Onias, ce grand prêtre, homme vertueux et bon, modeste dans ses manières, doux dans ses paroles, et exercé dès l'enfance dans toute espèce de vertu, étendait les mains et priait pour toute l'assemblée des Juifs. Ensuite il parut un autre homme remarquable par sa vieillesse et sa dignité; son aspect respirait la majesté; une grandeur imposante marquait tous ses traits. Onias prit la parole, et dit: Celui-ci est Jérémie, le prophète de Dieu, qui prie beaucoup pour le peuple et pour la ville sainte."

Nous avons également l'exemple du prophète Samuel, qui, même après sa mort, a été attribué une intercession prophétique. Cette intercession a servi à effacer l'iniquité du peuple juif, comme le mentionne le livre biblique de Siracide. Cet épisode illustre que les saints peuvent continuer à agir en faveur du peuple de Dieu, même après leur passage dans l'au-delà.:

• Siracide 46:13-20 : "Samuel fut aimé du Seigneur. Il établit la royauté et oignit des princes sur son peuple. Par la loi du Seigneur, il jugea l'assemblée, et le Seigneur visita Jacob. Par sa fidélité, il fut reconnu prophète, et il montra ses paroles comme un visionnaire véridique. Il invoqua le Seigneur Tout-Puissant lorsqu'il fut pressé par ses ennemis tout autour, et il offrit un agneau sans tache. Le Seigneur tonna du ciel, et il fit retentir sa voix. Il extermina les princes de Tyr, et tous les chefs des Philistins. Avant le temps de son sommeil éternel, il témoigna devant le Seigneur et son oint: Je n'ai pris de personne, ni taureau, ni agneau, et personne n'a porté plainte contre lui. Après son sommeil, il prophétisa encore, et annonça au roi la fin de sa vie; il fit entendre sa voix de dessous la terre, en prophétie, pour effacer l'iniquité du peuple."

Pour lire plus à ce sujet, voici un lien: https://practicalhelpwitheric.blogspot.com/2024/05/intercession-of-saints-no-need-for.html

2) "Pourquoi se confesser à un prêtre si lui aussi est pécheur?"

Réponse 2: important de noter que le critère établi par le Seigneur n’est pas que le prêtre soit sans péché, mais qu’il soit un juste de Dieu, car, comme le dit l'Écriture, "la prière du juste a une grande efficacité" (Jacques 5:16). Les prêtres, par leur ordination, sont rendus justes par le Christ et ont reçu le ministère particulier de la réconciliation, transmis par Jésus aux apôtres, puis transmis par la succession apostolique. En tant que successeurs des apôtres, les prêtres exercent ce ministère de pardon et de réconciliation (Jean 20:21-23), agissant ainsi au nom du Christ dans le sacrement de la confession. Cette pratique s’appuie donc sur l’autorité donnée par le Christ lui-même aux apôtres, et à travers eux aux prêtres, pour pardonner les péchés et réconcilier les fidèles avec Dieu.

• Jacques 5:16 : "Confessez donc vos péchés les uns aux autres, et priez les uns pour les autres, afin que vous soyez guéris. La prière fervente du juste a une grande efficacité."

• Jean 20:21-23 : "Jésus leur dit de nouveau: La paix soit avec vous! Comme le Père m'a envoyé, moi aussi je vous envoie. Après ces paroles, il souffla sur eux, et leur dit: Recevez le Saint-Esprit. Ceux à qui vous pardonnerez les péchés, ils leur seront pardonnés; et ceux à qui vous les retiendrez, ils leur seront retenus."

• Actes 19:18-19 : "Plusieurs de ceux qui avaient cru venaient confesser et déclarer ce qu'ils avaient fait. Et un bon nombre de ceux qui avaient exercé les arts magiques, ayant apporté leurs livres, les brûlèrent devant tout le monde; on en estima la valeur à cinquante mille pièces d'argent."

3. "L'utilisation d'images sacrées, d'images de Dieu, de la Sainte Marie et des saints."

Résponse 3: L'idée d'utiliser des images sacrées lorsque l'on entre en présence de Dieu vient directement de Dieu lui-même, telle qu'elle a été révélée au patriarche Moïse. Dieu n'est pas opposé aux images sacrées, mais il est en effet contre les images représentant d'autres divinités (des idoles). Il ne tolère aucune autre divinité devant Lui en présence de Son peuple. Cependant, les images utilisées pour honorer Dieu et guider les fidèles vers Lui sont permises et même encouragées, comme le montre l'exemple des chérubins sur l'Arche de l'Alliance.

• Exode 25:18-22 : "Tu feras deux chérubins d’or; tu les feras d’or battu, aux deux extrémités du propitiatoire; fais un chérubin à l’une des extrémités, et un chérubin à l’autre extrémité. Tu feras les chérubins sortant du propitiatoire à ses deux extrémités."

• Nombres 21:8-9 : "L'Éternel dit à Moïse: Fais-toi un serpent brûlant, et place-le sur une perche; quiconque aura été mordu, et le regardera, conservera la vie. Moïse fit un serpent d'airain, et le plaça sur une perche; et quiconque avait été mordu par un serpent, et regardait le serpent d'airain, conservait la vie."

Voici un lien pour pousser un peux plus la reflection: https://youtu.be/jJhvG6z0qno

 4. "Prier pour les défunts?"

Réponse 4: Nous avons aussi l'exemple des soldats juifs qui, après être tombés au combat, furent découverts avec des amulettes d'idoles, ce qui était considéré comme un péché grave pour des Juifs. En effet, ils n’auraient pas dû toucher à ces idoles. Pourtant, Israël a prié pour ces soldats même après leur mort, demandant à Dieu de leur pardonner cette offense. En plus de la prière, une collecte fut organisée pour offrir un sacrifice d'expiation au Temple de Jérusalem pour leurs péchés. La Bible qualifie cet acte de prier pour les défunts et d'offrir un sacrifice pour leur pardon de "fort bien et noble" et le décrit comme une "pensée pieuse et sainte" (2 Maccabées 12:39-45). 

Cet épisode souligne l'importance de la prière pour les morts et montre que cette pratique est enracinée dans les traditions bibliques.

·        2 Maccabées 12:39-45 : "Le lendemain, Judas et ses compagnons vinrent, pour enlever les corps de ceux qui étaient tombés, et les déposer avec leurs proches dans les tombeaux de leurs pères. Ils trouvèrent sous la tunique de chacun des morts des objets consacrés aux idoles de Jamnia, que la loi interdit aux Juifs; il devint alors évident à tous que c'était là la cause de leur mort. Tous bénirent la conduite du Seigneur, juste juge, qui révèle les choses cachées, et se mirent en prière pour implorer le pardon du péché commis. 

    Le vaillant Judas exhorta le peuple à se garder du péché, car ils avaient vu de leurs propres yeux ce qui était arrivé à cause du péché de ceux qui étaient tombés. Après cela, il fit une collecte parmi tous ses soldats, environ deux mille drachmes d'argent, qu'il envoya à Jérusalem pour offrir un sacrifice expiatoire, agissant fort bien et noblement dans la pensée de la résurrection. Car s'il n'avait pas espéré que ceux qui étaient tombés ressusciteraient, il eût été superflu et sot de prier pour les morts. Mais, s'il pensait à la magnifique récompense réservée à ceux qui s'endorment dans la piété, c'était là une pensée pieuse et sainte. C'est pourquoi il fit faire ce sacrifice expiatoire pour les morts, afin qu'ils fussent délivrés de leur péché."

St. Paul a prié pour Onesiphore qui etait dejà mort:

·        2Timothé 1:16  “Que le Seigneur répande sa miséricorde sur la maison d'Onésiphore, car il m'a souvent consolé, et il n'a pas eu honte de mes chaînes; au contraire, lorsqu'il est venu à Rome, il m'a cherché avec beaucoup d'empressement, et il m'a trouvé.  Que le Seigneur lui donne d'obtenir miséricorde auprès du Seigneur en ce jour-là. Tu sais mieux que personne combien de services il m'a rendus à Éphèse”

 Voici un lien pour plus d’info sur Onesiphore: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2015/08/st-paul-prayed-for-a-dead-man-onesiphorus.html

5) "Baptême des enfants"

Réponse 5: Pour comprendre le baptême des enfants, il est important de comprendre l'alliance de la circoncision chez les Juifs. 

Genèse 17:12: "A l'âge de huit jours, tout mâle parmi vous sera circoncis, selon vos générations, qu'il soit né dans la maison, ou qu'il soit acquis à prix d'argent de tout fils d'étranger, qui n'est point de ta race."

Dans le Nouveau Testament, le baptême d'eau est la nouvelle circoncision en Christ, remplaçant la circoncision juive de l'Ancien Testament. 

Colossiens 2:11-12: "Et c'est en lui que vous avez été circoncis d'une circoncision que la main n'a pas faite, mais de la circoncision de Christ, qui consiste dans le dépouillement du corps de la chair: ayant été ensevelis avec lui par le baptême, vous êtes aussi ressuscités en lui et avec lui, par la foi en la puissance de Dieu, qui l'a ressuscité des morts."

La circoncision juive incluait les enfants, même les nourrissons de 8 jours. De la même manière, la nouvelle alliance qui est indiqué par le baptême d’eau, aussi appelée la circoncision en Christ, inclut également les enfants des croyants, tout comme l'ancienne circoncision de la loi incluait les enfants des croyants dans l'Ancien Testament.

Actes 2:38-39: "Pierre leur dit: Repentez-vous, et que chacun de vous soit baptisé au nom de Jésus-Christ, pour le pardon de vos péchés; et vous recevrez le don du Saint-Esprit. Car la promesse est pour vous, pour vos enfants, et pour tous ceux qui sont au loin, en aussi grand nombre que le Seigneur notre Dieu les appellera."

Science and Religion: Questions about the Scientific Revolution

A couple of months ago, I was on an online debate with a group of non-Christians (atheist/agnostic) discussing the interface between Religion and Science, particularly the Christian religion. This latter designation is important since all of them seemed to have been former Christians by their own account. The dialogue touched many topics and one of them is the claim that Christianity has been opposed to Science in previous centuries. When asked to prove their points, they offered the following two names as the alleged proof that there was religious persecution of scientists in Medieval time. Of course, they always go for many centuries in the past because it is not obvious now to use contemporary history to support their case. They always rely on ancient history, I assume, hoping that people would not check the historical record to verify their claims. I have learned that when in dialogue with a virulent secularist (atheists and others), ALWAYS FACT-CHECK them! ALWAYS! Their persuasiveness rely on their interlocutor ignorance of history, science, and philosophy.

I. QUESTION ABOUT RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION OF SCIENTISTS?

1) The Case of Michael Servetus:

Michael Servetus wasn't executed for his science but because he entered in conflict with protestant reformers by upholding the heretical doctrine of 'Unitarianism'. He published his book, The Restoration of Christianity, which put him in trouble with his co-religionist reformers. The book was not a scientific book as the title itself shows! The Cambridge trained Historian Dr. Hannam had this to say about Severus: 

"The book infuriated Calvin, to whom Servetus had foolishly sent an advance copy ... Servertus escaped but fled through Geneva where Calvin himself lived. There he was apprehended and at Calvin's insistence, executed as a heretic. In later years Servetus's work on the heart led to him enjoying a reputation as a martyr for science. This is unwarranted because he was executed for purely religious ideas that had nothing to do with anatomy."

- Source: God's Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science. Chapter 14: The Reformation. Page 292 - (ePub version)

Even today when a Government enjails or executes someone for an ideological reason, that person doesn't automatically become a martyr for what the person happened to have studied at school (example, electrical engineer) nor doesn't he become a martyr for the type of professional work he does (example, electronic maintenance). His persecution is unrelated to his educational background or professional work. So it is the same as the ancient trials on heresy. If the trial is about doctrines, then this can't be transferred to whatever the person's job or lack of a job happened to be (gardener, scientist, book-keeper, etc). As sad and regrettable was Servertus trial, he was put in trial for his religious views, and NOT for any scientific ideas.

2) The Case of Bruno Giordano:

As unfortunate as Bruno death was, it is nevertheless important to present the historical data correctly. Bruno Giordano was not a scientist but rather a mystic as documented historian Tim O Neil (Tim is an atheist by the way):

Bruno the Mystic: To begin with, any knowledge of Bruno that goes beyond internet memes will make the idea that he was in any sense of the word a “scientist” immediately dubious.  Bruno was a brilliant and eclectic thinker who ranged over a number of the disciplines of his day, and so is difficult to put into any one category.  He was a metaphysicist, a magus, an expert in mnemonics, a neo-Pythagorean, a neo-Platonist and an astrologer. He advocated a kind of philosophical reasoning, but it was one focused on images and symbols and the use of visualisations and metaphors.  He had a cosmology that included the physical universe, but he rejected the use of mathematics to explore it, considering that too limiting and preferring what he believed was his own intuitive sense for symbols, sacred geometries and what simply felt right. His eccentric melange of ideas included things like Copernicus’ heliocentrism and Nicholas of Cusa’s centreless infinite universe, but it also included magic, stars and planets with animating souls, ancient Egyptian religion and Pythagorean symbolism.  Probably the best word to describe him in modern terms is to say he was a “mystic”."

- Source: https://historyforatheists.com/2017/03/the-great-myths-3-giordano-bruno-was-a-martyr-for-science/

Moreover, Bruno's trouble with the Catholic Church had nothing to do with him doing science since he wasn't a scientist to start with. It was about theology. Heresy is always about a fight against orthodox theology from within the ranks and nothing else. Bruno wrote books calling (i) the Pope the beast of the apocalypse (while still being a Church member), (ii) denying the trinity, teaching the view that the Holy Spirit was the soul/spirit of the world, (iii) teaching that only the Hebrews descended from Adam and Eve and that the rest of the Nations descended from two people that God made the day before (hence questioning the doctrine on the original sin); (iv) that Christ was not God, but a distinguished magician that mocked people, etc.

Clearly, his many grievances against the Church were doctrinal in nature and not scientific. And he was handed over to secular authority after his ecclesial judgment on these matters of doctrines and not for any science-related issue. Also, see the translated letter from 1606, the day he was executed by the secular authority that details the issues of Bruno in his many trials and they happened to have been doctrinal in nature. As unfortunate as his death was, Bruno doesn't qualify as the Science Martyr some ill-intended atheists try to pass him for.

II. OTHER QUESTION ABOUT SCIENCE AND RELIGION?

3) Kick Starting the Scientific Revolution (1543 - 1632)

When the uninformed skeptics finally realize that Christianity has been quite favorable and conducive to the emergence and growth of modern science in the medieval period, they usually react in two ways: The first option, they recognize their error and concede the point and no longer regard Science and the Christian religion as being at war. The second option, they double down in their historical ignorance and try to find alternative reasons for how science might have arisen in medieval times without giving credit to Catholic Christianity.

In my experience, my skeptical interlocutor (usually the virulent no-nothing atheist type) chooses option two and proposes alternatives for he can't bring himself to the realization that he was historical clueless about his misgivings against Christianity. The particular skeptics I was exchanging with made two particular claims: (1) The precursor to the scientific revolution started by Christian scientists was preceded by the discovery of mathematical documents preserved by non-Christian Arabs. (2) The printing press was the technological advancement that kick-started the whole thing and that it is not thanks to Christian fervor or Christian interest to knowledge and progress.

Allow me to interacts with these two claims: 

(a) Recovery of Ancient Documents

The recovery of ancient Greek philosophy documents from Arab countries (which were the possession of Eastern Greek-speaking Christian Monk before the Islamic invasion) was recovered purposely by the Latin speaking Christian monks, priests and clerics of the West who would take these works written in classical Greek and Arabic languages and translate them in Latin for a wider consumption in Cathedral schools and later in Universities which were mainly promoted by the Church. These works were translated from the 12th century onward up to the time of the 'scientific revolution'.

As Cambridge historian Hannam acknowledges, these documents were acquired and translated by Churchmen:

"The most prolific of the translators was Gerard of Cremona (1114-84), who spent many years in Toledo working on the manuscripts in the library there."

Source: The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution; Chapter 4: The 12th century Renaissance. Page 63

 We also know that Gerard of Cremona worked in concert with other translators in Toledo under the direction of Bishop Raymond.

(b) The Invention of the Printing Press

The Printing Press was produced by the religiously motivate German, Johannes Gutemberg. If you wondered, why on earth the Printing Press which spurred the scientific revolution as my skeptic friend would have argued was first invented? I bet that the answer to the inventor of the printing machine would surprise many. Here is a line that Gutemberg wrote on the first book that he printed:

"God suffers in the multitude of souls whom His word can not reach. Religious truth is imprisoned in a small number of manuscript books, which confine instead of spread the public treasure. Let us break the seal which seals up holy things and give wings to Truth in order that she may win every soul that comes into the world by her word no longer written at great expense by hands easily palsied, but multiplied like the wind by an untiring machine. Yes, it is a press, certainly, but a press from which shall soon flow in inexhaustible streams the most abundant and most marvelous liquor that has ever flowed to relieve the thirst of man! Through it God will spread His Word. A spring of pure truth shall flow from it! Like a new star, it shall scatter the darkness of ignorance, and cause a light heretofore unknown to shine among men."

– Lines written in the Gutenberg Bible by Johannes Gutenberg

 Isn't it interesting to note that the printing press was made with the inventor's religious fervor to see the multi-production of Bibles to reach the whole world as the driving force and impetus for his ingenuity? 

 Hence we see that both main points the skeptic mentioned as instrumental to the scientific revolution were essentially done, carried out, and produced by motivated Christians in the Middle age. There is no escaping this fact. What is sure, there were NO atheists or skeptical secularists on the horizon when science was emerging. For all their grievances against religion, their historical contribution to science is nowhere to be found, except sadly in their internet Memes and/or Popular Atheistic books. What we do witness contrary to popular belief in our secular world, it is that fervent and passionate Christians along the way championed the emergence and progress of natural philosophy and science during the middle age (medieval period).

4) Why for 1,500 years did Christianity fail to produce a Scientific Revolution?

The other question I received once from a skeptic was rather unexpected but I think It had some good legitimacy. If Christianity was the principal cause that brought the Scientific Revolution and the emergence of modern science in the 16th Century, why didn't modern science arise earlier? I guess this is a fair question. It is important to note that this question doesn't nihilate what we have already covered above about Christian scientists' contribution to new field of scientific studies or the role the Church played with the translated documents and the innovative emergence of the printing press.

Nevertheless, let consider the question on its own right.

First, though Christianity emerged in the first century in Palestine as a persecuted minority throughout the Roman Empire. It wasn't an established institution until many centuries later, as it contended against many powers trying to control it until Pope Gregory VII in 1066 AD freed the Church from the political hands of European political leaders (Kings, Nobles, and Dukes) and strengthen Church discipline.

Second, the scientific revolution didn't occur in a vacuum. The 16th century might have been the revolutionary period but it was preceded by many natural scientific endeavors from earlier on which aggregated knowledge from the previous Millenium. Many minds had to succeed to each other while leaving a growing body of knowledge to the new generation. As an example the Franciscan priest Roger Bacon (who is considered as one of the founders of the scientific method, empiricism) in the 13th century (1214-1294 AD) built on the work on previous Christian thinkers.

As Medieval historian, Tim O Neil (who happens to be an atheist) points out, the advent of the Scientific Methods was preceded by an aggregation of prior knowledge from Christian thinkers, each adding their own contributions to the vast body of knowledge growing incrementally toward the eventual explosive 'Scientific Revolution'. Tim puts it this way about the pre-scientific revolution thinkers, which many have contested did not exist due to the alleged Church persecution of scientists, and I quote: 

"I produce a laundry list of Medieval scientists - like Albertus Magnus, Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, John Peckham, Duns Scotus, Thomas Bradwardine, Walter Burley, William Heytesbury, Richard Swineshead, John Dumbleton, Richard of Wallingford, Nicholas Oresme, Jean Buridan and Nicholas of Cusa - and ask why these men were happily pursuing science in the Middle Ages without molestation from the Church, my opponents have usually run away to hide and scratch their heads in puzzlement at what just went wrong."

This quote from an atheist such as Tim also resolves one of the frequent misleading assumptions of skeptics which assumes that natural scientists/philosophers pre- 16th Century were either inexistent or living in fear of the Church. Clearly this is an unfounded claim.

Thirdly, regarding the emergence of Modern science when it did, it is not always obvious to know why something happened (cause-effect relationship) but sometimes a simple correlation can be indicative of a hidden parameter. I submit this view: Christianity was still expanding throughout Europe during those 1500 years and meeting obstacles to its philosophical views in the European continent. But when all Europe became fully Christianized, that's when its view which was already being practiced by those who held the Church views on nature, philosophy, and theology exploded throughout the continent unimpeded as new knowledge aka modern science. The evidence for this reasoning of mine is that I noticed that it just happened that the scientific revolution occurred in the same time laps of when Europe was fully Christianized. I quote again Tim,

"Jenkins notes that we tend to think of Christianity as a religion which began in the Middle East and then spread west, via the Roman Empire, eventually finding some kind of natural home in Europe before expanding across the globe from there in the Modern Era.  Whereas, in fact, it was not until around 1500, with the conversion of the last European pagans in the Baltic and the expulsion of the last major Muslim presence in Spain, that Europe became fully Christian." 

- (Review of the history book, The Lost History of Christianity, by Professor of History at Baylor University, Dr. Philip Jenkins)

I think this information from Dr. Philip Jenkins does point us toward a possible answer. Europe was still being Christianized, and hence growing in awareness in what Christianity could offer intellectually. Therefore it took time for Christianity to bring about the rise of science. However, when everybody was embracing the same natural sciences and philosophical worldview (scholasticism) proposed by the Catholic Church, that's when the scientific revolution of the 16-17th century started to emerge forcefully throughout continental Europe. Hence, Christianity is absolutely in the heart of the process for the rise of science despite the time it took to be fully formed as a new discipline of investigation of the natural order created by the Creator.  

Science and Religion: Friend or Enemy?

I have frequently heard from antipathic people who hates the Christian faith that Christianity has been a 'science stopper'. That religious people have always prevented the growth of scientific knowledge. They even advance the idea that if it wasn't for the Christian religion, the world would have made significant progress in science and culture many centuries ago. However, what is missing in their grandiose claims against Christianity is ANY shred of evidence to substantiate their claims.

Contrary to their repeated claims, we do have historical evidence for Christianity as the only major contributor to the rise of modern science. We know for example that if it was not for Christianity there would have probably never been anything resembling the scientific establishment that we are all so proud of today. The Cambridge trained Historian Dr. James Hannam argues convincingly in his book that the very idea of science and its brilliant methodology also known as 'the scientific method' has arisen because of Christianity and not in spite of Christianity. His book, The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution, was twice shortlisted for The Royal Society Science Book Prize 2010 and the British Society for The History of Science Dingle Book Prize 2011. Yes, the book is that good that even secular institutions shortlisted it for multiple awards.

This book is a powerful antidote for the wide-ranging historical ignorance going around among the modern youth and the uninformed young adults who have swallowed the ludicrous narrative against Christianity under the misguided veil of being 'skeptics' or 'free thinkers' or even 'enlighted intellectuals'. You would think that with these self-congratulatory titles, they would have at least done their homework and check their history books or do some minimum research before they publicly expose their ignorance when they speak about the relationship between Christianity and Science.

I was in a heated exchange with a gentleman who was overtly skeptical about the contribution of science by religious persons during the period of the 'Scientific Revolution'. I was surprised that he chose that specific period in order to launch his offensive. I then proceeded in sharing with him a list of some Medieval (Middle Age) scientists during the Scientific Revolution Era who were Christians and who were pioneers of many scientific fields. Read them below in their own words:

1. Nicholas Copernicus, (1473-1543) – Astronomer: “To know the mighty works of God, to comprehend His wisdom and majesty and power; to appreciate, in degree, the wonderful workings of His laws, surely all this must be a pleasing and acceptable mode of worship to the Most High, to whom ignorance cannot be more grateful than knowledge.”

2. Tycho Brahe, (1546–1601) Astronomer: “Those who Study the Stars, have God for a Teacher”.

3. Galileo Galilei, (1564-1642) Astronomer: “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. When I reflect on so many profoundly marvelous things that persons have grasped, saw and done, I recognize even more clearly that human intelligence is the work of God and one of the most excellent”.

4. Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) was an astronomer: “Our piety is the deeper, the greater is our awareness of creation and its grandeur. Since we astronomers are priests to the highest God with regard to the book of creation, it befits us to be thoughtful not of the glory of our mind but rather above all else of the glory of God”.

5. Rene Descartes, (1596-1650), Mathematician and Physicist (the early text on optics and anatomy): “Thus I see plainly that the certainty and truth of all knowledge depend uniquely on my awareness of the true God in such an extent that I was incapable of perfect knowledge about anything else until I became aware of Him”.

6. Blaise Pascal, (1623-1662) (Mathematicians, Physicist): “There are two kinds of people one can call reasonable: those who serve God with all their heart because they know him, and those who seek him with all their heart because they do not know Him”.

7. Sir Robert Boyle (1627-1691) (Founder of modern chemistry): “The vastness, beauty, orderliness of heavenly bodies, the excellent structure of animals and plants, and other phenomena of nature justly induce an intelligent, unprejudiced observer to conclude that a supreme, powerful, just and good Author.”

8. Anthony van Leeuwenhoek (1632—1723), Dutch Microscopist who was the first to observe bacteria: “It is to be hoped that the inquirer into nature works by searching deeper and deeper into her hidden mysteries will more and more place the discoveries of the truth before the eyes of all so as to produce a version to the errors of former times which all those who love the truth are diligent to aim at. For we cannot in any better manner better glorify the Lord and Creator of the universe than that in all things, how small forever they appear to our naked eyes which has yet to receive the gift of life and power or increase, we contemplate the display of His omniscience, and perfection with the utmost admiration”.

9. Sir Issac Newton (25 December 1642 – 20 March 1727) was an English mathematician, physicist: “ The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, [and] absolutely perfect. Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors.”

This list was adapted from a Dr. David Wood presentation debate. Some of the quotes are longer than the one provided initially by Dr. Wood, for I went to the sources and selected lengthier quotations to bring out more clearly their strong Christian beliefs and commitment to show how their faith guided their scientific exploration.

As the list of those luminaries above demonstrates, there is nothing inimical between Science and Christianity. On the contrary as Dr. Hannam argued in his book, Modern Science arose within Christian Europe and not somewhere else for a reason. Christian thoughts were the decisive factor that provided the background knowledge and a foundation for the development of the whole scientific enterprise.

Why do Modern Scientists who believe are in a minority then?

For some, the exaggerated report that today's body of scientists do not believe in the existence of God (the divine) seem to strike a point in favor of the secular proposition that science doesn't work hand in hand with belief. And the evidence usually provided to support such a claim is that ‘93% of the National Academy Of Science scientists are atheists’. 

However, this is an inadequate reading of the evidence. The National Academy of Science (NAS) is not representative of all scientists neither in the USA nor in the world. NAS has only 2 thousand (2,000) scientists as members of the organization; while the whole country of the United States of America (U.S) has 2 million (2,000,000) scientists. And of these 2 million scientists, 51% of scientists in the USA believe in the existence of the divine. 

And this reflection only caters to the demography of scientists in the USA which doesn't take into account the number of scientists in another part of the world such as Africa, India, etc.

The warfare thesis that pit Science against Christianity is quite a modern idea. It has taken a stronghold in the public imagination thanks to a virulent secularization of our society which foister this misrepresented view to an unsuspected public.

Step Up Your Game with 2018

Happy New Year 2018 to all the readers of Help Me Understand blog. Today marks the beginning of my first blog-post for the year 2018. I am feeling in a story-telling mood and that is exactly what I am going to do.  

'Why do you like reading books' my cousin Tony asked me exasperated once. He had tried unsuccessfully to bring me out of the bedroom where it seemed to him I had spent most of my holiday times in. The year was 1998, I had just started my fourth year of high-school. Though i wasn't able to answer him intelligently at the time on why my eyes clung to this particular book the whole holiday, I think I can do so now. I was reading my first troubling book, 'The Normal Christian Life' by Watchman Nee. He wrote differently from every other authors I had read at that time. His writing style was new to me. He could vividly describe a complex situation simply by appealing to casual words, no sophisticated words in his writing. He had a fine use of common words.   

Stacking books after books after it, my reading became intoxicating as I grew up, thanks to my parents' encouragement. Given that I had come to split my time between dialogues and debates with spiritual opponents, Brahnamists and Jehovah Witnesses, I had come to read a lot of their respective documentations. One of them which I came to like despite our opposite views on religion and Christian doctrines, was the Jehovah Witness book that dealt with youth, 'Les Jeunes s'interrogent.' It was the best resource out there I could find dealing with behavior and teenage lifestyle. The book was so accessible and less dogmatic which I think played in its favor unlike their Watch Tower editions. In one of its chapters, the authors encouraged teenagers to be careful about their reading habits and they made a remarkable comment that has stuck with me up to this day and I paraphrase it, 'Reading a book is like having a conversation with the author. And some authors are not worth having a conversation with.' This piece of advise has encouraged me to be selective in my readings and it has given me a different outlook on literature. Reading is an opportunity to be in conversation, so to speak, with an author. And boy, i have been in conversation with some minds that have totally changed me.

The year was 2007 and I was reading 'Dream and you will win the World' by Cesar Castellanos. I came to a chapter where the story of his wife is recounted. She was watching a particular TV program and on the program a lady practicing new age spirituality was the main guest. The new ager lady had many repulsive views to her taste. Adding insult-to-injury, she also revealed that she would be running as a presidential candidate in Columbia. By the end of the TV program, Castellanos wife found herself mumbling and lamenting to herself, 'How can this country change if we have people like this running our country?' and almost suddenly as she mentally uttered these words, she heard what she identified as the voice of the Holy Spirit challenging her with these mental counter-thoughts, 'Then why don't you run for presidency?'

She took it as a lesson realizing that you shouldn't just complain in life, sometime you have to act. She ran for presidency and lost the election in Columbia when there were only two remaining national candidates. Though she didn't reach the supreme position, she became influential and was able in many ways to influence public opinion with her perceived ethical views based on her Christian worldview.

This story really hit me like a load of bricks. As I was reading the book, incidentally at my campus was running a recruitment of student representatives. The position was widely advertised on campuses running for weeks. I didn't even think about it as I daily passed it on my way to or from school. Upon the book read, I was reminded that I had always complained that students at the University were doing drugs and other things that affected their academic performance. Sometime I did pray for it but that was all. Now things were different. I had been in "dialogue" with an author who would awaken my resolve into going the extra mile. I felt compelled to apply for this academic position. I became restless. My thoughts were agitated during day and night. Many objections came to my mind on why I should not go for it, chief of them: I was a foreign student, a foreigner! "Who will vote for me anyway?", I asked myself repeatedly. I wasn't even sure what would I do even if I became one of the elite student representative at the University in charge of five campus with close to 60,000 students. In brief, I was afraid and sweating fear.

Being unsuccessful to dissuade myself out it, I chose the path of least resistance - I embraced the challenge. Going one more time through the requirement listed, I decided to apply by faith. I was tired of complaining and running away each time I saw an opportunity to make a commitment to affect changes in my immediate surrounding. I had to make a decision that night in my room as I closed the book one last time. My choses were clear: Either I stop complaining at what happens in the Campus or I get involved and bring the little light I have as God's allows me. After some time in prayers, I finally decided to respond to the inner call. I went through the opening positions, and their requirements. I got confirmation that I was indeed eligible as Head Mentor_Student Representative candidate. I had only one problem, I wasn't known. A big issue since candidate would be voted. Mentor students from all campuses of our University (in Pretoria) would be present for the election. I proceeded anyway with my application. I chose a position that reflected best my immediate interest, Head Mentor_Student Representative in charge of Academic Portfolio. I gave God one condition though before I submit my candidacy, 'please, you know I know no body, I would appreciate as a sign that you are in this affair that you allow that I be elected at 100%'. If you dream big, why stop with the election success? I was in for the kill. I wanted a Soviet score. 

The election day came, we were at the main Campus of Tshwane University of Technology (TUT), a distant campus from Arcadia campus where I usually attended my classes. As expected, I saw probably 1 or 2 person that I knew among the participants coming for the votes. Not a good start, I needed more than 2 votes to be elected. Darkness started falling upon me. I kept hope rationalizing that this was just the beginning and were were still waiting for other voters to arrive fort the election.

By the time the election process begun, I looked again around me and noted with horror this time that all the rest of the voters were perfect strangers! The leader of the event, a psychologist/psychiatrist by academic training involved in student life, call the room in order and explained the electorate process. All candidates of different portfolios were invited to give a speech on who they were and to present their intellectual program, followed by votes from student mentors from different campus choosing who fit best the advertised position. Different positions, there were only 5 portfolios, were presented by the leader of the electorate commission. Candidates walked on the hot-spot to pitch their programs. And the votes were casted. Then came the turn of the portfolio on academics. I was shaking and almost cursing myself for being so vain and audacious as to think that I could even be a likely candidate. I had no faith at that time and in that room. I had lost my faith.  I forgot about the book I read, and if I remembered it, I would have cursed the author. I had a good life, a uneventful life but a peaceful life nevertheless until I read him. Why did I want to put myself in a position were failure was a possibility? Why did I do it? I regretted.

My name was called. I felt as pined on my chair. They called me twice and people started looking around. The one person who knew me looked at me as if to say, 'they are calling you!' Damn it, no where to hide. I stood up and walked to the stage swallowing my fear as much as I could. It seemed as a long walk. I ran mentally through my program speech that I had rehearsed the previous day and in the morning when my faith was still alive and incendiary. I gave my small presentation to the gazing audience, trying to find a friendly face I could focus on and administrate the totality of message. My presentation ended, people applauded respectfully. Then they called the other candidates for this same position on Academics. No one stood up. They insisted, no one was there. It looked like I was the 'Candidat unique'. I was voted at 100% with no abstention. The mentor group applauded their new student representative in charge of the academic portfolio. I smiled, barely realizing what was happening. I waived confidently, greeting them with a growing confidence. My faith at that time had completely returned! Did God really answered my prayers literally? I was mildly shaking my head as I was going to the new honorific chair prepared for the winner of this position.

The year 2007 to March 2009 was indisputably one of the best years of my student life and arguably my best intellectual years yet. I practiced faith as never before in my life. My wife sometimes asks me, 'what did they give you in South Africa? You always talk about it.' I always laugh. I can't stop thinking of my life then, for I have seen God walk with me in a new and unexpected way. Matter of fact, He has never stopped doing so even when I left South Africa to Rwanda, nevertheless what I had experienced there has left a mark in my mind. Probably because it was a formative year, a learning time, a time when I did many things for the first time. Maybe that is why it has marked me so much. I have lived other incredible moment of God's actions since then - sometime even more than what I lived in South Africa, but it is always difficult to compare the current moment when the marvelous is not new with when the marvelous is first experienced.

With this I end my story-telling, as I got on to vacate into my many pending project currently awaiting my attention. Be faithful and dare to believe and to try in this new year 2018. It won't cost you to try but it would cost you regrets if you do not try. To the immortal words of Pastor Rick Godwin from San Antonio, Texas: 

'Live full and die empty'

Have a blessed, prosperous and productive New Year 2018 in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.

Is Good Works Against Heaven and Eternal Life?

"Do we inherit Eternal life and heaven because of our works or because of having faith in Jesus."

This question was asked in one of the WhatsApp group I happen to be in. This question has the singular weakness to present a false choice to those who are asked to answer them. As I remarked in the WhatsApp group, the question although interesting to provoke a discussion, it is nevertheless based on a false dichotomy. Before I answer the question directly, some clarification is needed given the faulty assumption that oppose deeds and faith.

Clarifying the Concept

The attitude of the New Testament is not to make an unintelligible separation between our action and our faith, as if we were asked to choose and show our loyalty between our actions or our faith. Rather, the New Testament always strive to keep a balance by reminding us about contexts and the necessity of a collaboration between our faith and our actions. 

This is clearly seen in the writings of St. James who took pains to point out that faith and deeds are not in a perpetual war as some would like us to believe. There three verses found in the second chapter of the epistle of James says it all:

"But someone will say, 'You have faith; I have deeds.' Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds." James 2.18 NIV

"What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them?" James 2.14 NIV

 "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead."James 2.26 NIV

It is clear that from the perspective of St. James, there is no good that can come from making an arbitrary distinction between faith and action. Such as endeavor is theologically futile just as it is practically fruitless.

The Kingdom of God

Now back to the question related with the inheritance of the kingdom or as some presume by calling it Heaven. To reflect on it from a sound biblical foundation, I'd like to share a text which is suggestive of how the early Christian community thought of it, which is still how the majority of the Christian today think of it. The text is found in epistle of St. Peter which give the direction for proper reasoning in light of what we read above in James 2:14,18,26.

"Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For IF you do these things, you will never stumble, and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." - 2 Peter1:10-11 

In this passage of St. Peter, we are informed that the believers should do something in order to receive a rich welcome into the Eternal Kingdom of our Lord. Just like St. James, St. Peter doesn't see the necessity to separate a life of faith with a life of actions (deeds) as these the verses above demonstrates through sentences such as these: a) make every effort, b) if you do these things. These are statement of actions. St. Peter not only link but also condition the plain entrance into the Kingdom of the Lord to these series of actions as the word "IF" in the verses suggest.

We also see that St. John do not make an arbitrary separation between actions and the experience of receiving the kingdom in his book of Revelation in chapter 3 verse 21,

"To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne." NIV

St. John expressly says that the inheritance into the reign of Christ is meritorious, which means based on the believer's life of victory. This explicit reasoning from St. John is repeated over and over in the book of revelation. It is clear that St. John saw no problem that a life of faith should be expressed through actions and deeds of an overcomers - "The person who conquers will inherit these things. I will be his God, and he will be my son" - Rev 21:7 (also see Revelation 2:7; 2:26-27). 

Eternal Life

As for Eternal life, the New Testament use that word in different way with regard to the life of the believer. However, I will start by restricting its possible diverse meaning by singling it to one mean. I will restrict it to Jesus definition of the word, "Eternal life" as the knowing relationship with the Father in John 17:3,

"Eternal life is to know you, the only true God, and to know Jesus Christ, the one you sent." - John17:3  CEV

"And this is eternal life: to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent—Jesus the Messiah." - John17:3  ISV

The Lord Jesus therefore define Eternal Life as the knowledge of God (the Father and the Son). If we use this definition with relative consistency we discover some interesting biblical revelation. For one, we can find out that St. John reminded his audience that they already have that knowledge form of relationship with the Father and the Son called "Eternal life" in 1John5.13,

"I have written these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life." - 1 John 5:13 ISV

Hence for St. John, the believers who were recipient of his letters had the 'Eternal life' or had 'that knowledge/relationship with the Father and the Son'. In order word, they were in a relationship with God, for knowing someone indicate having a relationship with that person.

Another New Testament writer, St. Jude told believers that the relationship with the Father "Eternal life" is something we can be led into just like any other relationships. 

"keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life." - Jude 1:21 ESV 

So as believers keep their eyes focused on Jesus' mercy (or grace), the believers are lead into Eternal Life. Here St. Jude seem to suggest that this relationship with the Father is something that we are continuously led into. Which makes sense, since all relationship are not static and continuous. We are always invited to know the person more and more or this relationship will be disrupted and we become estranged to each other (no more relationship).

All these were just to show in an indirect way how active participation is required for anyone who is in a relationship and want to keep this relationship alive and enduring. It is true for our human relationship, it is equally true with our divine relationship. Allow me now to respond to the question of Eternal Life and its relationship with deeds in a more direct way now. 

St. Paul told his audience that this relationship with the Father called "Eternal life" is unmistakably linked with a believers good actions in Roman 2:6-7,

"God 'will repay each person according to what they have done.' To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life." Romans 2:6-7 NIV

St. Paul unmistakably said that God do avail the provision of the knowledge (relationship) of God aka 'Eternal Life' to those who search for Him by doing good. Here we see St. Paul who understand the primacy of faith over the works of the Mosaic Law with regard to divine justification, nevertheless recognizing that actions are not per se in opposition to faith but that action such as doing good are an inescapable in our experience of true faith that lead is to the reception of 'Eternal Life' just as St. Jude and St. James recognized.

How Fake Grace preys on Innocence

Early in life, we learn quickly how to align ourselves with those we admire most. I remember hearing parents trying to convince children on doing homework in a certain way that were different from what the children remembered their primary school teachers had taught them. The kids just rejected
any attempt by the parents to do the homework in any other way. Why? Because the teachers said so.

Look at the teenagers who changes their wardrobes to the dismay of their parents, why? 'cause they have found new admiration toward a celebrity clothing style.

Authority figures come in all shape and form: teachers, celebrities, an alpha friend in the pack, religious personalities and more. Authority figures usually work on impressionable mind, when individuals have yet to master factual information. This makes perfect sense. Since they can't arrive to a conclusion by following a string of factual information by themselves, they have no other choice but to rely on another form of authority beside facts for their belief. This is standard normal practices for humans. We have learned as much since early childhood. When we don't know much about any given topic or subject, we rely on people whom we believe know more or better. Example of subjects that requires learning mostly from authority until people masters the facts, Chemistry, Biology, Economics, Astrophysics, etc.

How do people end up embracing dangerous ideas or bad habits? Same short answer, the influence of authority figures. These later figures usually hold and/or encourage dangerous ideas or bad habits. For an untrained mind, these dangerous people becomes like drugs.

Just as it has been difficult to change a child's mind about a certain way of doing calculus because of the way the kid learned it from his teacher, so I have encounter difficulty helping young folks when it comes to understanding the scriptures because of their fanatical embrace of a certain religious leader or religious figure. You can easily tell if their embrace of a certain view is a result of personal thinking or a mindless adherence of what they heard.

A case in point.

Not long ago, I was in a dialogue with some youth discussing some biblical concepts. But it became clear that I was not discussing with them, but with the ghost of their teachers. I couldn't reason them, they mindlessly abode to their position. One of the best evidence of that came during the rather elongated dialogue, when one of them made an appeal to history, unfortunately for him it was fake history.

In our effort to establish the right context for the epistle of John which discusses the problem of sins in many of its chapters, the gentleman I was debating openly claimed that John the writer of the first epistle of John was writing against Gnosticism. I easily pointed out that this could not be possible since Gnosticism didn't even exist in the first century. It was a second century philosophy by all account. I pursued with the correction by pointing at him that John in his epistle was fighting Docetism which was a first century heresy that denied the humanity of the person of Jesus Christ. The young man refused to admit this simple kernel of historical truth despite internal evidences to the texts that I raised to his attention. Later on, I found out in my reading research about the counterfeit grace movement that this belief of gnosticism as being a first century phenomenon was not peculiar to my then interlocutor. It seems that this misinformation has been moving from one person to another without any of them actually stopping and thinking for themselves by asking if this statement could be true or not. Frankly, with the advent of internet and google search engine, this would have taken them less than 5 minutes to find out. But as I came to realize, it is not truth that they searched for but it was a form of theological comfort. A theology that didn't call them into repentance as part of the good news of the gospel. They collectively didn't care about truthful statement, or contradictions in their argumentation or incoherence in their thinking, I finally came to realize. All that interested them was to repeat what their authority figure had told them. If it feels good then it must be good they seemed to be thinking.

This is quite a difficult situation to be in for a parent and a family member and friends, when they see their children or brothers, or close friends taking the dishonest path of 'fake grace and/or hyper-grace'. I have been lucky enough that not many people close to me, either family or friends have ever gone the deep end and get totally lost in this fake grace dishonest teachings. But I also know that this is not always the case for some people that I meet who have lost their whole team and club of friends into this intellectually dishonest and spiritual predatory and bankrupt movement.

For this reason, I would like to start a series of posts that will deal with some of the most popular themes that are staple food to the fake grace movement of Rwanda. I hope that by providing these resources, some of you will be equipped to dialogue and exchange with those you have lost to the destructive lies of the 'fake grace' message. And who knows, maybe the Lord will be gracious to them and restore many of your loved ones to reason, truth, light and love of God and of God's Word.

The purpose of my series of posts is not to close or shut the conversation with those of the fake grace movement. The intention is to first equip the untrained Christians who meet these type of fake grace proponents at schools, workplace, choirs, charity club, youth clubs with a sound biblical background so that they may be immune of the the lies of the fake grace movement and so that if they ever get engaged by one, they may know how to respond to them with full conviction and clear responses. I will encourage all my readers in this series to adopt the Berean's attitude. I will quote and link as much as I can to all my sources for your information with the hope that you can go read them and verify. Let us not be like those of the fake grace movement who do not verify what they are taught or what they hear! The first antidote for what is fake is to display what is true, and secondly it is to teach people on how to distinguish between the two.

"The people in Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica. They were so glad to hear the message Paul told them. They studied the Scriptures every day to make sure that what they heard was really true." - Act 17:11 - ERV