Main page | Jari's writings

Church leaders and God



Church leaders and God; that is, how many priests and bishops have drifted beyond the Christian faith



This text is about church leaders and God. The aim is to shed light on people’s attitudes towards God and His will as well as on people’s understanding of God. That is, churches and their delegations are filled with many so-called liberal administrators, whose perceptions differ from Christian faith and the Bible. They abandon God’s creation, the atonement of sins, the divinity of Jesus, and His resurrection. At the same time, they have an arrogant approach towards other fundamental Christian teachings.

This is peculiar, indeed. That is, since they work at a church, you would think that their aim would be in everything to follow God’s will and His teachings? It does seem logical that every one of them would follow the teachings given to us by Jesus and His disciples, doesn’t it? That should be self-evident, since the first congregation was born through the teachings and sacrifice of Jesus and from the preaches of the disciples. If we abandon their teachings, we can no longer call ourselves the Christian church or congregation.

That is why we are going to dive in more deeply into the views of people who don’t seek the will of God, or the teachings of Jesus and the disciples. The following themes will be looked at:


1. Denying creation
2. Denying the significance of Jesus
3. Denying God’s personality and judgment
4. Rejecting God’s will
5. Close to Hinduism


1. Denying creation


- (Rom 1:19,20) Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has showed it to them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse


When it comes to the universe and life, it is generally agreed by scientists that these two have had a beginning. They admit that the universe hasn’t always existed and that life on earth hasn’t been infinite either. They might not believe in creation by God but are forced to acknowledge the fact that the universe came about at some point, as did life on this earth, too. This acknowledgment is due to the following factors:


• The second law of thermodynamics shows us that usable energy sources in celestial bodies decrease slowly. If they were infinite, they would no longer be able to radiate warmth and light. However, celestial bodies, such as the Sun, are still very much radiating. This suggests that they have had an on set setting this process into motion.


• Because life on earth is dependent on the light and warmth from the Sun, it sets its own limits to the existence of life here on the planet. Life cannot be infinite, because the Sun is not infinite. Life must have had a beginning too.


How do the so-called liberal church leaders react to God’s creation? Many of them deny it. They think that the biblical teaching about creation is not true and, instead, believe that the universe came about by itself during the so-called Big Bang, that life began by itself, and that all species stem from the same original cell. They fail to consider the following factors that are crucial aspects in the matte, however.


They have traded their theistic belief to a naturalistic belief. If church leaders decide to abandon the idea of God’s creation, it is not an act supported by science. Here is why: you cannot study the beginning of the universe and life scientifically, because there were no witnesses when it happened. Animations attempting to illustrate the onset of the universe in the Big Bang, the earth forming itself, and life beginning by itself, are more heavily based on imagination than on any absolute information. The world coming about by itself is a naturalistic belief in the same way that someone might believe theistically about the initial phases of the universe and life. Both views operate in the territory of faith, rather than in the area of science and knowledge. Theistic and naturalistic views are well capitalized in the following creeds:



- (Hebr 11:3) Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.


Naturalism and atheism:

Through faith we understand that the worlds came about from nothingness, matter itself formed celestial bodies and life began by itself.


Nothing can come out of sheer emptiness. When some church leaders believe that everything came from nothingness by itself in the so-called Big Bang, they fail to realize that, what they believe in, is comparable to believing in magic. It requires much bigger faith than believing in creation by God.

The reason for this is simple: There isn’t a single practical observation that would suggest objects having the ability to appear out of nothingness. Bicycles, airplanes, rocks, cliffs and street sings do not suddenly appear out of thin air by themselves. Why would the universe be the only exception, when it is exponentially larger than anything else? Why would the universe possess the ability to appear out of nowhere, when nothing else does? Believing in this kind of theory, which goes against logic and real science, isn’t the smartest thing we can do. From a logical point of view, it would seem much more rational to believe in an almighty God who has created everything (it would not have been possible for any “minor god”). This is attested by the diversity and beauty in nature. These two things are difficult to associate with the Big Bang.


- (Gen 1:1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


- (Rev 10:5,6) And the angel which I saw stand on the sea and on the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,

6 And swore by him that lives for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:


- (Rev 14:7) Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.


The beginning of life. When some church leaders deny creation by God, they don’t take into consideration that life’s beginning by itself hasn’t been proven either. The more we have studied it, the more difficult it has become to explain it from a scientific point of view. Naturalistic theory gives dead matter these supernatural qualities that it doesn’t have. That is why it is so odd that many would deny biblical miracles but believe in fairytale theories, where dead matter generates life. They believe in miracles without a miracle maker, which does not sound logical.


Species transformations. As noted, many church leaders would rather believe in naturalistic theories than the Bible narration of the beginning. This also applies to species transformations, which are necessary for evolution. These people believe all species of today stem from the same original cell, which is believed to have developed in the sea or some other body of water.

   The question is, where is the evidence for said species transformations? Since evolution theory has been popular for almost 150 years already, you would think they would have presented us with some examples of species transforming into a new species. One example would be enough, but isn’t the case that Darwin did not give us even that in his book On the Origin of Species, and neither has anyone else proved it in the last 150 years since the publication of Darwin’s book? If the evolution theory was true, there should be at least one concrete example where a species has changed into another wholly new species, but scientists have admitted that such an example does not exist. Darwin also had to admit this, as illustrated in the following quotation. The other comments elaborate further. They show that Darwin did not have concrete evidence for his theory:


Darwin: I am actually tired of telling people that I do not claim to have any direct evidence of a species having changed into another species and that I believe this view correct mainly because so many phenomena can be grouped and explained based on it. (1)


Encyclopedia Britannica: It must be emphasized that Darwin never claimed to have been able to prove evolution or the origin of species. He claimed that if evolution has taken place, many inexplicable facts can be explained. The evidence supporting evolution is thus indirect.


”It is rather ironic that the book, which became famous for explaining the birth of the species, does not actually explain it at all.” (Christopher Booker, writer of Times when quoting Darwin’s magnum opus the Origin of Species) (2)


Recently, it has been admitted that Darwin’s ”proof” was actually philosophical reasoning without a great deal of scientific basis. I quote from the most presticious recent evolutionist, Ernst Mayr (Harvard University): “One must grant Darwin’s opponents the validity of two of their objections. First, Darwin produced embarrasingly little concrete evidence to back up some of his most important claims.” (Nature 248, 22 March 1974, p. 285) The evidence for evolution has never been strong, nor is it strong today. (3)


Perhaps the most staggering point about the current situation is the following: although in the mass media Darwin is considered to be a secular saint and evolution theory is thought to be an unbeatable challenge to religious claims, the leading biologists consider it to be self-evident that the origin of species is still not discovered. In the Nature –magazine Eörs Szathmary wrote an evaluation of Jeffrey Schwartz’s efforts to construct such a theory and he began his evaluation like so: “The origin of species has for long fascinated biologists. Although this is the heading of Darwin’s magnum opus, it does not provide a solution to the problem. Will Jeffrey Schwartz provide a solution? I’m afraid that generally speaking he does not. (4)


What about species transformations in fossils? Perhaps the world’s most famous fossil researcher, now late atheist paleontologist, Stephen Jay Gould came to the same conclusion of lacking evidence, when he studied fossils in rocks. He tells that there are no signs of gradual development in them, despite it being crucial to the evolution theory:


The extreme rareness of intermediate forms in fossil material continues to be the trade secret of palaeontologists. The evolution trees appearing in our textbooks include facts only at the heads and folding points of the branches. The rest is reasoning, no matter how reasonable it is, not evidence of fossils –- I do not want in any way to belittle the potential competence of the gradual evolution view. I want only to remark that it has never 'been observed' in rocks…(5)




2. Denying the significance of Jesus


It is a renowned fact that history is dated after Jesus. He is regarded a historical figure, otherwise there would be no point in saying 1970 BC or 2014 BC. This shows how people once firmly believed Jesus to be a historical person who had a real influence in the area of Israel.

When it comes to the historicalness of Jesus and the New Testament, they are both affirmed by other sources. For instance, dozens of people from the New Testament are being mentioned in these sources, some of which include John the Baptist, Jesus, Pilate and numerous other rulers. This illustrates how the Bible deals with real historical events and figures, although, it needs to be noted that historical events cannot be completely proven afterwards. The following list touches upon this issue. It refers to what has been mentioned about Jesus in early sources external to the Bible. These sources corroborate with the Bible:


• Jesus was a man filled with wisdom, if he can even be called a man (Josephus).

• Jesus was known by the name Jesus the Nazarene (Talmud).

• He said that he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Talmud).

• He was a teacher (Josephus, Talmud).

• He had disciples (Talmud).

• He worked miracles (Josephus, Talmud).

• His disciples healed the sick and worked miracles (Talmud).

• Pilate (26–36 A.D.) condemned Him to death (Tacitus, Josephus) because of the provocation of influential Jewish men (Josephus) during the reign of Emperor Tiberius (14–37 AD.) (Tacitus).

• He was condemned to death on the cross (Josephus, Tacitus, Thallus, Talmud).

• There was darkness at the time of His crucifixion (Thallus).

• He was crucified during the Passover (Talmud).

• He rose from the dead (Josephus).

• The successors of Jesus regarded Him as God and sang songs to praise Him (Plinius the Younger).

• He had Jewish and Greek successors (Josephus).

• Faith in Christ originated from Judea (Tacitus, Josephus) and spread to Rome from there (Tacitus).

• Jesus' successors were called Christians (Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Plinius the Younger).

• Jesus had a brother called Jacob (Josephus).

• Jesus was called Christ or the Messiah (Josephus).


The historicalness of events (including the miracles) mentioned in the New Testament gets affirmed by the fact that they have plenty of eyewitnesses. The disciples were, of course, one of the witnesses, but they may have also pleaded to other people who saw what they had seen. In total there were thousands of eyewitnesses, which is the best starting point and evidence that you could have for confirming historical events:


- (2 Peter 1:16) For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.


- (Luke 1:1-4) For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

2 Even as they delivered them to us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you in order, most excellent Theophilus,

4 That you might know the certainty of those things, wherein you have been instructed.


- (Matt 4:24,25) And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought to him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatic, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

25 And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.


- (Matt 14:16,20,21) But Jesus said to them, They need not depart; give you them to eat.

20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full.

21 And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children.


- (Matt 16:9-11) Do you not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets you took up?

10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets you took up?

11 How is it that you do not understand that I spoke it not to you concerning bread, that you should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?  


- (Acts 2:22,40,41) You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the middle of you, as you yourselves also know

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added to them about three thousand souls.


- (Acts 26:24-26) And as he thus spoke for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, you are beside yourself; much learning does make you mad.

25 But he said, I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and soberness.

26 For the king knows of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner.


 - (Acts 10:37,38) That word, I say, you know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;

38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.


What about liberal church leaders’ attitudes towards Jesus? What do they think of Jesus and supernatural occurrences associated with Him? With these questions one should pay attention to the following two aspects:


• They deny any supernatural occurrences associated with Jesus, such as miracles, resurrection, and ascension.

• They do not believe in the divine status of Jesus, and only consider Him a wise and a good teacher.


They deny supernatural occurrences associated with Jesus, such as miracles, resurrection and ascension. When it comes to supernatural occurrences in the Bible and in the life of Jesus, liberal leaders of church much rather follow what liberal theology teaches about it. They do not think the Bible is a reliable source in this respect. They are skeptical about miracles, virgin birth of Jesus, resurrection and ascension, as is common for liberal theologists.

Are these leaders and liberal theologians following science, when they abandon miracles and other supernatural occurrences associated with Jesus? They do not, because they are abandoning clear historical facts, which have plenty of eyewitnesses. That is, everything that has happened in the past is also science whether it includes miracles and other supernatural occurrences. This aspect is often overlooked.

But these church leaders are inclined to follow a naturalistic worldview, according to which matter is everything there is, and anything supernatural is deemed impossible. Thus, what they have is a naturalistic view of the world, which is not a scientific one.

Their naturalistic worldview also comes apparent in their belief in previously mentioned fairytale theories, like the universe exerting itself into existence from nothingness and life beginning by itself. They believe in these unproved naturalistic theories, because they see the world as a closed system from God and His influence. In their understanding of the universe matter is all there is. Moreover, they think this dead matter has some supernatural qualities, because they think the matter itself formed into celestial bodies and generated life, bringing about all species that exist today. They give dead matter these qualities that are usually associated with God.


They do not believe in the divinity of Jesus, but instead consider Him merely a wise and a good teacher. What do church leaders think of Jesus and His significance? Many have acquired an unbelieving attitude towards it. They deny Jesus’ special status that He would be the Son of God descended from heaven. They deny fundamentals associated with the Apostles’ Creed. They do not believe in the following things that Jesus said about Himself, for example:


- (John 8:23,24) And he said to them, You are from beneath; I am from above: you are of this world; I am not of this world.

24 I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins: for if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sins.


- (John 14:6) Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.


- (John 8:56-58) Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

57 Then said the Jews to him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?

58 Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham was, I am.


- (Matt 7:24-27) Therefore whoever hears these sayings of mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man, which built his house on a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it fell not: for it was founded on a rock.

26 And every one that hears these sayings of mine, and does them not, shall be likened to a foolish man, which built his house on the sand:

27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.


- (Matt 24:35) Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.


- (John 5:24) Truly, truly, I say to you, He that hears my word, and believes on him that sent me, has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death to life.


What do these people think of Jesus then? In short, many think He was just a regular man. They believe He was a wise and a good teacher but in no way divine. They might think He was a good example for people and that His teachings were positive, but they discard His divinity and what He said about Himself.

Here is, however, where they stay on their incoherent and illogical course. If someone were to claim such things about themselves as Jesus did, surely, they could not be a wise and a good teacher if everything that they said about themselves were lies. These two things go hand in hand and cannot be separated. Liberal church leaders might do so, but that’s where they abandon all common sense. Either Jesus was a wise and a good teacher and the Son of God from heaven, or He was neither. Only one of those options can be true.


Thomas: Yes, according to literary notes he started it. It was the reason why they put Him on the cross – blasphemy.

Socrates: He Himself claimed to be God?

Thomas: Yes.

Socrates: He really said that?

Thomas: Yes, according to the only records we have, the four gospels.

Socrates: Only on one occasion?

Thomas: No, many times, in multiple different ways.

Socrates: How? In which ways?

Thomas: He called Himself the Son of God. He claimed to be sinless and that He’d atone all the world’s sins. He said that in the end of times He would condemn the whole world. He said thing like, “I and Father are one” and “who has seen me, has seen Father” and “before Abraham was born, I HAVE been”. 

Socrates: You don’t believe this Thomas, do you?

Thomas: Yes Socrates, it is incredibly absurd.

Socrates: So it seems. What about the rest of you, what do you think of this Jesus?

Bertha (looks at Thomas with disdain): In any case, more than he does.

Socrates: Do you believe He was a God?

Bertha: No.

Molly: Not in my opinion.

Socrates: Why do you study Him then?

Bertha: He was a great philosopher, a wise man.

Socrates: Oh, that cannot be right.

Bertha (surprised, while others also raise their heads): What? Why not?

Socrates: I believe I can demonstrate it quite easily. Thomas, do you think He was a great philosopher? What do you think of Him?

Thomas: I don’t think anything. I certainly do not believe He was a God.

Socrates: Do you believe He was a great philosopher?

Thomas: No. I believe He was a great conman. I think He started the biggest superstition in the world.

Socrates: Thank you. Does any of you believe He was a God?

Chris: I do.

Socrates: Ah, then you Chris, are the only one who is allowed to think He was a great philosopher.

Others: What? Why?

Socrates: Oh, it is quite simple. The man claimed He was a God. If He truly was, then Chris is the only one who is right. If He was not, then Thomas is the only one in the right. A mere man who claims to be God, cannot be a wise man. In fact, He would quite possibly be mad. Therefore, whether He was or wasn’t what He claimed to be, only one of you can be right about Him. The majority is in the wrong in any case.

Bertha: But surely, He was a wise man. Read the gospel and you’ll see.

Socrates: That is not possible.

Bertha: How can you be so sure? You’ve never read them.

Socrates: Don’t you understand? It cannot be, as there cannot be four sides to a triangle. A mere man who claims to be God, cannot be a wise man, and a God that claims to be God isn’t a mere wise man. The former is crazy, and the latter is God. Jesus is inevitably either crazy or a God. The only thing He cannot be is a mere wise man.

Bertha: Then why do so many people think of Him like that?

Socrates: That is exactly my question. And I ask you that now, I am not asking those many people who are not here, but you who are here. Why do you choose the most illogical option, the only one that naturally contradicts itself? You are familiar with logic, right?

Bertha: Professor, can you help me out of this?

Professor: I am not sure that is necessarily my task… (6)




3. Denying God’s personality and judgement


Above, we mentioned how liberal church leaders don’t believe what the Bible says about Jesus. They do not believe He is the Son of God from heaven who atoned all sins, that He was born of a virgin, and that His resurrection and ascension are true. They deny these things, like they might deny miracles mentioned in the Bible.

The same pattern is shown in their understanding of God. They do not believe in the God who announced Himself on the pages of the Bible. They generally believe that biblical descriptions of God represent the views that people of that time had of Him – views that reflect the world’s understanding of the time. Whereas, liberal leaders of church these days have a different view of God. It is typical for this view that God is impersonal and does not condemn anyone. We are going to look at these views separately.


Impersonal God is a common perception among liberal church leaders. They have this strange impersonal God who does not react to anything. He does not love, or maybe He does, but He does not react to anything else. He does not care whether people do good or bad, since He feels indifferent about everything. That is why people don’t believe in judgment after death, either. They think that God – if He even exists – is also uninterested in that respect, too.

We can ask however, why should God be impersonal? If humans are different personas with feelings and attitudes towards things, why couldn’t God be like that, too? For instance, a mother can feel different kinds of emotions with her children. For example, the following feelings might apply:


• Mother loves her children.

• She might be concerned about her children and their health.

• She can feel joy for her children’s success.

• Mother hates it if someone tries to harm her children. That is, a mother has hatred for sin – in this case, the sin that is directed at her children.


Therefore, as a mother can go through different feelings, since she is her own persona, the same can be thought about God. He might have different feelings, because He is a persona. It would be strange for humans to have feelings that allow us to love, be happy, or get angry about wrongdoings, when a personal God would not experience these things. The following Bible verses, for example, talk about this:


• God feels love towards people, as it has been written:


- (John 3:16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


- (1 John 4:8-10) He that loves not knows not God; for God is love.

9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.


• God and His angels are happy if someone repents and turns to God:


- (Luke 15:7-10) I say to you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repents, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

8 Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, does not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it?

9 And when she has found it, she calls her friends and her neighbors together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I have found the piece which I had lost.

10 Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repents.


• God hates injustice, as it has been written:


- (Rom 1:18,19) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has showed it to them.


This raises the question, why should God be impersonal? If people are personas with feelings and the ability to react to things, it is wrong to think that God couldn’t be a persona, as well. If He created the first humans in His image, as stated in the First Book of Genesis (this image was, however, distorted in the Fall, when sin entered the world and people’s lives), it is logical to think that intelligence, language, feelings, and other things associated with personality come from Him. They did not come about by themselves from nothingness in the Big Bang, because nothingness cannot create any of these things. It is not wise to think that. Instead, the best option for our beginning is that humans were created in the image if God, as said in the Bible. People have feelings, intelligence and language, because God has these qualities too.


- (Gen 1:26,27) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


“God does not judge anyone”. As stated, liberal church leaders seem to have a strange impersonal God who does not react to anything. He does not love, or maybe He does, but does not react to anything else. He does not care whether people do good or bad, since He feels indifferent about everything. That is why it is believed there is no judgment or hell after this life.

In this regard, liberal church leaders have an imaginary god, however. How do they know that there is no judgement or hell on the other side? That is, since they do not have any personal knowledge about the other side, and they do not believe what Jesus and the disciples have taught about it, the only thing left is their imagination. They must entirely rely on their imagination, because they do not have any personal experiences about the afterlife. And information with such a basis should not be trusted. If someone decided to trust these church leaders, it is similar to asking directions in New York from a Chinese or an African farmer who’s never been there. That kind of person cannot lead us correctly, as they do not know what they are talking about.

On the other hand, a kind of god who does not react to evil but is indifferent towards it, is bad himself. If he accepts all evil and does not condemn wrongdoers, he is inescapably taking the side of evil. Or if God does exist and unrepentant people are allowed in His kingdom, as believed by liberal church leaders, we cannot consider Him a good God anymore.

This is a good place to take another motherly metaphor. When many liberal church leaders accept God’s love but not His hatred towards sin and wrongdoings, we can still see a regular mother having similar feelings that God might have: a mother loves her children and hates it if someone tries to harm them. That is, a mother has two different qualities, which do not conflict each other. Why is it so difficult to associate that with God, as well? He, too, has love for people and holiness, which is hatred towards sin. There is no conflict, as John stated in his gospel:


- (1 John 4:8) He that loves not knows not God; for God is love.


- (1 John 1:5) This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.


Basically, these two opposite feelings can be seen in the following:


1. God’s love comes apparent in His wish to save every person out of love, as it has been written:


- (John 3:16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


- (1 Tim 2:3,4) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;

4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


2. God’s holiness, which is hatred towards sin and wrongdoings, comes apparent in that He condemns unrepentant sinners. This is namely about unrepentant people, who purposefully do wrong things, and do not want to change, nor care about forgiveness. God is willing to forgive everyone, but people must first confess their sins. If God forgave these unrepentant wrongdoers who enjoy their ill behavior and wish not to change, He would go against His essence. Him accepting wrongdoings is something we cannot expect from a good God. God accepting wrongdoings would be bad.


- (Rom 3:5,6) But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who takes vengeance? (I speak as a man)

6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?


What is our part if we wish to avoid hell and, instead, experience the love of God? We can achieve this by reforming ourselves, that is turning to God, confessing our sins and, above all, accepting Jesus as our Savior, instead of rejecting Him (John 5:40 And you will not come to me, that you might have life..). Grace is offered for everyone, but first, you must repent your sins. An unrepentant person cannot be saved, but a person who turns to God and repents their sins can. We do not deserve salvation and eternal life by repenting and confessing our sins, because our salvation only happens through Jesus Christ. On the other hand, if we do not confess our sins and repent them, it only shows that we aren’t yet with God.


- (Acts 17:29,30) For as much then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like to gold, or silver, or stone, graven by are and man's device.

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commands all men every where to repent:


- (1 John 1:9) If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.


- (Prov 28:13) He that covers his sins shall not prosper: but whoever confesses and forsakes them shall have mercy.




4. Rejecting God’s will


When Jesus lived on earth, the most important thing for Him was the will of God. He came from heaven, not to do His own, but His Father’s will, the Father who had sent Him. This was the main purpose of His life. The same thing (Jesus’ sinless life and that in the end He bared our sins), also made it possible that people today can receive forgiveness of sins and enter the kingdom of God. Had Jesus not lived by the will of God and without sin, this opportunity would not have been laid out for us.


- (John 4:34) Jesus said to them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

- (John 5:30) I can of my own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which has sent me.


- (John 6:38) For I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me.


When we look at the teachings of Jesus, we see that God’s will is a crucial part of them. He emphasized it in the Lord’s Prayer and in other instances. He said, e.g., that anyone who chants ‘Lord, Lord!’ will not inherit the kingdom of God but only those who do the will of our heavenly Father. Similarly, he stated that the punishment will be greater to those who know the will of God but decide to break it:


- (Matt 6:9,10) After this manner therefore pray you: Our Father which are in heaven, Hallowed be your name.

10 Your kingdom come, Your will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.


- (Matt 7:21) Not every one that said to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven.


- (Luke 12:47,48) And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For to whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.


What is the attitude of liberal church leaders towards the will of God? Are they trying to respect it and use it as a base for their decisions, or what seems to be the case? Are they striving to act like Jesus, who said He is here to do the will of the one who sent Him?

In short, they reject the will of God. They do not believe moral comes from God, and they have even less faith that the teachings of Jesus and the disciples apply to the people of today. They consider them to be old-fashioned notions that no longer apply. They think people today are wiser and can see things more clearly.

Their attitude is clearly visible in their reactions towards sexual questions, especially towards homosexual behavior. As we already know, liberal church leaders avidly support this lifestyle, as some of them may even support free heterosexual affairs if “both of them love each other”. They use the same argument that was used back in the day to support the sexual revolution. They believe in this argument more than they do, for example, the following verses, which warn us from the consequences of wrongful behavior:


- (1 Cor 6:9,10) Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?  Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortionists, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


Where will this behavior of liberal church leaders lead us? We are going to look at this and other aspects related to this issue from different angles.


They claim Jesus and the disciples were either liars or oblivious. The first consequence to their behavior is that they claim Jesus and his disciples to have been either liars or oblivious. They might not directly say it, but in practice they place themselves above the teachings of Jesus and the disciples by considering their teaching unreliable. They think they know more about eternal affairs than Jesus and the disciples did.

Here we see an imminent conflict: we have church leaders, who think they are acting as advocates of God and Jesus, but in reality, deny the teachings that came through Jesus and the disciples. These church leaders do not believe these teachings are based on truth, despite Jesus and the disciples stating so (see the following passages!). The question is, which should be trusted: do we trust that Jesus and the disciples were experts on eternal affairs, or do we trust people of today, who reject Jesus and the disciples’ teachings regarding them as false. Church liberals have shifted towards the latter.


- (John 1:17) For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.


- (John 8:44-46) You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and stayed not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45 And because I tell you the truth, you believe me not.

46 Which of you convinces me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do you not believe me?


- (John 14:6) Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.


- (2 Cor 4:1,2) Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;

2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.


- (Eph 4:15) But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:


- (1 Tim 2:3,4) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;

4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


They lead people straight to hell. Another consequence is that liberal church leaders are leading people into hell when they bring people to trust their claims. That is if the teachings of Jesus and the disciples are true, there is no other option left. Either the people of the church are correct, or Jesus and the disciples are correct. There is no in-between in this matter. On the other hand, if these leaders are incorrect in their claims, they have become the undoers and blind leaders of others; the people Jesus talked about and warned us about. Trusting their claims, which may be wrong, isn’t the best thing we can do for ourselves.


- (Matt 15:14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.


- (Matt 18:6, 7) But whoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

7 Woe to the world because of offenses! for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!


How does love work?


- (1 John 4:5) They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world hears them.


- (Luke 6:26) Woe to you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.


The reality is that liberal church leaders are often popular among the masses, because they talk in a way that appeals to people. They talk about love and think that they are being loving and sensible, when they accept a view that’s becoming popular among the masses. This can be seen, e.g., when they support extramarital affairs or homosexual behavior in the name of love.

What is the Christian view? The fact is, we are not here to be the judges of others (fortunately!), and that we should love every person despite who they are. This should be self-evident, and it should not be questioned. Love should be directed to any kind of person, despite what they represent or how they live. God, too, loved the whole world, and that is why Jesus was sent here (John 3:16).


- (1 Cor 13:1) Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.


- (1 Peter 2:17) Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.


Liberal church leaders confuse two very different things, however: inclination and sinful behavior (like, how they cannot distinguish how you can love a person, even when you don’t love their wrongdoings. For instance, a mother of an addict son can love her son, even when she wishes he did not use drugs). Many people might have an inclination towards sinful acts, like homosexual behavior or other addictions (drugs, alcohol, pornography, pedophilia, hatred etc.), but that does not prevent people from forming a connection with God, given that they turn to God, confess their sins and want to be freed from their sins. Nor does it prevent them from doing spiritual work, because everyone has their own inclinations that they know to be sin and want to stay away from. There are probably hundreds or thousands of people in congregations in this situation. They might have a homosexual inclination and a temptation, or some other kind of tendency, but they do not live by their desires, because they want to follow God. Liberal church leaders do not consider this, however, since they think it is showing love if they support people’s sinful inclinations and behavior. This is how they have become deceivers leading people away from God to appreciate sinful acts. This is the difference between the teaching of Jesus and our current liberal church leaders. Jesus and the disciples talked about reform, but the latter group does not take to heart the teaching of Jesus and the disciples about people being urged to reform their wrongful lifestyles.


- (Luke 13:2,3) And Jesus answering said to them, Suppose you that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?

3 I tell you, No: but, except you repent, you shall all likewise perish.


- (Acts 17:29,30) For as much then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like to gold, or silver, or stone, graven by are and man's device.

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commands all men every where to repent:


Foreseen development. When it comes to liberal church leaders, they usually do not believe in fulfilled prophecies. They reject biblical prophecies, like they do other prophecies, due to their naturalistic views.

Remarkably, the direction, where church and different congregations are headed to, has been foreseen. For instance, Paul mentioned how before the second coming of Jesus, there would be an apostasy. It means that people in church and congregations would abandon God and the basic truths that relate to our connection with God and Christian faith. This seems to directly apply to liberal church leaders who have impaired the teachings of Jesus and the disciples. They advocate things foreign to early congregation and things that were clearly understood as sin. However, this kind of trend began taking place already shortly after the disciples (Jude 1:4: For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.)


- (Acts 20:29-31) For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.


- (2 Thess 2:3-5) Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

4 Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

5 Remember you not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?


As stated, the development in churches has been foreseen. However, it is not limited to the Bible only. That is why we are going to look at a few other related prophecies. The first one comes from David Wilkerson’s book, the Vision, from more than 40 years ago, when people were not aware of the developments of today. It might be unnecessary to say that such developments have gone quite far with no end in sight, as the current trend seems to keep going. Our quotation talks about positive attitudes towards homosexuality, which has already become a reality because of many liberal church leaders. They eagerly advocate for this cause in congregations, but it is hardly a surprise to God.


"There are two forces that prevent gays from dedicating themselves completely to their sin: society does not accept them and the church's teachings are against them. But these barriers will disappear when society no longer resists their sin and deems it abnormal, but on the contrary encourages them to continue, and when the church no longer preaches about their sin but supports them in their sexual activities. The floodgates will open, and the gays will be encouraged to continue in their sin. I have seen in my vision that these two obstacles will be wiped away and when they are taken away, chaos will follow." (7)


Another prophecy is more than a hundred years old, and it comes from the founder of Salvation Army, William Booth. The prophecy describes the spiritual state of the so-called Christendom a day before the second coming of Jesus. It might not need to be said that this prophecy, too, has largely come to pass, because of things like “heaven without hell” and “forgiveness without reform”. They are exactly the kinds of topics that we discussed above, and what liberal church leaders have brought up in their talks:


   1. "At that time politics is without God. (...) There will be a day when the official state politics of the entire West is of the kind that nobody in a leading position fears God (...) the new generation of political leaders will rule Europe; a generation that does not fear God in the least;

   2. Then there will be heaven without hell (...) There will be a day when a great withdrawal of what the Bible says to be "the Gospel of the full truth" will take place. At that time a "gospel" for the itching ears of the people will be preached. The hearers will determine what is preached from the pulpits. Then, the common order for the pulpits will be 'speak mild, sweet words; speak about heaven, leave us in peace so that we would not have to be strained when you preach about hell.'

   3. Christianity is full of forgiveness but without repentance. The teaching of the Bible that there is not forgiveness without repentance will disappear from Christianity.

   4. The day before the coming of Jesus will be full of the joy of salvation, with people who have not been born again from above.

   5. There is a lot of religion without the Holy Spirit (2 Tim 3:5 Jude 18,19).

   6. Christianity without Christ. Christ is not anywhere where the 'BLOOD and FIRE ' are not valid – deny one of the two and you will have forms of Christianity but without Christ."




5. Close to Hinduism


Above, we mentioned how liberal church leaders might think that Jesus was only a human, a wise and a good teacher, who was not born of a virgin, did not resurrect, nor perform any miracles. This is their conclusion, despite it opposing historical facts and it being the worst option logically (wise and good teacher cannot put forth such claims that Jesus did if they are not true).

Liberal church leaders not considering Jesus a divine being and His claims as true, also affect the way they see salvation. That is, they might say that the same God is behind every religion, making each path the right one. When it comes to this, there are three common views in the Western countries: a view based on atheism, Christian theism, and Hinduism:


• Atheism: no path will take you to heaven, because nothing exists after death. Atheists are certain that their view is the right one.


• View based on Christian theism; the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who came from the heavens, is the only way to God’s kingdom.


- (John 14:6) Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.


- (John 10:9,10) I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

10 The thief comes not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.


• View based on Hinduism. According to this view all paths lead to heaven. The holy book of Hindus (Bhagavad Gita, IV:11) says:


"Oh Paartha, no matter how the people approach me, I will receive them; whatever way they use, it is also my way."


It might be obvious that many liberal church leaders have opted for the third option. Their view is much like the one in Hinduism, because they might see all paths as equal in leading to heaven. They are closer to Hinduism than Christianity. We can also see this almost-Hindu-view in the fact that many of them possess a pantheistic idea of God, or they consider God an impersonal being. These are also common notions in Hinduism, meaning that these liberal church representatives have adopted a Hindi worldview. These people posing as open-minded, who might still strongly put forth their own views, walk the on the fine line of Hinduism.

What is the truth about salvation? In this question, the following points should be remembered:


1. The universal nature of sin is something that is widely known. Everyone knows deep down that they have not always done what they know to be right. Every person knows – if they are being honest - him or herself to be flawed in many areas. We are not hundred percent perfect and sinless.


- (Rom 3:23) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God


- (1 John 1:8) If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.


2. Not having assurance of salvation is a consequence of the former; our imperfection. Because people are imperfect, they do not have the assurance that God will accept them and that they will be alright on the other side. This is the case in every religion where people try to achieve assurance with their own merits. Paul Little tells us his observations. He describes how Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims might not have the assurance, but this also applies to some Western people who have grown up with Christian culture:


The Muslims do not have an assurance of salvation either. I have often asked the Hindus, Muslims and Buddhists whether they are going to nirvana or heaven after they die. None of them has been able to give me a definitive answer. They have rather referred to the incompleteness of their life, which is an impediment in reaching this goal. (8)


3. What is the solution to our imperfection? If we cannot receive salvation with our own merits, the only option is that it is gifted to us by someone perfect.

This is exactly what the New Testament tells us. Since only God can atone our sins, the New Testament tells us how Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to earth and took our sins away. In fact, God was in Christ and atoned the world with Himself, as told in the Corinthians. God made the initiative and made it possible that we can have our sins forgiven and we can receive an eternal life. His motive was His love for people. We are going to look at some related verses:


- (2 Cor 5:19-21) To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses to them; and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be you reconciled to God.

21 For he has made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.


- (John 3:16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


- (1 John 4:9,10) In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.


- (Rom 5:8) But God commends his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.


As God has made everything for us, it means that we can receive salvation by grace. It is the gift of God. Do not reject this gift:


- (Eph 2:8,9) For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.


- (Rom 3:24) Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus


- (Rev 21:6) And he said to me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to him that is thirsty of the fountain of the water of life freely.


The next quotation is perfect for this topic. When the gap is too great for us to surpass, the Son of God, Jesus Christ, came here to be the bridge and the mediator for us (Hebr 8:6 But now has he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.) enabling us to surpass the gap. Otherwise, getting to the other side would be impossible.


"Wait, I’ll give you one example: the average man can jump, for example, two meters. A person who has practiced sports and is fit may jump perhaps five meters. And if he is an Olympic winner, he can jump almost nine meters, but jumping any longer will be quite impossible in our generation. Let’s suppose then that we are all standing at the edge of a canyon with 200 meters to the other side. None of us has the ability to jump over that abyss, right? Now then, let’s study the same in the form of an allegory: That abyss is the abyss of sin and God is on the other side. He inspected as poor crickets just as we are and started pity us. He knew that it was quite impossible for us to get to Him by our own powers; for this reason, He sent for us His own Son, Jesus, who is a bridge between God and man. Jesus is the mediator between God and man. We can go with Him safely, because according to His own words He is 'the way and the truth and the life’! I know that there are many, who will reject this divine solution as too easy. They’ll rather try to do something by their own power to save themselves, but no effort of man can take him to God, our destiny is to fall into that yawning abyss!” (9)


The prayer of salvation: Lord, Jesus, I turn to You. I confess that I have sinned against You and have not lived according to Your will. However, I want to turn away from my sins and follow You with all my heart. I also believe that my sins have been forgiven through Your atonement and I have received eternal life through You. I thank You for the salvation that You have given me. Amen.







1. Darwin, F & Seward A. C. toim. (1903, 1: 184): More letters of Charles Darwin. 2 vols. London: John Murray.

2. Christopher Booker: “The Evolution of a Theory”, The Star, Johannesburg, 20.4.1982, p. 19

3. Marvin L. Lubenow: Myytti apinaihmisestä (Bones of Contention), p. 257

4. Rodney Stark, p. 184

5. Stephen Jay Gould: The Panda’s Thumb, (1988), s. 182,183. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

6. Peter Kreeft: Sokrates & Jeesus, p. 78,79

7. David Wilkerson: Näky, p. 48

8. Paul Little: Tiedä miksi uskot, p. 129

9. Jakov Damkani: Siionin poika, p. 107,108



More on this topic:

Misled priests; that is, how modern priests have created their own religion based on the basic assumptions of atheism

A message to a Church employee. Modern priests want to appear tolerant and progressive, but at the same time they give their support to injustice

Religiousness or faith? What is the difference between religiosity and saving faith in Jesus and God? They are not the same thing

Theoretical belief. Many have faith in God, having outward forms of Christianity, and some are even church workers, but they still do not know the matter of salvation.

Are you a foolish virgin? It is possible to be a member of the church and attend church, but still be a foolish virgin, or unsaved person. What are the characteristics of such religiosity?

About salvation. How do Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses understand salvation, and how their teaching differs from traditional Christian and biblical teaching?

Jesus and the Catholics. Mary, the merits of the saints, the works of atonement, and the sacraments have supplanted Jesus in the Catholic Church. Therefore, most lack salvation and certainty
















Jesus is the way, the truth and the life





Grap to eternal life!


More on this topic:

Misled priests; that is, how modern priests have created their own religion based on the basic assumptions of atheism

A message to a Church employee. Modern priests want to appear tolerant and progressive, but at the same time they give their support to injustice

Religiousness or faith? What is the difference between religiosity and saving faith in Jesus and God? They are not the same thing

Theoretical belief. Many have faith in God, having outward forms of Christianity, and some are even church workers, but they still do not know the matter of salvation.

Are you a foolish virgin? It is possible to be a member of the church and attend church, but still be a foolish virgin, or unsaved person. What are the characteristics of such religiosity?

About salvation. How do Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses understand salvation, and how their teaching differs from traditional Christian and biblical teaching?

Jesus and the Catholics. Mary, the merits of the saints, the works of atonement, and the sacraments have supplanted Jesus in the Catholic Church. Therefore, most lack salvation and certainty