As for why I chose Eloquorium.com and write under the nom-de-plume of “Eloquorius”, there are several reasons. Initially I had plans to open this up as a group blog or possibly a front door to a larger media site, hence the use of a coined latin word meaning “a place of expression.” But I also write under a screen name because in today’s viciously politically correct environment employers are starting to fire employees for things said online — even in their private life and/or about non-work matters. Employers regularly use tools like Google to research new employees. Needless to say that as a believer in the Bible, traditional marriage and gender roles, the existence of Hell for those who reject Christ, etc., employers in my area look at such view as downright Nazi-like. Corporate America (and I suspect in other Western cultures) is controlled by the hard left wing, and they hate what we stand for. In recent years it’s become standard practice to Google potential employees for unofficial pre-screening. That’s big part of why I use a screen name. Am I a coward? I don’t think so, at least no more so than any cowardice demonstrated by Christians in persecuted lands who meet secretly and communicate anonymously. Besides, is my name important? Probably not.

First, all religions make claims of some sort; the question is the validity of the claims. Some claims are so spiritual that there’s really no way to objectively verify them. And then some religions, especially Christianity (and Judaism which it fulfills) make factual claims in their scriptures. Unlike almost any other religious books (at least of the major religions) the Bible contains as much history as theology because truth claim have to be backed up with, well, truth! If a prophet foretells the fall of a kingdom in a specific way, the prophet is legitimized if he’s correct. Perhaps, over the years, a pundit will get one or two predictions correct. But what impresses even those who read the Bible merely as an ancient historical resource (among other available ancient sources) is both it’s accuracy and, if the reader is honest, the prophetic accuracy as well. But many people who admit the historical accuracy have a hard time with the prophetic accuracy because to accept both is to then accept the two things it represents: historical claims and theological framework through which to view them. The central claim, of course, is the resurrection of Christ. Even the Christian Scriptures admit that “if Christ is not raised” (1 Corinthians 15:17) then we hope in vain. The resurrection is the central event to which Judaism looks forward (the Messiah and new covenant) and around which Christianity is based, so if it didn’t happen then we ought to sell our church properties and party away the money. But if it did happen–as a literal, historic event–then the Christ’s claims demand acceptance. If wish I had room here to recount the physical, circumstantial and other evidences and observations that go into making the case for Christ’s resurrection, but it would be a long comment reply! Suffices to say that I’m a skeptic by nature, my original major was law by my later degree was computer sciences, so I’m pretty analytical and weak arguments don’t go over well with me. After a number of years, I, too, became convinced that the majority evidence (a “preponderance of evidence” as they’d say in court) leans heavily toward the resurrection as a literal historic event with real witnesses. Even the Apostles who ministered for decades after Christ outright challenged the doubters to check with the witness; hundred of them were still living in Jerusalem. The gospel of Luke begins by admitting that it is a product of research with eye witnesses to the events recorded therein.

Second, you mention that it matters more how we treat people. The reality is that none of us are perfect, of course, and we all have our failings. And that’s the point; we fail. “Ah,” some say, “but we can make up for it!” Really? How is that hope for anyone? For the old, who have little time left to atone for life’s missteps and errors, there is no hope in the idea that the afterlife is based on some wildly subjected standard of how “good” (or not) we lived. For the young, who have more years ahead, even if they do “good” in their life, that only leads to smug self-satisfaction that the Bible calls pride. In all these cases, though, the man or woman is quite obviously the sole judge of their character quality. In other words, without THE God we simply make “gods”; usually ourselves. If there is no God, then making peace with yourself as judge is probably the best you can do. But if there is a God, and God’s will (standards, laws, expectations) can be known, then one would be a fool to shove aside God as judge and instead seat themselves on the judge’s bench to judge themselves.

I always invite people to look into Christianity. Not “the church” (or any denomination), just Christ, His life, teachings, death, etc. I talk to many people who say something like, “Well, there’s a lot I like, but I have questions/doubts about such-n-such.” Fine! I invite people, including you, to come to Christ with doubts and questions in hand. Even good old St. James said, that if anyone has questions or needs wisdom, “he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.” (James 1:5) So, even a not-so-good person can draw near to God (which is actually God drawing near to him/her, but that’s another discussion) and God will answer, if the seeker seeks genuinely.

So, Joseph, the bottom line is: 1. No religion can guarantee anything, unless it’s claims can be verified, and 2.) none of us are a perfect and the message of “be a good person” really isn’t one of hope anyway, it’s only a psychological analgesic with many side effects and no cure for the problem.

I found your blog on a post you made on challies.com (http://www.challies.com/quotes/resisting-christs-mercy). I really appreciated your comment.

As far as this post, My feelings exactly. I truly see no difference between and atheist or an agnostic.

In Christ,

Thomas