Why?

Why do I believe in Christianity? Why do I trust in the God of the Bible, this entity, being, or whoever He is who I know so little about? Why do I hold on to the promises that He gives to me and to humanity, promises that are not only audacious, but outright irrational?

To those who demand logical, scientific answers to these questions, to be honest, I haven't a clue as to why I dare to believe in this God who is beyond logic and rationale, whose ways transcend the "natural" or scientific order of things. To be truthful, I've gotta admit that my trust in this God has not been founded upon scientific evidences or sophisticated proofs that many so-called learned people like to find. My faith in the promises of the Bible has not been based on its logical arguments, or its reasonable tenets, or even its good, moral principles because far from being a practical, commonsensical rule book, the Bible really pushes forth a daring, almost insane hope in a God who can raise the dead, and with that, a sacrificial, almost reckless kind of life that requires us to join in the sufferings of Christ that we may share in His glory.

This is not to say, of course, that there are no scientific evidences whatsoever to support the claims of the Bible - that at the beginning of His creation project, God made the heavens and the earth, and that more than 2,000 years ago, a man called Jesus walked on this earth, died on the cross because of our sins and then rose again from the dead. There is definitely ample of evidence supporting and undergirding the authenticity of the Bible, as well as the arguments and proofs leading persuasively to the existence of the Creator and His Will for this earth.

Some of these evidences that I can think of from the top of my mind include:

1. The early writing of the Biblical manuscripts - The New Testament was written within a few decades after Jesus' life, with the earliest letter from Paul dating to 55 AD and the last book, the book of Revelations, dating to 90 AD. All these writings all date back to within one to two generations after Jesus' life, when there was still strong eye witness accounts and testimonies from first generational believers who saw Jesus' with their own eyes.
2. The number of Biblical manuscripts and their coherence to one another - Up to date there are thousands of Biblical manuscripts discovered in many different places throughout the world and there is a general coherence among them in terms of their core doctrine. More than 90% of the variations among these manuscripts are mostly spelling variations that do not affect their core message in any way. The presence of many manuscripts that are coherent with each other, coupled with the early writing of the manuscripts, suggest that the Bible is less likely to have been the product of myth makers or fanciful story tellers. Today, we believe in the historicity of events in the empire of Rome, for example, based upon a few writings of historians that date several generations after the events have occurred. Now, we have a historical record that was written within 2 generations after the said event with thousands of copies of it found in many places throughout the world. So what does this say then about the Bible?
3. There are records of non-believers around about the same period of time depicting and detailing about the life of Jesus and the founding of the early church - There are writings from historians who themselves are non-Christians living at around the same time as Jesus and the first believers talking about the life of a prophet or teacher among the Jews who was rejected and despised, and of an early movement of believers founded upon the belief in a man raised from the dead.
4. There are shameful events in the Bible - Historians place more weight and give more credibility to accounts that include shameful records and details in them because it shows that the authors are more likely to be telling the truth and not making up their own stories, for who trying to concoct a grand fairy tale to gather believers would talk about shameful acts that would only discredit them, unless if it were true? In the Bible, we see numerous such shameful events, such as the apostles deserting Christ, the apostle Peter denying Christ, Christ tortured, beaten and crucified, all of which are not exactly top class material for a nice, neat, hero's story.

The scientific world is replete with such evidence all pointing in the direction of the authenticity of the Bible and the presence of a good Creator who raised Jesus from the dead. I have merely touched the tip of the iceberg and presented the appetisers, yet I shall not attempt to expound on and explicate each and every single evidence and argument for the Creator, the Bible and His promises because it is not my intention in this entry. 

Scientific evidence and philosophical arguments are only able to get you to a certain point. Beyond that point is chasm and to get to the other side requires you to take the step of faith. The evidence will get you to the point of realising the possibility of the existence of a Creator and the truthfulness of His promises as revealed through His Word in the Bible. Yet, as to any form of evidence, no matter how persuasive it is, it is disputable and indeed, many people have found more and more profound arguments and challenges to the evidences presented, regardless of how good or compelling they are. Therefore, I believe that the evidence should either propel us to the knowledge of the Creator, or undergird and lend support to our faith in the promises of the Creator, but they should never be the sole reason or core foundation stone of our faith.

To be sure, however, we are not called into blind faith. Yet, at the same time, faith does not mean knowing everything or having all the evidence to the point where we can incontrovertibly say to the atheist: "See, I'm right. You're wrong!" because possessing the knowledge of everything and having the whole details of the plan no longer makes faith, faith. Faith, as the apostle Paul tells us, is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. The first part tells us that faith requires a sub-stance (or under-standing) of the things that we hope for. It means that we have caught glimpses of and experienced partly the promises of God for us, and we invest into the promise knowing that it is good and purposeful. The second part tells us that faith is being sure of things not seen. It means that for the remainder of the things that we have no physical evidence of, there is the certainty that comes from the understanding the promises of God to know that they are trustworthy and true.

So then, if faith is not about trying to get more evidence to prove that I am absolutely right, then what is my faith about? What the reasons behind my faith?

I believe that my faith comes in the fact that His promises for humanity is good and meaningful. I believe in the goodness of the Creator revealed in the Bible, calling humanity to a life of love, peace and meaning. We know and believe deep down to be true that the way to bring restoration and healing on to this earth is by people who are willing to lay down their lives in love and sacrifice, who are willing to give their lives calling people into purpose and identity, an identity not defined by other people's judgements or comparisons, but one that is unique and personal to each and every individual. I believe in the ways of Jesus as told in the gospels to be the true way of living that brings grace, salvation and meaning to all of humanity.

Just in case it comes to the question of the Bible being a good set of moral teachings telling us how to be good and nice people, it hammers out the promise of the resurrection. As insane as it sounds, resurrection makes so much sense to me. If one has invested his life into building something, yet did not live to see it come to fruition, the most intuitive thing to do would obviously to wake him up from the dead so that he can enjoy the fruits of his labour. If one is called to lay down his life to bring goodness and salvation to the people, then the most "logical" reason for that is because he will be raised from the dead again. 

This may sound illogical and completely nonsensical, but I believe in a faith that comes from the glimpses of goodness in the promises of God for this earth and for humanity, and a faith that comes from the power and authority of laying down one's life to bring grace and healing and of taking it up again in resurrection.

Illogical? Yes. Purposeless? Absolutely not!