Imaginary god

Many have a god that is the product of their own mind; a god to whom all ways are equal and who does not judge anyone for his deeds

In modern times, many question the Christian faith. Creation in particular has been called into question. People don't believe that God created everything in six days, but they believe in the birth of life by itself, in Darwin's theory and the long periods it requires. People stick to these theories, even though the origin of life has not been proven and intermediate forms between basic groups have not been found. It has been confirmed by several famous scientists and paleontologists.

One thing that people have also questioned is the Christian concept of God. These people do not believe in the God who has revealed himself in the Bible and through Jesus Christ. They do not believe what the Bible teaches about him. Instead, they speak of their god, saying, "My God is such and such." In practice, it usually means the following sayings and concepts:

“My god is so broad-minded that He works in all religions. All paths are equal and will lead us to Him.”

“My god is so accepting that He doesn’t condemn anyone to hell. There is no judgment.”

“MY GOD IS SO BROAD-MINDED THAT HE WORKS IN ALL RELIGIONS. ALL PATHS ARE EQUAL AND WILL LEAD US TO HIM.”

Logical contradictions. When we begin to examine the view that all roads are equal and lead to the same God - as presented in the previous example - we immediately encounter logical contradictions. They can only be passed by rejecting the special features of these religions. The following things cause problems:

• The question of the number of gods is the first problem. For example, Buddhism and Confucianism have no god, while Hinduism has over 300 million. In Hinduism it is also believed in the divinity of everything. Instead, Islam, Judaism and Christianity teach the existence of one God. So when the number of gods varies so much - no god at all, one or millions of gods - how can all these paths and beliefs lead to the same God? Not all options can be true at the same time.

• The perception of God's nature varies. E.g. Muslims do not believe in the biblical teaching that God has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ and that there is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in God. Muslims also do not understand God's love. Even in Hinduism, god's love and forgiveness is not known as in the Christian faith.

• Either salvation is by grace (Jesus' work for us) or by works (the most common conception in religions), but not through both at the same time.

• The concept of life after death varies: In Buddhism and other religions it is believed in heaven and hell, while the Hindus do not believe in them. These concepts are opposites to each other, and it is impossible that the same things do not exist and exist at the same time.

• Reincarnation (Hinduism, Buddhism) and non-reincarnation (Islam, Judaism, Christianity, etc.) cannot both be true at the same time.

Have people been at the top? As stated, many believe that truth is relative or that there are many different paths to God. They do not believe in the existence of a single truth that can only be found in the Bible, but consider the presentation of such a view to be narrow-minded. Instead, in this view, everyone can choose the form of Christianity or other religiosity that suits them, because all paths are equally good. Religion is measured only by moral grounds and nothing else matters.

One must ask such a person: How do you know that? Do you have concrete information on the matter? Have you been across the border, do you know the conditions there and on what basis does God accept people? That is, if someone has lived for a few decades only on earth, he cannot know things beyond the border based on his limited experience. Although he can present his views and opinions, they lack a concrete basis. It's a question of his imagination and what he wants to believe and not of certain knowledge. Such information is of little importance.

The former is due to the fact that if someone has lived for a few decades, and only on earth, such a person cannot accurately know what is beyond the border. He may have opinions but no personal experience of the afterlife, so it is questionable to trust such a person's certain claims and opinions. If they are trusted, it is the same as asking directions about New York from a Chinese or an African farmer who’s never been there. Such a person cannot give correct information because he does not know these regions.

So, when we're looking for guidance about New York City, we ask someone who's been there and knows the area. Only such a person can provide information that is reliable. Only he knows exactly what New York City is like and where each attraction or one of its areas is located. He can guide us and give us the right information.

It is the same with eternity. In that area, one person knows and knows the afterlife. He is Jesus who came from eternity and went back to eternity. He has no ambiguity about what lies beyond the border because he is the Son of God and has been with God the Father before coming to earth. He is certainly the best and most reliable expert we can turn to. Of course, we can't check the accuracy of his words either. We can only consider them to be true or false. Many unbelieving priests consider them a lie, that is, claim Jesus as a liar. He himself said that he was the truth and that he spoke the truth. Which option is correct: Jesus' words about himself or the opposing views of some contemporary priests?

Something of the previous view emerges from the following quotation. It shows the notion that all roads lead to the top, that is, to God, and that it doesn't matter what you believe. It is considered a tolerant thought, but in reality it is a philosophical view that is difficult to prove true. If a person has not been to the "top of the mountain" and does not know the conditions beyond the border, it is a question only of his own imagination:

Socrates: How can you know that they all go to the top?

Sanna: How can you know that they do not?

Socrates: I do not know. And I do not claim that I do. But you claim that you know that they do end up there. How can you know this if you are not standing at the top?

Sanna: No, I am not at the top. I do not assume that.

Socrates: Obviously, you are assuming something else – you assume that you know that all religions are of human origin, that they are rather our ways to God than God's ways to us. This is what you think of religion, is it not?

Sanna: Yes.

Socrates: How can you know that? How can you know that it is not the opposite, as your own religion – the Bible – claims: that God searches for people more than people search for God?

Sanna: I do not know. But does it make any difference?

Socrates: If it is the invention of God and not ours – note that I do not know if it is or not – it would make sense that there would only be one way made by God. If, on the other hand, religion comes from man, it would make sense that there are many ways, because there are many people, nations, and cultures. And if religion comes from man, it would make sense that all religions are equal in principle, because they are human, limited combinations of good and bad. If religion comes from God, it would make sense that other religions, human religions, would be of lower rank than the religion of God, because human things are of lower rank than divine ones. (1)

Are these people Hindus? While some people believe that all beliefs are equal and that there are many equal paths to God, these people may not know that one great world religion teaches the same: Hinduism. So are these people Hindus? At least their view is very similar to this religion. A Hindu holy book (Bhagavadagita, IV:11) points out how all paths are equal:

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

Respect. One characteristic of people, who think that all paths are equal, is that they do not see the differences between religions as real. They try to deny the differences, even though they exist as already stated earlier. They don't think that if all truths are equal, truth becomes irrelevant. You have to abandon logic in that.

Another characteristic of these people is that they regard as tolerance the Hindu view that all religions are basically the same thing and lead to the same goal. They may also think that such a view will eliminate conflicts between followers of religions. However, they do not take into account that in Hindu countries, where people have the same notion as they have, this has not happened. Hindus have attacked those who think differently.

Can this issue be approached from another angle?

The teachings of Jesus and the apostles can be used for this. They lead to the fact that we should not deny the differences between beliefs - as if they did not exist. They still exist. Instead, we are told to respect everyone and love even our enemies. In practice, it means acknowledging the existence of different beliefs and differences, but trying to respect people regardless. This does not remove differences of opinion but confrontation and hostility between different groups of people. It is tolerance and love that Jesus and the apostles taught:

- (Matt 5:44-48) But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which spitefully use you, and persecute you;

45 That you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

46 For if you love them which love you, what reward have you? do not even the publicans the same?

47 And if you salute your brothers only, what do you more than others? do not even the publicans so?

48 Be you therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

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

”my god is so accepting that he doesn’t condemn anyone to hell. there is no judgment.”

Another common point of view that some people have is that there is no judgment and no hell. They reject the Bible's teachings on these matters, even though Jesus and the apostles often referred to them. In this view, man himself decides what he wants to believe and what not; what he wants to add or remove. He chooses a god and faith that he happens to like. A God who condemns an unrepentant person to hell is not part of his image of God. In this matter, however, it is worth paying attention to the following points:

Other religions. When exploring the previous view, it is good to start with other religions. When these people value other religions, it is interesting that the idea of hell or judgment also appears in them:

• In Buddhism it is believed in hell. The murderers have no way out of there.

• In Islam it is believed in hell.

• Hinduism has the law of karma which refers to judgment. There is no forgiveness, but a person has to reap what he has sown. It is basically the same as what the New Testament teaches:

- (Gal 6:7) Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that shall he also reap.

- (1 Peter 1:17) And if you call on the Father, who without respect of persons judges according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear

Do these people believe in an evil god? Many, who have the former view, criticize the idea of judgment and hell, or the God of the Old Testament and the judgments appearing in the Old Testament.

However, one must ask such people, do they believe in an evil god? For a god that does not respond to the evil that Hitler and other wrongdoers have done to others cannot be a good god. If He said it didn't matter at all and if He gave his consent to wrongdoing, he would be evil. You shouldn't believe in such a God. However, many of these people believe. Aril Edvardsen has explained this topic while discussing it with a person:

I let him speak and I didn’t say a word back. “Well, maybe I believe that there is a Creator”, he continued. “But I cannot believe in a loving and righteous God, when the Bible says that there is hell and judgement day.”

Do you think so? I said. ”I think the complete opposite. I could not believe in a loving and righteous God if that, what you call hell, wouldn’t exist – a final settlement day for people, when everyone must account for what they have done in this life, the good and the bad.

He looked at me in confusion and said: “You cannot be serious!”

“Yes I am!” I replied. ”I mean exactly what I said. If tyrants, dictators, terrorists and bad people, who have tortured and destroyed others in this life, wouldn’t have to pay and settle for their actions sooner or later, then I couldn’t believe that a righteous God exists.” The doctor looked at me in astonishment and I continued: “Think about Adolf Hitler and Adolf Eichmann, who tortured and killed millions of people in concentration camps – all the while living a luxurious life style during the Second World War. Would they get away with it just like that – getting shot in the head and getting hanged? The whole thing would be over in a matter of seconds and then nothing, while many ordinary people in this town die with much worse suffering than those two – like cancer and other diseases.

Would Hitler and Eichmann get off more easily from the world than others – and after death there wouldn’t be anything? Not any kind of reckoning? …No, then I couldn’t believe in a loving and righteous God.”

“Please continue”, he said and I did:

“The Bible says that God is both loving and righteous, and that is why judgement day will come to us all, and then all of us must account for ourselves. Then wrongful people get their doom and those, who unjustly suffered, get their amends.

The whole human life, death and eternity would be completely without a purpose if people wouldn’t believe in judgement day, the day of justice.”

The district doctor sat silent and listened. All of a sudden he looked at me as if he had come up with something entirely new.

“You are absolutely right!” He exclaimed. “I haven’t thought of this before. That is logical. You are totally right, sure enough. Life here on Earth is often tough and unfair for many. People’s lives will get destroyed and the cruelty of other people causes harm as much in marriages, families, work places, refugee camps as in battle fields.

If you wouldn’t have to pay for what you’ve done in this life – for all that humans have done, good and bad – then there really couldn’t be a loving and righteous God. I must think about this!” he mumbled. (2)

Secular Judiciary. When many deny judgment, they do not take into account that, for example, the secular judicial system refers to the possibility of judgment. In general, all societies have a judicial system whose tasks include bringing murderers, criminals and other wrongdoers to account for their actions. Physical and sexual violence, theft, fraud and embezzlement are common criminal reasons for which a sentence can be passed. This has been a common practice in all societies throughout the centuries. If the judiciary works correctly – it hasn't always worked – it stays within these frameworks.

On the other hand, if there is a secular justice system whose duties include bringing murderers, criminals and other wrongdoers to account for their actions, why is it hard to believe in the idea that there is a judgment after this life as well? Judgment after death is no more strange than the fact that people answer for their wrongdoings in an earthly court. Either model follows the same principle, so there is one good reason to take the idea of a posthumous day of reckoning seriously. God will then make people answer for their actions just as it happens now in the secular judiciary. Everyone has to account for how they have lived and treated others. Everyone reaps what he sows.

- (Rom 14:12) So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

- (Hebr 9:27) And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment

- (Gal 6:7) Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that shall he also reap.

Imaginary god. As noted, some deny the existence of judgment and hell. They may consider themselves progressive, tolerant, and loving, and explain that the New Testament teachings in this area represent an outdated worldview that is no longer valid. Often they talk in this context about extramarital sex affairs or the practice of homosexuality, which they defend in the name of love. They do not believe that the teachings of Jesus and the apostles on these matters are correct. They reject, for example, the following verses that talk about these things:

- (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.

- (Rev 22:14,15) Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and fornicators, and murderers, and idolaters, and whoever loves and makes a lie.

However, the view of these people can be questioned. How do they know things better than Jesus and the apostles? When has their God appeared in this world or to themselves? Have they met this god? Have they been beyond the border so that they can say with certainty that there is no judgment and no hell? Or is it all based on their vivid imagination and what they want God to be like ("my god")? These questions should be thought about, because there cannot be two opposite truths. If we hold the opposite view to Jesus and the apostles, we are wrong, or if we are right, they must have been wrong.

David Pawson continues on the same topic. He shows - while explaining the Book of Revelation - how it is not always decisive whether a person believes in God, but what kind of God he believes in. It is possible that man has an imaginary god. It means God, which is only in a person's own thoughts and head. Do you have such a God yourself?

I have lived long enough to realize that it isn’t that significant, whether a person believes in God or not. What is decisive is what kind of God he believes in or does not believe in. “I don't go to church,” many say, “but don't think I don't believe in God. Yes, I believe." What kind of God do you believe in then?" I always ask. That is the decisive question, not whether a person believes in God or not. These concepts are difficult to process, which is due to our modern perceptions, which are also prevalent inside the congregation. We have heard so much about love that we forget that in the same letter that says "God is love" it also says that "God is light". We have heard so much about God's grace that we have forgotten his justice. ...In the 15th chapter of the Gospel of Luke, it is only told about a merciful God without mentioning anything about His justice. In the 15th chapter of the book of Revelation, it is only told about God's justice and not a word is said about mercy. The truth consists of both. We have to keep that in mind, or else our concept of God will become distorted.

... The Book of Revelation does not say anything about God or Jesus that would contradict the Gospels. This last Book of the Book is directly given by Jesus - not by anyone else. It is the Revelation of Jesus Christ. In other words, you must accept the God of Revelation or reject Him. After that, you can create the God you like, but I guess you understand that it is just a product of your own imagination. This God is God and the Father of our Lord Jesus, and Him you must either accept or reject. He is the only God; He is who He is and you cannot change Him. (3)

If we continue on the same topic, i.e. why some people deny hell and believe in the concept of salvation for all, the main reason is surely that they have an imaginary god. They have chosen in their minds a god that happens to please them and then stick to that idea. They only accept things about God that please them, but reject especially the possibility of judgment. However, they cannot present any concrete evidence for their thoughts and cannot tell where their information comes from.

Let's look at a quote that refers to the same topic. It shows how a person can choose a God in his mind that happens to please him. He only accepts the Bible's teachings about a loving and forgiving God, but no judgment for the unrepentant. This kind of theology is characteristic of many unbelieving theologians and people alienated from God. They take only the good things from the Bible, but reject those that do not please them. Then it is worth asking why they usually read the Bible or other literature, if they have already predetermined their own opinions. All reading is then useless.

Sanna: So you mean that we should not interpret the Book based on our beliefs?

Socrates: Of course not! Doing so is confusing interpretation with belief.

Sanna: Oh.

Socrates: Besides, if you do so, why do you need the Bible at all?

Sanna: What do you mean?

Socrates: If it agrees with you, it is unnecessary and if it doesn’t, it’s wrong. Why read a book that must be unnecessary and wrong? In fact, why read anything or listen to anybody? After all, everything is unnecessary and wrong... Do you have any proof of God's forgiveness?

Sanna: No, I do not.

Socrates: So you only know through Jesus and from the Bible that God is forgiving.

Sanna: Yes.

Socrates: Do these two sources say anything about God’s punishment, justice and judgement, or hell?

Sanna: Yes, they do.

Socrates: All of these three things are taught by the Bible?

Sanna: Yes, they are.

Socrates: Does Jesus also teach all of these three things?

Sanna: Well yes, in his parables, but in my interpretation...

Socrates: It is only fable?

Sanna: Yes.

Socrates: So, why don’t you think that Jesus’ teachings about the loving and forgiving God are also fables?

Sanna: I simply cannot believe that God is unforgiving...

Socrates: The only reason why you do this is that the literal judgement by God contradicts your belief system. (...) Your believing in God being forgiving but not judgmental is a little like a bar of chocolate, right? It is a wonderful idea, the idea that when we deal with God, we will only be faced with one side of God’s fairness. The fact that God will reward you for being good but will not punish you for being bad – isn’t that a wonderful and attractive idea? Is it not true that it attracts you like a bar of chocolate? (...)

Sanna: Alright, let me teach you one thing. Socrates, there is one thing I know for sure. God is love, not a judge. God is a silent, small voice, not an earthquake.

Socrates: I’m not going to go into how you know that now. However, I will ask you one question: Why could God not be both?

Sanna: How would that be possible?

Socrates: Does love not make it own assessments? Does not love have eyes? Could love not equally well be an earthquake than a silent, small voice? In fact, could love not be the largest earthquake of them all?

Sanna: I don’t know which God you believe in but I prefer the God of peace.

Socrates: That may be the case, but the problem is that it is not about what you prefer but what is the truth.

Sanna: It is a question of which god I choose to believe.

Socrates: Do you select your beliefs like you would select a bar of chocolate?

Sanna (confused): Well, of course not... I don’t know anymore...

Socrates: Hah, those are the magical words! (4)

Conscience and guilt. It has been brought up above how some people can have an imaginary god and that they do not believe in any judgment. They consider it a false view.

But as noted, there are things that point to the possibility of a verdict. Among other things, the secular judicial system can be considered as one such example. It has much in common with the coming judgment that Jesus and the apostles spoke of.

One thing that is an indirect reference to the possibility of judgment is also a person's conscience and the associated sense of guilt. We can carry guilt for the wrong things we have done, and that is right. It shows that we haven't fully hardened ourselves and that one day we will be judged for our actions. If a person is not responsible to anyone, why does he feel guilty for his actions? Our conscience bears witness to God and judgment.

Our conscience also shows our inadequacy. Everyone has to admit that they have not always done what they knew to be right. Everyone is imperfect. David Pawson continues on this topic:

Everyone has a conscience, according to which they will be judged: it is crucial, whether one’s conscience blames them or not on that day. God will look at your life and see, whether you acted in a way you knew to be right. Nothing else would be fairer than this – and yet there is no one, who would want their book to be opened with such principle.

I have talked with self-righteous people, who have considered themselves as good. Those, who say that “I’m just as good as he or she” or “I’m not any worse than people who go to church”, still cannot answer the question; “have you always done what you knew to be right”. I ask them if they can look me in the eye and say that they have always followed the light for as long as they could see it. I still haven’t found anyone, who would have said yes. Thus, meaning that there is no one, who could based on their life’s book answer anything else than “guilty, your honor”. (5)

ATTITUDES TOWARDS MISSIONARY WORK

- (Luke 11:52) Woe to you, lawyers! for you have taken away the key of knowledge: you entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in you hindered.

- (1 Thess 2:16) Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come on them to the uttermost.

When many people believe in the equality of all religions and that there is no judgment and hell, it is natural that they consider missionary work unimportant. Denying the importance of missionary work is very common among those who believe in the equality of religions and that there is no judgment. For when people think they have the same God, all roads are equal and there is no judgment, they see missionary work as pointless. Instead, such people may favor dialogue between adherents of different religions. However, these people do not take into account the following points, which are essential for missionary work:

God's love. The first reason to spread the gospel is that people do not know God's love. It does not occur in Islam and Hindus do not know it either. In them is not talked about how almighty God has loved and approached people and wants them close to him.

That is one good reason for missionary work: to tell about God's love and how people can be forgiven of their sins. This is what Christ's love for people obliges us to do. Rabi Maharaj, a former Hindu guru tells how this was new to him.

I stood up from my chair to ask her leave. There was no point in continuing this discussion. But she uttered the words, very quietly, that made me sit down again. “The Bible teaches that God is a God of love. I would like to share with you how I came to know Him.”

I was stunned. Never in all my years as a Hindu had I heard of a God of love! I listened to her eagerly.

“Because He loves us, he wants to draw us closer to Him.” This startled me, too. As a Hindu, I wanted to get close to God, but she was telling me that a loving God was trying to draw me nearer!

“The Bible also teaches that sin prevents us from getting close to God,” Molli continued, “and it also prevents us from knowing Him. This is why He sent Christ to die for our sins. And if we receive His forgiveness, we can know Him... ”

“Wait a minute!” I interrupted. Was she trying to convert me? I felt that I had to make some rebuttal. “I believe in karma. Whatever you sow you reap, and no one can change that. I don’t believe in forgiveness at all. It’s impossible! What’s done is done!”

“But God can do anything,” said Molli confidently. “He has a way to forgive us. Jesus said, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me.’ Jesus is the way. Because he died for our sins, God can forgive us!” (6)

Lack of assurance of salvation. A common thought pattern in Western countries today is that religion is only measured by moral criteria. The core of Christianity is defined as ethics, and therefore what is essential is no longer Christ and his atoning work, but the right values and striving for an ethically valuable life. The church's message to today's world can be found precisely in high morality. That's why it doesn't matter what a person believes, only how he lives. A person can believe in Christ or not and it doesn't matter much.

For the same reason, such a person considers differences between religions to be non-existent. When he thinks that religion is measured only on moral grounds, neither Christianity nor any other belief can be better than the other. Therefore, religions basically teach the same thing, even though they may appear different on the surface. A person can be a representative of any religion and it doesn't matter, because only morality is thought to matter. All paths are equal to God.

If we think about such a person's conception of morality, he is absolutely right that morality is characteristic in the teachings of different religions. It appears in Hinduism's Law of Karma, Buddhism's Eightfold Path, Confucianism, and other religions. It cannot be denied that they have the same features as Jesus' Sermon on the Mount and the ethical teachings of the New Testament. When Jesus urged to treat and love your neighbor as yourself, there is nothing new in the matter in itself. It has been known throughout the ages, although it has often not been followed. In addition, even secular laws contain features that distinguish things morally.

But what is the lack of good deeds and morals? Although they are valuable and good things, they have one great weakness: they do not bring certainty of salvation to anyone. Man never knows if he has done enough of them, if he is good enough, and if God approves of his efforts. He does not find reassurance by observing himself or doing his best. This is a fact of all major religions, including Christianity, which does not take seriously the atoning work of Jesus Christ. Paul Little shares his findings:

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. (7)

The reason why we can’t to find assurance of salvation from within ourselves is simple: we are sinful and imperfect beings, as the following passages will show us. It is impossible to find assurance, when we are not one hundred percent perfect:

- (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.

What is the solution if you don’t have assurance of salvation? It is the same old thing that unbelieving people want to deny and despise: the atoning work of Jesus Christ for us (1 Cor 1:18: For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but to us which are saved it is the power of God.). Because when an unbelieving person has denied the work of atonement and forgiveness, he has only brought in its place a religion of law and ethical ideals - things that do not offer people the certainty of salvation, or even hope. They in themselves only lead to a dead end.

Here is one reason why missionary work should be done. When people lack certainty of salvation and certainty of God's acceptance, they should be told how God has already prepared for us the forgiveness of sins and access to His connection. It is not a question of man's building a road to God, as occurs in religions, but of the fact that God in his love drew near to us, reconciled us through Christ and gives the gift of eternal life. Salvation no longer depends on our actions but on what another has done for us. God was the initiator and salvation can be received as a gift:

- (John 3:16,17) 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.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

- (Rom 5:6-8) For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.

8 But God commends his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

- (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.

- (2 Cor 5:18-20) And all things are of God, who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and has given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

19 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.

- (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.

- (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.

- (Rev 22:17) And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that hears say, Come. And let him that is thirsty come. And whoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Bound people. One reason for the mission work is the bound people. For example, here in Finland, some people criticized it when the preacher Pirkko Jalovaara talked about being freed from demons (just as the Bible shows), but in many countries it is a big problem. In these societies, people are bound because of centuries of idolatry, witchcraft, and the occult. They need help and a key to how to free themselves from the slavery of false powers. The key to that is Jesus, who has already defeated all the powers of darkness on the cross. If people is not told about this, they’ll stay in their bound state - even here in Western countries. Mere social work, no matter how good it is, is not enough on its own:

Doctor Charles Kraft, my colleague from Fuller’s theological seminary, tells what happened to him in Nigeria. He tried to teach, what the Letter to the Romans has to say, to a small tribe. After a few months the same people came to him and explained very politely that his teachings are good, but did not cater to their needs at all. They needed wisdom for their nightly battles with bad spirits that were tormenting them. Doctor Kraft had to admit that, unfortunately, he never received training to act against bad spirits. (8)

The uniqueness of Jesus. At the beginning it was stated how many do not believe in the uniqueness of Jesus, and this is a big reason why they do not believe in the importance of missionary work either. They do not see Jesus as the son of God who came from heaven to atone for our sins, but only as a great spiritual teacher or a wise man. Then it is natural that they do not see the need for missionary work.

However, the fact that Jesus is only considered a great spiritual teacher or a wise person is logically the worst option. No good teacher can make such claims about himself (Son of God, Messiah, way, truth and life, came from the heaven from the Father’s beside) as Jesus made, unless they are really true. If his claims are false, he cannot be a good teacher. On the other hand, if his claims are true, he must be divine. A mere wise person or a spiritual teacher cannot make the following promises, but if Jesus' words about himself and eternal life are true, they are to be taken seriously. They are also a good reason to tell all nations how important it is to respond positively to Jesus:

- (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 5:39,40) Search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

40 And you will not come to me, that you might have life.

- (John 14:1-6) Let not your heart be troubled: you believe in God, believe also in me.

2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you to myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

4 And where I go you know, and the way you know.

5 Thomas said to him, Lord, we know not where you go; and how can we know the way?

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

References:

1. Peter Kreeft: Sokrates & Jeesus, p. 62,63

2. Aril Edvardsen: Rakkauden terapia (Kjaerlighetens Terapi), p. 68-70

3. David Pawson: Matka ilmestyskirjan maailmaan (Come With Me Through Revelation), p. 199,200

4. Peter Kreeft: Sokrates & Jeesus, p. 34-36

5. David Pawson: Matka ilmestyskirjan maailmaan (Come With Me Through Revelation), p. 249,250

6. Rabindranath R. Maharaj: Gurun kuolema (Death of a Guru), p. 113,114

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

8. John Wimber, Kevin Springer: Ihmeet ja merkit (Power Evangelism), p. 60