Join Our Mailing List

Print this page

THE 3-R’S OF RELIGION

(Matt. 7:17-20)

There’s a lot of unreasonable, unrealistic and irresponsible nonsense being propagated in the name of religion. Some of these movements are literally “getting away with murder!”

Faith healers give false hopes; evangelists criticize psychology, ridicule science, and censor history; fanatics describe demons and denounce “devil worship;” psychotics do terrible deeds in the name of God or the name of Satan. It’s significant that you never read about atheists or “secular humanists” who kill prostitutes or burn babies or beat children and say, “My philosophy told me to do it!” Yet, warped religious notions often lead to such atrocities.

Unfortunately, religious organizations are not subject to the same “truth in advertisement” standards required of other businesses. They aren’t held liable in the same malpractice suits that threaten other professions. Instead, absurdities are overlooked and damage is excused. Educators seem reluctant to challenge theologians. Politicians hesitate to criticize groups with pious labels. There’s almost a superstition about examining or evaluating anything that’s classed as religious. Such timidity is neither wise nor Scriptural. Jesus challenged temple authorities, criticized traditional teachings and demonstrated that spiritual analysis is not only our privilege, it’s our duty. He said over and over again, “You will know them by their fruits . . .” (Matt. 7:16). “Each tree is known by its own fruit . . .” (Luke 6:44).
In fact, it’s by your fruits that you stand or fall. “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down, and thrown into the fire” (Matt. 7:19). Fruits mean practical results.

Therefore, effects, not orthodoxy should be the criteria of all doctrines and practices. A religion that isn’t reasonable, realistic and responsible isn’t right. It’s as simple as that! The “Three R’s of Religion” must be emphasized. Before you accept, believe, support or follow any ideology ask yourself three questions: Is this reasonable? Is this realistic? Is this responsible?

I. Reasonable things hang together.

Reasonable things can be followed to their logical conclusions without any copouts or coverups. They fit. They make sense.

If you have to find loopholes and make exceptions in your religion, then it’s not right.

If you have inconsistent consequences without causes in your religion, then it’s not right.

If you have to defend and apologize for your religion, then it’s not right.
An omniscient God is reasonable. If He’s reasonable, then His methods and purposes will be reasonable. Remember, even God is known by His fruits.
If a religious doctrine or practice is not good with intrinsic virtue, then it’s not right.

If a religious doctrine or practice is not righteous with justice and equity, then it’s not right.

If a religious doctrine or practice is not true with openness and honesty, then it’s not right.

“For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth; Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord” (Eph. 5:9,10).

It’s unreasonable to claim that a loving God ordains human souls to perdition.

It’s unreasonable to claim that a just God condemns people for saying the wrong words in a creed or making the wrong moves in a ritual.

It’s unreasonable to claim that an intelligent God is dogmatic about the details of church government or the use of musical instruments or regulations against females communicating the gospel. Such trivial doctrinal disputes are incongruent with a reasonable God.

II. Realistic things can be verified by experience.

Realistic things produce positive, overall, long-term benefits. They work! They are authentic!

When reality conflicts with doctrine, something has to give. We must adjust both elements until they mesh or we must relinquish one of them.

Unfortunately, when reality confronts religion, it’s usually reality that suffers. People tend to deny, suppress or twist truth until they see no contradiction.
If you have to deny obvious facts in order to maintain your religion, then it’s not right.

If you have to suppress evidence in order to maintain your religion, then it’s not right.

If you have to pervert or twist events in order to maintain your religion, then it’s not right.

Instead, we must hold to the most valid, not necessarily the most comforting of the two conflicting elements. When forced to make choices, we must choose the good. “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (I Thes. 5:21).

To prove means to examine, test and try. It doesn’t mean to swallow or meekly accept.

An omniscient God is realistic. If He is realistic then all of His methods and purposes are realistic.

John said we are obligated to declare what our eyes and ears tell us. “What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you . . .” (I John 1:3).
We must be like the blind man who stubbornly stuck to his facts. “Whether he is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see” (John 9:25).

Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, we speak that which we know, and bear witness of that which we have seen . . .” (John 3:11). This suggests that we are not to deny our senses in order to remain orthodox.

III. Responsible things strengthen people.

Responsible things achieve ultimate good for all involved. They call forth the highest and the best in each individual.

If your religion encourages submission and lack of initiative, then it’s not right.

If your religion allows you to blame circumstances, evil spirits and false prophets for your problems, then it’s not right.

If your religion lets you escape personal accountability, then it’s not right.
We fail because of our own ignorance and negligence, not because the Devil made us do it. We succeed because of our own determination and effort, not because God decided to bestow a blessing.

An omniscient God is responsible. If He is responsible, then all of His methods and purposes will promote responsibility.

A religion that turns men and women into divine apple polishers or spiritual bootlickers is not right.

A religion that requires us to behave against our own enlightened self-interest is not right.

Paul said we should renew our minds in order to determine what is good and acceptable and perfect. “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom. 12:2).
He also said we are individually accountable. “He should not compare himself with others. Each person should judge his own actions. Then he can be proud for what he himself has done. Each person must be responsible for himself” (Gal. 6:4, ncv).

God’s laws are reasonable not arbitrary. God’s processes are realistic, not mysterious. God’s purposes for human beings include responsibility and autonomy, not subordination.

“It is given unto you to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven . . .” (Matt. 13:11).

In medicine, if a treatment makes us worse, we stop and change it. In education, if a method doesn’t work, we stop and change it. In agriculture, if the fertilizer we’re using doesn’t produce healthy growth, we stop and change it. It’s only in religion that we must doggedly continue even if the theology is hurting us, destroying others and creating social problems. It’s only in religion that we can’t stop and evaluate and adjust.

Science is self-correcting, and if religion is to retain credibility, it too must be self-correcting.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This issue of NEW PERSPECTIVES is from an unpublished manuscript © copyrighted 2008 by Miles and Maralene Wesner, Idabel, OK. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO USE THEM IN ANY WAY YOU THINK IS APPROPRIATE. The only thing we ask is that you give credit for original material in PUBLISHED works.

Miles E Wesner