Jesus and Jainism

Dear friend

You asked me to defend my disbelief in Jainism. I thought it better to defend my actual beliefs, to figure out a statement of defence of my faith.

The conversations we've had, among other things, has nudged me to question my beliefs, at least to ask the question why?

Why do I believe in a God, a Creator? Why do I 'give my life' to Jesus? Why do I believe in Him?

When I was fifteen years old these questions plagued me, and the thoughts whirred around and around in my head, questioning and contradicting one another, and a great fear gripped me that I don't believe, do not have the evidence to do so, and therefore am condemned. It was very scary, so scary that at times I could hardly even eat.

At a point it dawned on me, with the aid of my dad's wisdom, that I could choose to believe, and this set many fears to rest. So yes, it was a choice.

But still, why choose this way? Why choose Jesus? Why choose the God who is said to have revealed himself to Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Samuel, David and many many others?

Firstly. I believe creation is ample evidence for a Creator. It seems to make logical sense that existence does not come from non-existence, and that complex systems are made by intelligent beings, and that life does not come from non-life. Stands to reason that there is an intelligent being behind it, who breathed life into the living.

But why believe in this specific God? Why believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the creator? Why not the pantheon of Rome? Why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

So.. my answer to that, is Jesus. Haha, cop-out right? Swimming in circles? no.

I'm arguing from the resurrection. Jesus said that only the sign of Jonah will be given to those seeking a sign, the sign of Jonah is his death and resurrection. If Jesus was resurrected from the dead (evidence to follow), then it follows that he was no ordinary man, that supernatural powers were at work and are real, that there is more to life than we can see. His resurrection would prove his wildest claim (that he is to rise from the dead), and gives him resounding credibility.

Much research has been done with regards to his death and resurrection, more can be read here. In summary though, historical evidence suggests he died on the cross, a few days later his body 'went missing', and around five hundred people saw him alive and breathing after even more had seen him die. The fact that the resurrection accounts depict women as the first witnesses to Jesus' resurrection draws serious question to the theories that the accounts were fictional - women's witness were not considered all that credible in 1st century Middle Eastern culture. Of all the possibilities, the idea that Jesus rose from the dead seems to be the narrative best supported by historical evidence.

"The silence of history is deafening when it comes to the testimony against the resurrection" - Tom Anderson

The resurrection draws sharp attention to Jesus.  While the resurrection in itself is not conclusive proof that Jesus is the Son of God and the coming Messiah, it does demand that Jesus be given serious consideration. Upon closer investigation one finds that Jesus fulfills many prophecies given by the prophets of Israel throughout the centuries, foretelling of a Saviour and Messiah who would suffer for the salvation of his people, the fulfilment of God's promises to Abraham, the father of the faith.

Many feel that faith is a leap in the dark, a self-inflicted blindness, a mindless submission to tradition, but this need not be the case, and indeed should not. The story is told of Thomas who, shortly after Jesus resurrection, refused to believe that Jesus was alive until he had seen it with his own eyes, and had touched Jesus' wounds. To this, Jesus appeared to Thomas, and invited him to touch his wounds, to examine the evidence and see for himself that Jesus was as alive as ever.