jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (166 posts)

If Christianity really is the truth, shouldn't scrutiny demonstrate its truth?

  1. JMcFarland profile image85
    JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago

    If Christianity really is the truth, shouldn't scrutiny demonstrate its truth?

    All over the place in America, we see believers responding with outrage and defiance when Christian beliefs are challenged or questioned.  If the beliefs of Christianity are, in fact, the truth - the only truth, then shouldn't believers want it to be questioned, challenged and scrutinized so as to demonstrate the truth of their claims?  How, then, can they claim that their beliefs are being attacked by questions, and say that they're being persecuted simply by being challenged?  If a belief is true, shouldn't it stand up to any challenge that can be thrown at it, without claiming attack?

  2. ChristinS profile image96
    ChristinSposted 3 years ago

    In theory, yes it should stand up to scrutiny if you claim it to be a fact.  Many hardcore religious are the first to not understand the meaning of a Scientific theory for example.  When discussing evolution they are the first to say "but it's only a theory, prove it!" Not realizing that scientific theory is challenged routinely and tested.  If you ask them to do the same, it's an "attack on beliefs".  No, actually it isn't - it's an exploration of them.

    1. gmwilliams profile image84
      gmwilliamsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      A+, many religionists blindly accept their faith either through family or from religious authorities.They react vituperatively when asked to question their faith because they're quite fearful of WHAT they will/may discover re: their faith.

    2. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And what people DO DISCOVER when asking the hard questions is what leads many away from Christianity. There are two responses to hard ?'s in Christianity: (1) Ignore them or (2) find any little shred of the Bible to support what you WANT to believe.

    3. Chris Remmie profile image83
      Chris Remmieposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      You can't test evolution. You can only observe evidence and make assessments and speculations. Evolution is a hope against the Creator taken upon faith. To be clear, adaptation is not evolution.

    4. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Chris,  I don't think you know anything about evolution,  but thanks for stopping by.   Perhaps some research is in order

    5. ChristinS profile image96
      ChristinSposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Chris - you prove my point. Assessing evidence - scientific.  Blind faith without evidence - religion.  Prove God exists? speculation - no proof.  Speculation ok for believers and not for the scientifically minded? doesn't make sense, sorry.

    6. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, may I suggest brushing up on a science book, Chris. Evolution happens to be the best explanation of how everything came to be as it is, based on the available evidence. It does not necessarily preclude a god. The Bible story is lacking in eviden

    7. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Chris i think observing evidence and making assessments would count as testing. also Darwin ran hundreds of tests that brought him to his conclusions.

    8. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Robert I guess scientist like Henry Morris, John Morris, Larry Vardiman, Steve Austin, Andrew Snelling, Kurt Wise or how about Albert Einstein and Issac Newton aren't real scientist then for belief of a creator. Nothing can't create everything!

  3. christicue profile image74
    christicueposted 3 years ago

    Jmcfarland, I agree. Most Christians are too quick to become defensive. Exploring the truth and knowing it for yourself is of the utmost importance. All too often, Christianity is shallow and the believer doesn't know the answer themselves, or, they are so offended by what the other person is claiming that they react in defense instead of allowing the other person to share what led them to that belief and carry the burden of proof for their ideas on their own. This question brings to mind an important verse in the Bible for me about the Berean in Acts 17:11. It says, "Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessolonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said is true." Each of us should do the same...if we don't then our faith is not our own. Jesus made an outrageous claim in John 14:6, "I am the way, the Truth and the life." If the Bible is true, then it will be able to measure up and stand on its own. Much of the problem is that many people don't understand what the Bible is to begin with, who God claims He is, and how it reveals the heart and nature of man as opposite of God.  Jesus also said, "know the truth and the truth will set you free. . .when the son sets you free, you will be free indeed."  Jn 8:32, 36 Jesus' relationship with His Father while here in the flesh is the example to us of how we can discover truth for ourselves. I myself have been a defensive Christian. It does no good. So, now, I'm always curious...what do you believe and what led you to that conclusion? My personal goal as someone who wants nothing to do with lies or deception is to do what Paul advises in 2 Corinthians 10:5 and "demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God and take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ." When you purposefully and honestly measure the world against the Word of God, the Word always proves itself to be true, the question is, are you willing to accept it?

    1. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Do you see? "Measuring" the Bible against the world only works if you already have faith that the Bible is the truth of god. When you realize that most of the stories and doctrines of the Bible CANNOT be proved to be true, then you have the problem.

  4. profile image0
    Lybrahposted 3 years ago

    The thing you don't understand is that Christians are called to have faith--believe in that which cannot be proven.  Why is there a need to poke and prod at something you don't even believe in? 

    You can challenge and scrutinize the religion, that is one thing, but then you can also rebuke it and mock it.  That simply is uncalled for.

    1. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Beliefs cannot get hurt feelings.   The is nothing wrong with ridiculing beliefs.   That is different than ridiculing believers.   I'm truly sorry that you don't seem to understand the distinction.   I do not have to respect beliefs.   No one does.

    2. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, you do.  I don't sit around making fun of Hindu gods and their stories, out of respect for Hindu people.  What if I wrote a hub blasting Hindu beliefs?  I wouldn't.

    3. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry,  but you don't.   Some people believe ridiculous things,  like aliens are implanting chips in lucky charms.   If a believer treats me with respect,  I respect them.   If not,  I assume they want to be treated the same way they treat me.

    4. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      So you are mad at the world, and lash out with your anti-Christian hubs.  Do you assume all believers don't respect you?  It is hurtful to call someone's belief ridiculous.

    5. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not the least bit angry.   I write my hubs because the topic interests me,  and it falls in line with my past and my education.   I see Muslims criticize Christians and visa versa.  It's free speech.   Don't read it if it offends you.

    6. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I would assume it would be equally as hurtful to tell random strangers they will burn in hell for eternity/suffer the consequences of not accepting jesus.

      Two cents and all.

    7. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Agree with that,  link,  if that person is susceptible to fear as a motivator.  Especially since hell of any sort had no evidence.   Much like many other religious claims.

    8. jlpark profile image84
      jlparkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'm with JM and Link on this - why is it okay to tell random strangers they will go to Hell for being who they were made to be, but when someone rebukes your belief (belief, NOT you personally..unlike the previous example) it's 'uncalled for"?

    9. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I don't normally outright tell people they are going to burn in conversation, but I admit I have written about it hubs and on forums.  I don't do it to hurt people.  I am just looking out for them--I'm warning them.

    10. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And atheists don't criticize beliefs with the intent of hurting the feelings of believers.   Hurt feelings are a personal choice that a belief cannot make.   We talk about it because it's important and to share a different side.   Free speech.

    11. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Lybrah, it is hard to believe you are looking out for people when your "warnings" usually happen when you can't answer questions they ask you and you exit the conversation.

    12. EtherInfomat profile image59
      EtherInfomatposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with JM. Also if it can not be proven it shouldn't be there. Religion is just something humans made up to make themselves feel special.

    13. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Very well said Lybrah!

  5. profile image0
    Daveadams36posted 3 years ago

    Well I'm not a Christian, but i do believe in the universe/god..I'm not religious, but i have worked it out for myself..In my opinion we have been created, & we're down here for a good reason..The only trouble is that you can't scrutinise my practice or training or realising that i did over the last year or so, or all the experiences that led me to this conclusion you would have to search/scrutinise yourself..So i do believe & yet i still don't pray, but you can ask me why or any other questions & i will answer if your interested..I don't have to push my beliefs, because i do in fact believe..& so i know that anyone who fights or argues in god's name doesn't really believe, & have just intellectually tried to realise god which is nothing more than brainwashing..People are sat there all over the world trying to read or pray god into their lives when they would be far better off practising/training themselves, in order to realise god for themselves by shedding their mind not their ego..God can only ever be proved to the individual & even if someone does become enlightened, no one & i mean no one would ever believe them anyway!lol..So look around & see the most perfect learning curve/test, & I've not read the bible etc i just used logic & did the training..So for me Jesus probably did exist, & he was a normal man who became enlightened..He practice/trained to understand his mind & what it's there for, & became aware of his self..He then shed the need to use his mind, & operated on his senses/instinct/intuition heart driven desires..He then became enlightened, & realised we are all the children of the universe/god..It's only after months & months of investigating/practising/training/realising, that i started to have real faith in what i was doing & god. :-)

  6. Rhonda Lytle profile image73
    Rhonda Lytleposted 3 years ago

    This is a really interesting question on so many levels.  First off, let me state unequivocally that I am a Christian, the type you read about that knows the only way to heaven is through the grace and salvation of Jesus Christ. 
    Next, allow me to state I have never minded questions nor have I known many Christians who do mind honest questions.
    As for truth to the claims of Christianity, that comes down to faith.  It's really not so unlike science if you think about it openly.  Science says a big bang originating from cosmic dust started the universe.  It can never be proven.  Where did the dust come from?  Did it magically appear?
    The same holds true for faith in God.  The key word is faith.  For a believer truth is glaring on either side.
    Now, to the next layer of this most interesting question, the "say they're being persecuted simply by being challenged part."  Where to begin?
    First, notice how the question never mentions religion as in a collective of which there are many.  No.  Only Christians.  That alone is the targeting of a group.  Do you honestly think Christianity is the only religion that believes it is right?  Do you realize how many Christians have been beheaded just in the last few months for no reason other than they were Christian and refused to accept a false religion?  Have you seen the news, ever?
    How about the recent burning, tortures, rapes and deaths in the UK associated with Jews?  Are you aware of the law in California that tried to ban Christian worship groups in homes?  Since said law banned no such worship for any other group, in and of itself it illustrates well the targeting of only Christians. 
    Are you aware of the law from the 50's that made churches have to pay taxes if talking of politics, that was never enforced until this administration, is now being directed at Christian churches only?  Satanist and lettuce worshipers are exempt from scrutiny, of course.
    The framing of your question is antagonistic  and targeting in and of itself showing a decision that was made long before the question was posed in a not well veiled leading way.  But, it was interesting to address.  May God have mercy on us all.

    1. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I see Christians in America claiming persecution all the time whenever anyone challenges or criticizes their beliefs.   They are not being beheaded,  jailed or anything else here.   Yet they claim to have the 'moral majority'.  Which is it?

    2. Rhonda Lytle profile image73
      Rhonda Lytleposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Targeting is a form of persecution as mentioned above.  The media calls Christians the moral majority, or used to and frankly I doubt there's a real Christian in the bunch.  It's neither preassigned choice you provide.  It's truth.

    3. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      The question was specifically geared towards Christians because they're the majority in America and I used to be one.   It's simple really.   If the majority was jewish, it would be heated towards Jews.   Some people see persecution anywhere.

    4. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      As JM said, Christianity is most often the religion in question here because it is most dominant in western countries. No other religion comes close. Also, evolution makes sense of the available evidence. No, it does not say for sure what began every

    5. EtherInfomat profile image59
      EtherInfomatposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      It is targeted at christens because only no other religion cares enough to feel insulted when simple asked why. If they can't answer it they answer to something like "I don't know, but you may be able to find someone who does.

    6. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      @JMcFarland what exactly are you trying to criticize?  Give us an example what question are we running from? Turn the t.v. on you will see us being attacked- no bibles in school, 10 commandments gone, can't pray in Jesus name Iraq Christians beheaded

    7. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Upholding the law in the separation of church and state is attacking you?   No Christians are being beheaded in America,  dude.   Don't mistake Christian privilege with constitutional rights,  and don't claim that you're being persecuted.

    8. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      First of all "dude" the law of the separation of church and state was designed to allow Christians the freedom to worship different denominations for fear that there would be a centralized u.s. church like England had where we left

    9. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yes,  but if the separation of state does not include freedom from religion,  there can be no freedom of religion.   This is not a wild concept.  It's widely discussed and studied.

    10. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      The very proof of the Son of God is these attacks. If you don't believe in God why can't we pray in school, why does Jesus bother an atheist, why are we hated who preach love? Because Satan has went to war with the remnant of Jesus' seed. Repent

    11. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      AMEN Blake!!

    12. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      We all know God from his creation that is why I keep going back to this but it is sin that seperates us from God and makes us deny the creator. Just because we can't UNDERSTAND God doesn't make him a myth it makes him GOD.

    13. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      But what you're saying simply isn't true.   You'll have to demonstrate it and prove it.   Asserting something does not make it true,  Blake.  Simply saying that creation is proof of god because the Bible says so is circular logic - a fallacy.

    14. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM... Do you believe in light? Do you believe in cold? Simple physics.

    15. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I don't have to believe in light/dark or cold/hot.  It can be experienced,  measured and demonstrated through physics.   You cannot demonstrate god through physics.

    16. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And saying evolution is right isn't circular logic? You can't prove it. My question is what will it take for you to believe God? I'm about to write a hub that I hope helps you. I know God personally through events in my life but how can I help you?

    17. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I am afraid you are wrong JM. Light can be measured because light is the absence of darkness. Cold is simply the absence of heat. God is the absence of evil.

    18. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Evolution can be observed,  tested and tested,  Blake.   Repeatedly.   But evolution had nothing to do with the origin of life,  nor is it supposed to. Try learning about it.

      Jt, your assertion is just an assertion.  Demonstrate and prove it.

    19. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM... I am shocked that you would even question this. Albert Einstein has already done that.

    20. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I have studied it and evolution can't be observed. I challenge you to show me a change in kinds of species. You say species adapt but evolution teaches a change in species like the apeman (that's never been proven) if it can be observed then show me.

    21. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I'll bite,  jt.  Show me the peer reviewed, tested,  demonstrable and repeatable scientific evidence that a) god exists and b) said god is defined scientifically as the absence of evil.

    22. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I cannot believe you claim to be so educated and informed that you already do not know this? WOW.

    23. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      How can man figure God out? The creation is proof of a creator, the creator is made known through his written word, his written word contains prophecies written hundreds and thousands of years in advance that became true and eye witness accounts

    24. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Which eye witness accounts?   Surely you're not taking about the gospels.   Under what criteria for prophecy?  Until you prove creation,  calling it creation is the logical fallacy of being the question.

    25. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Haha prove creation man look around something created this right I mean we can agree on that right? You can't possibly answer it without God, in the beginning God created this that's more proof than you will ever have.

    26. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      No,  we can't agree on that.   It's the argument from ignorance AND begging the question.   You're just making an assertion and calling it fact.   I'm sorry,  you're going to have to do better than that,  and you may want to learn about fallacies.

    27. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Matthew 10:14

    28. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Ha, man so you are telling me that we don't exist? I'm saying rather you believe in God or not something or someone had to have created this and you are saying no?? The big bang, what created whatever banged? Are we imaginative or do we even exist??

    29. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think you understand how debates work,  Blake.   You are claiming that the earth was created by a very specific god.  You have the burden of proof to prove your claim true.   I am withholding acceptance of your claim until proven.

    30. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I asked you a question and you said we don't exist that's not a debate that crazy talk. The debate is ended until you prove how evolution works, my view is proven God said and it happened your view is strange you don't think we even exist

    31. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Now you're putting words in my mouth and outright lying.   I said no such thing.   Evolution had nothing to do with the origin of life,  nor does it claim to.   The burden of proof for creation is on you.  Can you prove it without lies or fallacies?

    32. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yes God spoke the world into existence I'm not lying to you there are 2 possibilities one an intelligent creator or 2 nothing just happened to create everything you have 2 choices

    33. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      False dichotomy.   Another logical fallacy.   You have to be able to demonstrate your assertions are true Blake.

    34. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM.... can you prove there is no God? Absolutely not. As the OP of this question it is up to you to prove your stance. As many scientists have tried and cannot.

    35. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Jt, shifting the burden of proof,  logical fallacy.   Until you prove your positive claim,  the burden of proof is on you.   I'm not claiming no God exists.   I'm saying that none has been sufficiently proven.

    36. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      If you would stop trying to sound so correct and listen, the proof of God is in the creation! How many times must I make that clear. Even your non believing scientist accept that there are only two choices a creator or the nothing into something

    37. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      No,  that's a false dichotomy.   You have no way of knowing those are the only two options,  much less demonstrating it.   Furthermore,  you're begging the question and using circular logic.   You have the burden of proof to prove creation.

    38. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Blake, the only person trying to sound correct is you. You are the one stating facts without properly backing them up but still claiming you are right.

    39. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      There are only two possibilities as to how life arose one is spontaneous generation arising to evolution the other is a supernatural creative act of God there is no third possibility.Dr.George Wald, Evolutionist Professor Emeritus Biology Harvard

    40. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      That's all neat and dandy Blake. You are admitting there are only 2 possibilities, cool.
      So why are you claiming 1 possibility as fact over the other?

    41. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And then there's physicist laurence krauss, who maintains something came from something,  not nothing.   Your last post doesn't even day something came from nothing.   The only one saying it is you.

    42. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM:
      on the show "how the universe works", Lawrence Krauss says right out that everything came from nothing.

    43. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yes,  but his nothing is really something,  like the subtitle of his book states.  And then there's this study:http://m.mic.com/articles/88441/cambridge-study-reveals-how-life-could-have-started-from-nothing

    44. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      interesting article, even though they use the term "nothing" very loosely. i havent read his book, but what i got from the show, Krauss literally meant nothing. what was the something he actually meant?

    45. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      From what I understand,  and I'm not a physicist, nothing in trends of physics is different from the phosphatase sense of the ten.   It's kind of Luke the scientific theory vs colloquial theory. We have no concept of nothing,  and have not seen it.

    46. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      if its different in a certain manner, then the terms should be clearly defined when speaking or writing to the average person. to say something can come from nothing, when you mean something, is misleading. it also does nothing to explain origins.

    47. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I think that explanation was kind of the whole purpose of the book he wrote,  what with the title and all.

    48. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      possibly. i would have to actually read it.

  7. Link10103 profile image74
    Link10103posted 3 years ago

    I have stopped trying to truly understand the logic of it all, there simply isnt any.

    It takes a special kind of person to admit that their own religion makes absolutely zero sense, yet still decide to believe in it WITHOUT whining when people question their beliefs. At least you can still have a conversation with those kind of people, since they have no issues answering questions or admitting that they do not know the answer.

    As for the others who get offended, I would hazard a guess and say that they know on a personal level that what they believe in is a load of bull but simply cannot accept that it is a lie. That line of thinking is only reinforced when they can't even handle simple questions and criticisms, yet the central figure of their own religion looked the other way...while being nailed to a cross.

    At this point, I just find it amusing to watch the second type of person chase their tail endlessly.

    1. Robert the Bruce profile image59
      Robert the Bruceposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Coming from a Christian background, I can tell you that most believers do not think through most of the doctrines they claim to believe. They are content to have their salvation from "hell" and do not question the accuracy of the Bible (w/o evidence)

  8. aguasilver profile image80
    aguasilverposted 3 years ago

    I think your American Christians feel threatened, at least the heavy duty brigade seem to be, they treat me with trepidation as well, mainly because I believe in,, and have seen more supernatural events than they have.

    We all have a problem with what we do not know for ourselves.

    The more laid back believers, who seem to be doing Christianity rather than belonging to it, could care not a jot about folks questioning their faith, why should they, when you have experienced such things as supernatural healing, and releases from demonic influence, .......when you become aware that there is a dark spiritual force waging a war against what you represent and bring to bear on the world,...... then a few jibes by unbelieving spiritually dead or deceived people is hardly a problem.

    As for telling folk they are going to hell, there's a difference between stating what the bible states are conditional indicators of ones eternal destiny, and any believers (or non believers) ability to determine ones condition and possible destiny.

    Sure those guys with ISIS; beheading folk and raping women and wantonly killing prisoners would seem to warrant and be assured of hell and that's a fact, but the ONLY entity that decides that ultimately is Jehovah.

    The same measure is applied to them as is applied to all others, and we, none of us, can apply that measure with the knowledge we possess.

    We can safely state that according to scripture we all face judgement for our words, deeds and lives, for how we have treated others, lived our lives, but nobody can equate what factors God takes into account beyond those contained in the bible:

    For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son so that anyone who believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

    God did not send his Son into the world to condemn it, but to save it.

    “There is no eternal doom awaiting those who trust him to save them.

    But those who don’t trust him have already been tried and condemned for not believing in the only Son of God.

    No threats of hell there,.... plenty elsewhere in the bible, but those are probably THE keynote verses of Yeshua.

    What I find more interesting is why people who deny Gods existence spend so much time thinking about Him?

    1. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I think about and discuss it because I'm surrounded by it and my background,  history and education are in it.   My interest didn't disappear when I realized I no longer believed it.

    2. christicue profile image74
      christicueposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Why did you stop believing JMcFarland? What was it that led you to trust Jesus in the first place?

    3. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      christicue - that's entirely too long of an answer to fit in 250 characters, and it wasn't just one thing.  It was a long, multi-year process in which I was dragged kicking and screaming out of belief.  It started in Bible college, though.

    4. christicue profile image74
      christicueposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JMcFarland, I understand. I wish there was more space for discussion. The search for truth is a complex one and sometimes it takes coming to the end before we can really discover it for ourselves. I hope you will still leave the door open.

    5. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I am always open to evidence of any kind, as long as it's not simply blind faith.  I cannot simply choose to believe something anymore.  More info is available throughout my hubs if you want to know more of the story.  I wish there was more room.

    6. aguasilver profile image80
      aguasilverposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Take a look at Bill Johnson, there are plenty of videos of him online, you may find him refreshingly different from whatever experiences you had that caused you to depart, just Google 'the resting place bill johnson' and be blessed! smile

  9. connorj profile image76
    connorjposted 3 years ago

    Yes indeed, I believe scrutiny does demonstrate its truth. That perhaps is why I enjoy and recommend  C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity so much or reading about early Christians to discern truth...

    1. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I've read all of cs Lewis.   Typical apologist.   Also read all of the early church fathers.   Still not convinced.   Asserting something does not make that something true.

    2. connorj profile image76
      connorjposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Did you know that C. S. Lewis was an agnostic and became Christian through his interactions with John R. R. Tolkien and a few others at Oxford? To say that C. S. was a typical apologist warrants futher research by you. Research the Inklings, perhaps?

    3. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      In theological school I read all of cs Lewis work.   Yes,  he covered to Christianity.   After he did so,  his written works are identical to typical apologists.  Apologies if that was unclear.

    4. profile image0
      christiananrkistposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      i kind of agree with JM that you could say Lewis is a typical apologist. mainly because many if not most apologists, quote or use the same arguments offered by Lewis. Lewis is to apologetics what sex pistols are to punk rock. kind of the standard.

    5. connorj profile image76
      connorjposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I would contend Clives was a writer/philosopher steeped in an ideal academic and philosophical environment during and after WWII. As an inkling member his intention was not apologetics and since Mere Christianity was a product of BBC WWII broadcasts

  10. Abrushing1968 profile image80
    Abrushing1968posted 3 years ago

    With the discoveries of modern science, the mysteries of the world seem to be decreasing. Sadly, many believe that science is disproving long held Christian views; making it difficult to believe Biblical accounts. I am finding that folks who are weak in faith often succumb to the mocking skeptics when confronted with “scientific facts”. For me scientific discoveries serve to deepen the mysteries of creation. I believe that the Bible is true, for the most part, science has served to help me better understand my faith.

    I freely admit there are things that cause me to scratch my head and question my understanding of scripture, reminding me that mysteries still exist; that some things still belong to God. This idea has become foreign. The existence of God and the reality that we know only what He wants us to know is unsettling to the atheistic scientist. “Not knowing” is unacceptable. But in truth, it is arrogant to believe that Humanity has, or will have, all the answers. In the face of my accusers, I cling to my faith and remind them that not everything has been revealed; that they would be wiser to resist drawing conclusions. Despite their objections, my best and most honest answer is still “I don’t know and that’s okay.”

    Is there a way for both the Bible and science to be true? Sure there is. We just don’t know what it is. In time, God willing, we may find the answer. If not, that’s ok too. Until someone comes up with an explanation that units the truth of God’s Word and the truths found in nature, I will live by faith.

    1. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      It's funny - I don't know any atheist scientists or lay people who claim to have all of the answers, or even that having all of the answers are possible.  What you said is true, though - the god of the gaps is disappearing as the gaps close.

    2. Abrushing1968 profile image80
      Abrushing1968posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM are you saying that because you don't know them that there must not be very many?  Are you judging the reality of statement on your limited experiences? I find this to be unsettling. I wonder, do you approach the truths of God in the same way?

    3. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      No, I'm saying that in my experience within the community and my resources, I've never met any.  Why must that necessarily equate to a doubt of you?  How limiting do you think my experience is?  Is that not a judgement?

    4. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      "The existence of God and the reality that we know only what He wants us to know is unsettling to the atheistic scientist"
      I feel you are judging the reality of that statement on your experiences as well, unless you know all atheistic scientists.

    5. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      You would also have to define and substantiate the "truths of God" before I would accept your assertion of them.

    6. Abrushing1968 profile image80
      Abrushing1968posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM Indeed, however, I judged according to what you have written. If you don't know any then, indeed, your experience, community, and resources are limited. God is like your elusive scientists, He exists despite your limited knowledge.

    7. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Abrush, are you saying god exists in general, or are you saying the biblical version of your god exists? If it is the latter, you have 0 proof to determine that as fact. If it is the former, the question is currently unanswerable.

    8. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Can you point me towards reputable, openly atheist, public scientists that claim outright that they have all of the answers to the mysteries of the universe and beyond?  I'd like to see their work.  Also, assertions do not make fact, nor do beliefs.

    9. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      What do you believe in? If you don't believe in God how were you created? Big bang theory? Thats the biggest joke ever. It takes a fool to think nothing created everything. Eventually a fish gave birth to an elephant

  11. EtherInfomat profile image59
    EtherInfomatposted 3 years ago

    To start off I am not trying to be insulting. I am an Atheist and I think very logically. To start off religion doesn't normally stand to well with logic. Science uses a the scientific theory, which is logic. There are many facts that support a conclusion. These facts are gotten from the use of the scientific method. Now days more and more people are trying to make conclusions logically. Religion, that uses little to no logic, wants people to believe rather than questioned. Because when you start to question religion the more it contradicts. Through that it starts to fall apart. From this you can probably see why they see you are attacking their religion. Religions normally (at least partly) define themselves by their religion. So in turn they feel like your attacking them. But I like aggravating people, so I tend to really piss off these types of people when I want to. When they become defensive just say, "when a scientist is told he is wrong he presents the facts that he is right and ask for their evidence that he is wrong." and when they respond with "The bible is fact." Say "Can you recreate it." They'll say "No". Then say "Then it is not fact because you can not prove it is." It will probable end with them saying "well you just have to believe." Which I normally respond with "If stuff worked by just believing we would have super powers, there would be no global warming and if just believing worked you'd be right". Most of my religions friends don't bring that subject up any more because they can't win the argument with me. Nor are they smart enough to win an argument like that against me. If you want to change my mind smite me. If that happens there would not be one person who believes more than me. Only an undereducated person believes blindly.

    1. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Ok, so can you prove God doesn't exist? This science that you speak of can you prove the existence of this "God particle" your scientist havent found yet? Can you prove the evolutionist theory? Can you show me proof of a bird giving birth to a human?

    2. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Blake, I think you completely missed the "prove it back" point of this comment. The religion side claims absolute truth with no evidence, the science side comes up with demonstrable theories that may explain the absolute truth. See the difference?

    3. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link I'm saying that science doesn't have all the answers Christianity has more proof than theorys, we have the facts. He said religion doesn't stand well with logic, I'm asking what the logic is in any alternative. I didn't miss anything buddy.

    4. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I dont think Ether claimed that science has all the answers. In fact, any scientist worth their salt should never claim that either, but I digress...

      What proof and facts does Christianity have, exactly? Examples, if you would.

    5. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Proof in what? Existence of God? Jesus? Be more specific please and I'll be glad to answer if you are willing to listen.

    6. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I am asking you to clarify what proof and facts Christianity contains that you literally just claimed that it holds.

      I already have a feeling of the general direction this conversation might go.

    7. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Scientific facts from the bible- earth is round Isa 40:22, most seaworthy ship design 30:5:3 Gen. 6, photons Job 38:7, Hubert Spencers scientific principles Gen 1, air has weight Job 28:25, matter is made of invisible particles Rom. 1:20

    8. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I doubt my ability to continue on with an extended amount of civility in regards to your...examples, so its probably best to take my leave now and avoid the headache later. Good night.

    9. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I urge you to open the bible and read the facts, Jesus is the only way. There's no logic no science nothing apart from him. Dont run from the truth the bible says you know him but it's your sin that makes you deny him. Jesus died for u and loves u

    10. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Is the entire Bible 100% true, or just the convenient parts?

    11. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      100 %

    12. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link.... is science 100 % or just the convenient parts?

    13. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Did I claim it was JT? I am pretty positive I claimed the exact opposite, but don't let silly details get in your way.

      Obviously it was correct enough produce the computer you are using to talk to people thousands of miles away. Again, details...

    14. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yes in your own condescending nature.

      As far as your other question... what are you babbling about??

    15. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link, the bible is 100 % truth without error. Even for Christians it isn't always convenient.  It is the only book that you don't read it reads you. It's like a mirror showing us our flaws. I don't know everything about it but it has never been wrong

    16. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Nice to know you didn't read any of the above comments JT. Good job. Don't know what question you are referring to though.

      Blake, does that mean you follow everything the Bible tells you to do, without fail?

    17. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      No one does that Link we are sinful creatures I try to obey God and repent of my sins knowing that Jesus is the only way because he is the only one to follow the law of God without fail. I believe in Math too but I'm sure I fail it sometimes.

    18. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Mmm, okay.
      If the Bible is 100% true, then is it true that god comitted genocide with the Flood. Or no?

    19. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Genocide no, genocide is racially wiping out a group of people. He destroyed the people yes.

    20. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link.... genocide? Look up the definition.

    21. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      How about 1 Samuel 15:3.  That is genocide,  correct?   And infanticide?

    22. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Read vs 2- God remembered what Amalek did to Israel to provoke Gods punishment on that Nation. If you want to label war as genocide then every war ever fought aside from civil wars would be genocide I call it war, judgement

    23. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Genocide - the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

      So the entirety of mankind doesn't fall under that definition at all JT? Interesting view you have there.

    24. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      So link your problem isn't belief in God it is a problem of him telling them to go to war with the Amaleks? It's not that you don't believe it's that you are either A-angry at God B-angry that you can't figure him out or C- you don't agree with him

    25. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      God remembered what the unborn infants had done to the people of Israel,  so they all had to die too?  Stop making assumptions about atheists since you seem to know nothing about them or your comments may be deleted.

    26. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      WOW. Disagree with her and she starts censoring. WOW!!

    27. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And they say we run and yell attack lol this is crazy

    28. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Blake.... welcome to their world. EGO!

    29. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      It's not a disagreement to assume something about a group of people that you know nothing about.   It is a lie,  and I doubt you'd appreciate it if it was reversed.

    30. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      First off, i have only been talking about the Flood. Second, my problem is that you assert truth with no evidence. What evidence may exist points to the opposite of what you claim, yet you still assert truth and denounce all other truths as false.

    31. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link.. I challenge you to prove there is no God. Can you? Of course not. Just like us that know there is a God... there is not going to be divine intervention "AGAIN." Yes, Jesus has come to this world once. You people want to put him on the cross ag

    32. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link what truth have I asserted with no proof? I say this creation is proof in a God you assert that its not with no proof you quote bible verses about God declaring war on a nation so obviously u know a little scripture thats why I said that about u

    33. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      You ask me to disprove god when you cannot prove god either. The irony...

      And Blake, I meant that comment to be in general terms but there wasn't enough character space. Again, I have only been talking about the flood. Never quoted scripture of war

    34. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link.. you are an atheist. Nothing that can be said or shown you could change your mind. Wonder why? EGO

      So why bother in debating something that you have already convinced yourself cannot be proven.

    35. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I agree that Link is angry.  Most atheists are, for some reason.  They know they are wrong, and they do not want to be.

    36. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Except that I'm not an atheist, at least not your specific definition of an atheist anyway.
      Notice how I haven't denied the existance of god rather than ask for proof of your specific god? Or was your ego too big to notice?

    37. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Guys, play nice!!!

    38. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Lybrah..... I thought I was playing nice. Link is a very angry person. Easily behind a comp.

    39. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I was just playin', JT.  smile

    40. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      So intervening in a conversation of 2 other people and assuming baseless things, no matter how many times I correct you, is somehow me being angry.
      Interesting take on things guys. What's your next comedy act? Ignoring facts? Wait, too late...

    41. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      So was I Lybrah.. smile

    42. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Fun times all around. Free cookies for everyone.

    43. profile image0
      Lybrahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I hope they're white chocolate macadamia!

    44. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Don't forget the milk.

  12. profile image0
    JThomp42posted 3 years ago

    First of all, could you please tell me where you see a GROUP of Christians doing this?

    Secondly, of course we believe this way. Just as much as you believe the way you believe.

    And lastly, because they are every day by people like yourself. This question is actually several answers within a question. You have done a fine job in answering your question with your other questions.

    1. EtherInfomat profile image59
      EtherInfomatposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Though science get questioned a lot more by religious folk, so stop your bitching and don't dodge the question.

  13. Aniket Lawand profile image73
    Aniket Lawandposted 3 years ago

    Christianity or any religion for that matter has to stand the test of time. The issue here is not testing but the methods of testing. Do you have any way to prove the existence of faith? Do we have any basis of proving how faith works?
    Mind you it is a science and faith in itself is a science, it is too complex to explain on a single line. I do believe in religion purely because of its scientific existence.
    But then do we have the patience for the results to be seen? If we have the patience to understand how it works and document it word by word then let it be tested. The main issue here is that the scrutiny that is done is done by impatient people who will use a calculator and want to see 2 + 2 = 4. For faith it works differently for different people.
    If time permits I will present the paper on it, but then will people have the patience to to do an honest scrutiny, if it is done, then the science behind faith and as a matter of fact any religion will be justified.

  14. profile image0
    christiananrkistposted 3 years ago

    i think so. but people in general hate having their beliefs challenged. nobody like to be wrong. and unfortunately, i think we live in a culture that has forgotten to think. like buffalo running off a cliff, people will follow whatever is popular culture without asking any questions.

  15. lone77star profile image84
    lone77starposted 3 years ago

    Absolutely.

    Those so-called Christians who feel victimized by questions are not really following Christ, but Ego. Ego is their enemy, but they do not recognize it, because they have not learned Christianity well enough.

    Ego defends itself. Someone who Knows Truth does not need defense and truly enjoys sharing Truth.

    But some who question Truth are not honest. They are vipers who have no interest in an answer. They have no intention ever of believing the spiritual Truth. They act only to mock what they do not understand. These are pure Ego -- the source of all evil.

    Analogy:
    Several children have fallen into a well which is about to collapse. The rescue team keeps running into some kids who mock and taunt and hinder the rescue effort. They have no intention of allowing the rescue to continue. They are being criminal in their actions which jeopardize others.

    Sometimes "scrutiny" is "ridicule" for its own sake. There is no intention ever to understand -- only to hinder the rescue -- to mock and belittle -- to place their own egos above all others. They have no love in their hearts.

  16. blakewhite4012 profile image60
    blakewhite4012posted 3 years ago

    Stop being a coward and tell us what questions we Christians claim attack and get offended by. You shouldn't  make a claim without an example or facts.

    1. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And you shouldnt call people cowards unless they actually refuse to present you with those examples and facts.
      And if you cant figure out the one, singular, hard hitting question any logical person asks of a christian, throwing stones is not for you

    2. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Romans 1:19-21 KJV

      Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his

    3. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Do you really think that calling me a coward is going to get me to carry on an extended,  reasonable and polite conversation with you?   Once again, it seems you are incorrect.

    4. blakewhite4012 profile image60
      blakewhite4012posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Once again? I don't see where I've been incorrect yet. Here's 2 questions and dont yell attack like you claim we do.. 1)how did life start  2) why get mad about being called a coward when you believe we are just star dust or no better than animals?

    5. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      1. I don't know,  but until you can prove god did it neither do you.   2. Who said I was mad?   I'm still a person,  and if you want to be treated with respect,  you have to reciprocate,  which you don't seem to want to do.

    6. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JM.... why do you continue to censor my comments. Apparently you are "INTIMIDATED" by what I have to say and you know it is truth!!!!!!!

    7. JMcFarland profile image85
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      No,  jt, but you don't get to tell people what to do on my questions.   Attempts to do so will be deleted.   You can accept it,  or you can go elsewhere.   You don't get carte Blanche on questions that are not yours,  sorry.

    8. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Then keep deleting.

    9. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      JT going on about censorship? Well that's a barrel of laughs. Hypocrisy at its best.

    10. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Link.. censorship should be used if someone is attacking, bashing, etc. I am only stating facts.

    11. Link10103 profile image74
      Link10103posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Although the hypocrisy is blinding, i agree with that.
      But since this is you we are talking about, I doubt you simply stated facts in a decent manner.

    12. profile image0
      JThomp42posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you link

  17. profile image0
    Deborah Sextonposted 3 years ago

    I wrote a hub something like this. If someone is truly connected to God, and spiritual, some should have proof of it. Not proof of God, proof of themselves

    "So You Think You Are Spiritual-But Are You?"
    http://deborah-sexton.hubpages.com/hub/ … ut-Are-You

  18. BobMonger profile image60
    BobMongerposted 3 years ago

    Because they are not very good at being Christians. They're lives are still being controlled by all the fears their faith is supposed to dispel. In my case I am a Methodist and, according to our founder John Wesley, we are REQUIRED to question scripture; to discuss and dissect each and every word in that we develop a deeper understanding of the inspiration of those who wrote them.  And that we are to love our fellow man no matter who or what gods they might pray to--or not. Our job is to take the light of Christ into the world-and by the LOVE of God, through the light of His son, to bring peace to a troubled world. Oh, and for us, the Bible isn't a book-it is a library; it has every literary style, including fiction.

 
working