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

1. 69

   JMcFarlandposted 9 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?

   replyreport
2. 41

   ChristinSposted 9 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.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   3. 66

      Chris Remmieposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   4. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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

      replyreport
   5. 41

      ChristinSposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   6. 61

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 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

      replyreport
   7. 0

      christiananrkistposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   8. 58

      blakewhite4012posted 9 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!

      replyreport
3. 61

   christicueposted 9 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?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 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.

      replyreport
4. 0

   Lybrahposted 9 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.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Lybrahposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   3. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      Lybrahposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   5. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   6. 60

      Link10103posted 9 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.

      replyreport
   7. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   8. 79

      jlparkposted 9 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"?

      replyreport
   9. 0

      Lybrahposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   10. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   11. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   12. 58

       EtherInfomatposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   13. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Very well said Lybrah!

       replyreport
5. 0

   Daveadams36posted 9 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. :-)

   replyreport
6. 65

   Rhonda Lytleposted 9 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.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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?

      replyreport
   2. 65

      Rhonda Lytleposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   3. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 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

      replyreport
   5. 58

      EtherInfomatposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   6. 58

      blakewhite4012posted 9 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

      replyreport
   7. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   8. 58

      blakewhite4012posted 9 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

      replyreport
   9. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   10. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
   11. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       AMEN Blake!!

       replyreport
   12. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   13. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   14. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
   15. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   16. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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?

       replyreport
   17. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   18. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   19. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
   20. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   21. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   22. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
   23. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
   24. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   25. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   26. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   27. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 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

       replyreport
   28. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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??

       replyreport
   29. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   30. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
   31. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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?

       replyreport
   32. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
   33. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
   34. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   35. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   36. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
   37. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   38. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
   39. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
   40. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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?

       replyreport
   41. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   42. 0

       christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
   43. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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

       replyreport
   44. 0

       christiananrkistposted 9 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?

       replyreport
   45. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   46. 0

       christiananrkistposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   47. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
   48. 0

       christiananrkistposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       possibly. i would have to actually read it.

       replyreport
7. 60

   Link10103posted 9 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.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 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)

      replyreport
8. 68

   aguasilverposted 9 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?

   replyreport
   1. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      christicueposted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
   3. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      christicueposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   5. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   6. 68

      aguasilverposted 9 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!

      replyreport
9. 69

   connorjposted 9 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...

   replyreport
   1. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   2. 69

      connorjposted 9 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?

      replyreport
   3. 69

      JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      christiananrkistposted 9 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.

      replyreport
   5. 69

      connorjposted 9 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

      replyreport
10. 78

    Abrushing1968posted 9 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.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
    2. 78

       Abrushing1968posted 9 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?

       replyreport
    3. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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?

       replyreport
    4. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    5. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
    6. 78

       Abrushing1968posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    7. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    8. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
    9. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
11. 58

    EtherInfomatposted 9 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.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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?

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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?

       replyreport
    3. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    4. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    5. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    6. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    7. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
    8. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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.

       replyreport
    9. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
    10. 60

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    11. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        100 %

        replyreport
    12. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    13. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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...

        replyreport
    14. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Yes in your own condescending nature.
        
        As far as your other question... what are you babbling about??

        replyreport
    15. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 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

        replyreport
    16. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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?

        replyreport
    17. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

        replyreport
    18. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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?

        replyreport
    19. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    20. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    21. 69

        JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    22. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 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

        replyreport
    23. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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.

        replyreport
    24. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 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

        replyreport
    25. 69

        JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

        replyreport
    26. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    27. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    28. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    29. 69

        JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

        replyreport
    30. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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.

        replyreport
    31. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 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

        replyreport
    32. 58

        blakewhite4012posted 9 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

        replyreport
    33. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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

        replyreport
    34. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 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.

        replyreport
    35. 0

        Lybrahposted 9 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.

        replyreport
    36. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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?

        replyreport
    37. 0

        Lybrahposted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Guys, play nice!!!

        replyreport
    38. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    39. 0

        Lybrahposted 9 years agoin reply to this

        I was just playin', JT. 

        replyreport
    40. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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...

        replyreport
    41. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        So was I Lybrah..

        replyreport
    42. 60

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Fun times all around. Free cookies for everyone.

        replyreport
    43. 0

        Lybrahposted 9 years agoin reply to this

        I hope they're white chocolate macadamia!

        replyreport
    44. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Don't forget the milk.

        replyreport
12. 0

    JThomp42posted 9 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.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       EtherInfomatposted 9 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.

       replyreport
13. 60

    Aniket Lawandposted 9 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.

    replyreport
14. 0

    christiananrkistposted 9 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.

    replyreport
15. 73

    lone77starposted 9 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.

    replyreport
16. 58

    blakewhite4012posted 9 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.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Link10103posted 9 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

       replyreport
    2. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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

       replyreport
    3. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
    4. 58

       blakewhite4012posted 9 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?

       replyreport
    5. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
    6. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 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!!!!!!!

       replyreport
    7. 69

       JMcFarlandposted 9 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.

       replyreport
    8. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Then keep deleting.

       replyreport
    9. 60

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
    10. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

        replyreport
    11. 60

        Link10103posted 9 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.

        replyreport
    12. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Thank you link

        replyreport
17. 0

    Deborah Sextonposted 9 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

    replyreport
18. 60

    BobMongerposted 9 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.

    replyreport