Is there a good reason why we believe?

[RichardT]

What is your reason for believing?

[RichardT]

What is your reason for believing?
Come on, answer my thread, I don't want to be deluded...

[arunma]

I believe because the Spirit of God has allowed it. Apart from the Lord's mercy, I would not believe in the Gospel of Christ.

That's the "spiritual" answer, anyway. And make no mistake, I am being genuine. But if you want some of my more practical reasons for being a Christian (the ones that you probably don't find in most testimonies), I can give those too.

[RichardT]

I believe because the Spirit of God has allowed it. Apart from the Lord's mercy, I would not believe in the Gospel of Christ.

That's the "spiritual" answer, anyway. And make no mistake, I am being genuine. But if you want some of my more practical reasons for being a Christian (the ones that you probably don't find in most testimonies), I can give those too.

Because I was posting in an atheist forum and they wanted good reasons for believing.. ( not like using the bible to prove the bible is true, or "I felt like Jesus took away all of my sins", or even, "ever since I accepted Jesus I became a better person"..

[arunma]

Because I was posting in an atheist forum and they wanted good reasons for believing.. ( not like using the bible to prove the bible is true, or "I felt like Jesus took away all of my sins", or even, "ever since I accepted Jesus I became a better person"..

I'll take that as a request for more information. OK, here are my reasons for being a Christian other than "I love Jesus" (which is a true statement, by the way).

First, Christianity is a somewhat intellectual religion. Oh sure, there are some fundies running around. But Christianity has a well-developed tradition, as well as very ancient theology and doctrines. One thing I love about the church fathers, reformers, and various other theologians is that they combine intellect with genuine spirituality, and draw great truths from the Bible.

Secondly, there's monotheism. Most people take this for granted, but this is a somewhat new concept to me. Belief in one God seems like a rather appealing idea. But our Triune God is not a pie in the sky, or an impersonal force. On the contrary, God has a specific personality, he speaks to men, and he makes covenants with us. The utterly transcendent and infinite Creator God is made knowable in the person of Jesus Christ. And that is a pretty interesting concept.

Third, Christians have an uncanny ability to draw spiritual truths from the seemingly mundane. The Apostles saw the entire Old Testament as an allegorical portrayal of Christ (without sacrificing the belief that it was a historically truthful book). Likewise, the church fathers saw that even the pagan religions of Greece and Rome were feeble attempts to rederive prophecies and types from the Old Testament which are truly fulfilled only in Christ. Many theologians have also seen allegories about Christ in nature. For example the Sun, which gives light to all but cannot be seen, is quite a bit like God. Through the Gospel of Christ, many aspects of ordinary life now have great spiritual significance.

And finally (for now, anyway), Christianity is a religion that is based in history rather than philosophy. It is not simply a "good idea," but is based in the historical truth that Christ genuinely died on a cross as propitiation for sin, and was physically raised to life by God. In this way, our faith is based on an event that really happened.

Anyway, maybe this is some stuff that you can tell your atheist friends if ever they should ask why anyone would want to be a Christian. To be honest, I can see why they wouldn't accept responses like "because Jesus took away my sin." It is true that the Lamb of God takes away our sin, and this is a most important spiritual truth. To the atheist it is meaningless, because the atheist doesn't even recognize such a concept as sin. Sometimes it is helpful to meet people where they are at.

[RichardT]

Oh sure, there are some fundies running around.

I am a fundie, does that make me stupid?

[arunma]

I am a fundie, does that make me stupid?

Well I never said that anyone is stupid. Fundamentalism (which in this case is defined as a refusal to study sound theology) simply doesn't appeal to me very much, since there isn't much room for theological growth and development. For example, flat-earthers might be considered fundamentalists, since they hold to a specific doctrine in spite of evidence to the contrary. I realize you're a flat-earther, so I'm not using the term perjoratively, though I'm still trying to accept the fact that you guys still exist.

BTW, sorry I missed your IM earlier. I'll be gone for a few hours, but I'll IM you back tonight.

[RichardT]

Well I never said that anyone is stupid. Fundamentalism (which in this case is defined as a refusal to study sound theology) simply doesn't appeal to me very much, since there isn't much room for theological growth and development. For example, flat-earthers might be considered fundamentalists, since they hold to a specific doctrine in spite of evidence to the contrary. I realize you're a flat-earther, so I'm not using the term perjoratively, though I'm still trying to accept the fact that you guys still exist.

BTW, sorry I missed your IM earlier. I'll be gone for a few hours, but I'll IM you back tonight.

What?! I'm not a flat earther! When did I say that?!

[Smidlee]

Because I was posting in an atheist forum and they wanted good reasons for believing.. ( not like using the bible to prove the bible is true, or "I felt like Jesus took away all of my sins", or even, "ever since I accepted Jesus I became a better person".. you will probably find this tricky that is if you trying to find an answer to satisfy an atheist.. It's like trying to explain someone born blind what the color red is.

[seebs]

The question of what constitutes a reason to believe is a hard one.

My advice: Unless you're willing to devote a couple of years of your free time to puzzling over things like "do different people see the same thing when they look at a blue object", or "is it possible that the laws of physics will change next week", I recommend you just punt and say "I am convinced, but I don't know how I could convince you."

[ZiSunka]

I believe in Christ for the same reason I believe in snow--I have experienced it!

I experienced God providing for me even before I believed in Christ, and that experience led me to a firm faith in Him.

The more you experience God and learn about him through the Bible, the stronger your faith becomes to the point where it is very hard to doubt.

The best way to keep the faith is to keep the faith.

[seebs]

Please turn your rep back on, lambslove. Or stop saying reppable things. :P

[JPPT1974]

I believe that God made the world
And that He made the Sunday a Sabbath Day
So that we can rest and worship Him
But also that He sent His one and only Son into the world to be the Savior & Lord
Because we couldn't save ourselves
To die on that lonely cross in Calvary
Only to arise from the dead and to exalt into heaven with God at the right-hand throne!

[RichardT]

I believe that God made the world
And that He made the Sunday a Sabbath Day
So that we can rest and worship Him
But also that He sent His one and only Son into the world to be the Savior & Lord
Because we couldn't save ourselves
To die on that lonely cross in Calvary
Only to arise from the dead and to exalt into heaven with God at the right-hand throne!

actually, sabbath was on saturday..... And that was only for the jews...

[Matthan]

I find that many people tend to deride fundemental Christians, and for a number of differing reasons. What they always fail to realize, or at least understand, is that basic fundemental belief in Jesus is what our Savior really wants. He tells us to have belief in Him "as a little child." What did he mean by that? This might be a poor comparison, but think how a young child believes in Santa Claus. With many children that belief is absolute and non-debatable. That is the kind of Christian belief He wants from each of us.

Does He get it?

Len

[eldermike]

I like to turn the question back on the one asking it (once is enough) and then leave it to God.

I will ask them this:
My faith holds that if you seek truth you will find it. However, it comes with a disclaimer, that is; Jesus claims to be that truth. So, instead of asking me why I believe, why not accept that my journey of discovering truth ended when I met Jesus, and ask yourself why you are still searching for it?

[Tenken07]

I find that many people tend to deride fundemental Christians, and for a number of differing reasons. What they always fail to realize, or at least understand, is that basic fundemental belief in Jesus is what our Savior really wants. He tells us to have belief in Him "as a little child." What did he mean by that? This might be a poor comparison, but think how a young child believes in Santa Claus. With many children that belief is absolute and non-debatable. That is the kind of Christian belief He wants from each of us.

Does He get it?

Len

My interpretation of "accepting as a little child" was that kids will accept and believe what you tell them, they dont question they just believe and accept it.

[ZiSunka]

My interpretation of "accepting as a little child" was that kids will accept and believe what you tell them, they dont question they just believe and accept it.

I've never met a child that didn't constantly ask "why" and other questions. Children don't simply believe anything without questioning it. Anyone who's every been around a 3, 4 or 5 year old knows that at those ages, they question everything all the time.

[trinityisunity]

Why not believe in Jesus, you got nothing to lose except eternal life if you do not.

[Phileoeklogos]

Jesus told us to preach the Gospel to all nations, Peter told us to always be ready to give an answer for the hope the lies within us, and Paul told us that God is plainly revealed in His creation, my answer to any one that asks why I believe is, I can't, not believe, I can't deny God.

When you read thru Acts, you never see the Apostles preaching the Gospel as an option, even Paul on Mars Hill said, God has commanded men everywhere to repent.

If you want to work at apolegetics, you better learn to be very paient, it's tough work, but don't ever think that giving someone "reasons" is going to convert anyone, that job is already taken,


Joh 16:7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
Joh 16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer;
Joh 16:11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

[arunma]

Why not believe in Jesus, you got nothing to lose except eternal life if you do not.

This is true in most modern, Western nations. There was a time in world history, and there are still places today, where belief in Christ would be a punishable offense.

[ZiSunka]

This is true in most modern, Western nations. There was a time in world history, and there are still places today, where belief in Christ would be a punishable offense.

More Christians died for their faith in the 20th century than in all the preceeding centuries put together.

Dying for faith in Christ is not a thing of the past or an isolated occurance, it is now more likely that you will die for your faith than ever before in history.

[Arythmael]

I'll take that as a request for more information. OK, here are my reasons for being a Christian other than "I love Jesus" (which is a true statement, by the way).

First, Christianity is a somewhat intellectual religion. Oh sure, there are some fundies running around. But Christianity has a well-developed tradition, as well as very ancient theology and doctrines. One thing I love about the church fathers, reformers, and various other theologians is that they combine intellect with genuine spirituality, and draw great truths from the Bible.

Secondly, there's monotheism. Most people take this for granted, but this is a somewhat new concept to me. Belief in one God seems like a rather appealing idea. But our Triune God is not a pie in the sky, or an impersonal force. On the contrary, God has a specific personality, he speaks to men, and he makes covenants with us. The utterly transcendent and infinite Creator God is made knowable in the person of Jesus Christ. And that is a pretty interesting concept.

Third, Christians have an uncanny ability to draw spiritual truths from the seemingly mundane. The Apostles saw the entire Old Testament as an allegorical portrayal of Christ (without sacrificing the belief that it was a historically truthful book). Likewise, the church fathers saw that even the pagan religions of Greece and Rome were feeble attempts to rederive prophecies and types from the Old Testament which are truly fulfilled only in Christ. Many theologians have also seen allegories about Christ in nature. For example the Sun, which gives light to all but cannot be seen, is quite a bit like God. Through the Gospel of Christ, many aspects of ordinary life now have great spiritual significance.

And finally (for now, anyway), Christianity is a religion that is based in history rather than philosophy. It is not simply a "good idea," but is based in the historical truth that Christ genuinely died on a cross as propitiation for sin, and was physically raised to life by God. In this way, our faith is based on an event that really happened.

Anyway, maybe this is some stuff that you can tell your atheist friends if ever they should ask why anyone would want to be a Christian. To be honest, I can see why they wouldn't accept responses like "because Jesus took away my sin." It is true that the Lamb of God takes away our sin, and this is a most important spiritual truth. To the atheist it is meaningless, because the atheist doesn't even recognize such a concept as sin. Sometimes it is helpful to meet people where they are at.

If I may say so, this is one of the more brilliant and edifying posts that I have seen after nearly 3 years of Christian discussion and debate forum activity. I suggest that others reread it carefully, slowly, and soberly.

RichardT,

I've had quite a few debates with intelligent atheists. My finding is that the more well-educated and diplomatic ones become very clever at misinterpreting, misapplying, and (apparently) misunderstanding your arguments. The less educated and disrespectful ones are very poor at hiding their logical blunders, and end up literally talking nonsense at some point. If you pursue this path, I'm just letting you know what to expect. The biggest obstacle (as you can probably imagine) is pride. It is not that the reasons aren't there, it is that they will do anything they can to show that they are "above" all of this "religious mumbo-jumbo", and that they do not need Jesus as an "emotional crutch".

Your best tools are your own reasons for believing (assuming you still do), knowledge of what Scripture says (and means), and good, solid logical and analytical prowess. Although I repeat my praise for arunma's statements, above, they will immediately run into trouble when put before the atheist looking for reasons to believe. This is because none of those wonderful qualities about Christianity necessarily make it right.

Being intellectual, well-developed, having the appearance of genuine spirituality, thematic application of general concepts across various components, an apparent historical context, and so on ... atheists will argue that these things about Christianity may make it appealing to people looking for a sense of significance, but that, again, they don't necessarily make any of it actually true.

The one about themes and patterns across various components of the Christian experience is actually one of the most powerful ones. But it is also one of the most arduous to go about demonstrating. This is one reason why it takes years of experience as a believer to gain a truly comprehensive appreciation for the beauty and solidity of the faith.

But you needn't worry about being deluded. You are most certainly not. The topics that arunma touched upon could each be (and probably have been) expanded upon and exposited to fill volumns of truly mind-blowing truths about God's design in the overall plan of man's salvation. And I, for one, am a strong supporter of the fact that the Christian faith is a completely rational and logical one.

One fundamental basis for our belief is that Jesus was telling the truth. So why do we believe this? Of course I will now begin to speak for myself so as not to represent the opinions of others beyond what I know about them from having simply proclaimed their faith. Yet I will venture to guess that what I say applies to many of them as well.

You have to understand human nature. People don't give up their lives for things they basically don't believe in. They might do it for glory, but then it makes no sense that such a person (for example, the Apostles) would center their entire basis of self-centered self-glory on the spreading of the message of selflessness and humility. Also, such a person would not want to share such glory with a bunch of others, all of whom together keep reiterating the fact that no glory belongs to them, but that all of it belongs to someone else!

This makes no sense whatsoever. The Apostles had very little to gain in spreading a message that goes contrary to the central, pride-based system of almost every human being on the planet -- by claiming that no one (not even themselves) except this one person, Jesus, is capable of doing good. And that only the subservient acceptance of His Lordship will save us from the wretched state we didn't even know we were in until Christianity came along and told us. That our only chance for having any true value and goodness to call our own is to take on the spiritual likeness of this man, who was and is God.

Almost no atheist I have ever met claims that the truths that Jesus and the Biblical authors proclaim are philosophically or ethically flawed. They usually argue that there are logical contradictions to believing in our God, and that the historical evidence is conjured up for purposes of manipulation. If I can find it, I will post a little "theoretical debate" that I came up with to demonstrate how ridiculous much of the atheistic argumentation against Christianity can be.

Hope this helps.


Arythmael

[Arythmael]

RichardT,


Here's that little debate I mentioned in my last post.

The following is a hypothetical dialogue between an atheist and a logician. I present a logician here because in many cases I believe it is more advantageous to argue as if you are not presenting yourself as a Christian, but rather, as simply a "voice of reason".

And I present this here merely as food for thought. That other Christians may read it and it may spark ideas for them, give them some sense of the kind of arguments they may be up against, or give them the opportunity to improve my own sense of argumentation by providing me with insights or corrections.

The argument does not "finish" per se, but others are certainly welcome to continue with what they imagine might come next.


Logician: So you feel quite sure that Jesus was not the Son of God?

Atheist: Yes. There is no real, solid evidence for believing this is the case.

Logician: Do you deny that Jesus stood out as among the most spiritually enlightened and wise men throughout history? A sage, in every sense of the word?

Atheist: Not at all. But the very fact that there existed other such wise men, like Buddha, Confucius, and Gandhi, who could not all be this Son of God in the uniquely qualified way which Christians imagine him, shows very well that such wisdom does not prove this concept to be true about Jesus in any way.

Logician: Was he wiser than you?

Atheist: That question seems irrelevant.

Logician: It is not, I assure you. Was he, or was he not, wiser than you suppose yourself to be?

Atheist: Well, I would say that I have a good degree of wisdom which has done me a lot of good in my life so far ... but no, I would not presume to place myself as among such figures as these. But I see no need to. I can give credit where credit is due.

Logician: Why did Jesus claim to be the Son of God? Was he mad? Mentally unstable?

Atheist: One need not assume Jesus was mad in order to explain his desire to appear as an authority of the God they all believed in. He knew he had wisdom and encouragement for the people, but that they would probably not listen to him unless he stood with some great authority. So he gave them this. And they listened.

Logician: But this is lying, is it not?

Atheist: Technically, yes. But he felt that it would be of the greatest good to give them this "lie" as you put it, so that in the end they would accept his message.

Logician: Do you wish that Christians would stop believing his "lie"?

Atheist: Most certainly.

Logician: Then it is unwise for them to believe it?

Atheist: Clearly, that is my view.

Logician: But then how could it be wise to deliver such a lie to Christians for precisely the reason that they come to believe it?

Atheist: I, personally, would not say that was wise at all.

Logician: But Jesus thought it was wise, correct?

Atheist: Probably.

Logician: Probably? Isn't it true that he had the opportunity many times to escape death if he would only stop telling people this was the case?

Atheist: So the story goes.

Logician: Then surely he must have considered it wise to continue in his message despite the impending persecution that he would face.

Atheist: Very well. So he thought it was wise.

Logician: But you don't.

Atheist: Again. Yes, I do not, and I am here to help Christians understand the delusion of their faith.

Logician: But you said that you were not wiser than Jesus. How then could he have been so foolish as to make this blunder which cost him his life and great suffering, whereas you, despite your humility, have the wisdom to clearly see the great foolishness that he displayed in maintaining this most fundamental aspect of his message?

Atheist: Well, you forget, friend, that I have very serious doubts that the man ever really existed. I think it quite likely that some of the radical Jews of that time, rather fed up with the Roman oppression they were under, were trying to stir people up to believe they should get ready to overthrow the forces against them by building up a new, spiritually devout group who would soon be lead by the return of their all-powerful, conquering King from heaven. Or there may be other, better explanations. But certainly with the jumbled, after-the-fact presentation of this person Jesus which we see in the New Testament, there is plenty of room to believe that they concocted this person to achieve their own goals.

Logician: Would it have been wise of these people to do that?

Atheist: Of course not.

Logician: Then they did not possess the kind of wisdom that leads you to see their error?

Atheist: I would not have been among them. How clear can I make that?

Logician: But yet, these people "concocted" one of the wisest, most deeply spiritual men of all time? You are saying that somehow, collectively, some group of people devised and formulated, wrote and orally distributed, a body of teachings which was so insightful that its wisdom shot holes in, and went deeper than, the wisest teachings of the spiritual leaders of their own religion at that time... a collection of sayings so multi-layered that to this day scholars are still poring over the intricate meanings, themes and subthemes that permeate the words of this sage ... and attributed them to a person whose life-story also happened to fulfill the many prophecies of the Jewish holy scriptures which all but a few beyond those spiritual leaders really knew intimately, and in such a way that was not merely adjunct to that message but very much central to it? And they did all of this over a course of one or two hundred years?

Atheist: It is precisely because they had over a hundred years that one may believe that such a myth would have time to gel into what it needed to be ... to become the widely-believed core of a huge religious system that it has indeed become.

Logician: During that period of time, then, one must say that it had not yet "gelled" into what it "needed to be".

Atheist: Yes. And so?

Logician: Needed to be ... in order to accomplish what? The acceptance of followers capable of demonstrating that rare tenaciousness afforded only to martyrs? If this is the case, how then did it accomplish such acceptance? How could it accomplish during that period what it was not yet empowered to accomplish? And what then -- in the absence of being what it "needed to be" during this centuries-long period of "gelling" -- could have been the impetus for continuing to refine this concoction which everyone on the "inside" knew was a lie, and which everyone on the "outside" must have thought true until they got on the inside and began perpetuating the lie?

Atheist: Ah, but once people begin thinking something is true -- long after there is no one left to personally verify or deny the original claims -- they begin effectively perpetuating what they believe is a truth. And they begin twisting it subconsciously into what they want it to be.

Logician: Does the subconscious of man really want to be told he is a filthy sinner, capable of no real good apart from some invisible God? Does he really want to be told that the right thing to do is to turn the other cheek? To sell his possessions and give to the poor? To not live for today, but to live a righteous life for a reward that no one has ever verified will ever really happen? To abstain from all selfish and purely fleshly pleasures, and to abstain from even thinking about them ... yet if he does, even though no one else knew of it, to go down on his knees and pray for the forgiveness of such natural desires -- desires that are themselves driven from that very same subconscious?

Atheist: People know they do wrong and have a conscience about it, so when they are told that rather than jump through all of the hoops that the Jewish laws required of them, all they have to do is really feel bad about it, and say I'm sorry to an invisible God ... sure, that probably begins sounding really attractive.

Logician: But if all of this is happening at the subconscious level, where stories get twisted and "gel" into other things, how is it that such a random, compounding, iterating multiplicity of psychological weaknesses resulted in an intricate, well-ordered, sage-like and spiritually truthful body of teachings whose central figure to this day remains what is arguably one of the greatest spiritual teachers of all time?

Atheist: Same as with the formation of the universe. Lots and lots of chances for it to go wrong, but only one chance has to go right, and there you are.


Arythmael

[arunma]

If I may say so, this is one of the more brilliant and edifying posts that I have seen after nearly 3 years of Christian discussion and debate forum activity. I suggest that others reread it carefully, slowly, and soberly.

RichardT,

I've had quite a few debates with intelligent atheists. My finding is that the more well-educated and diplomatic ones become very clever at misinterpreting, misapplying, and (apparently) misunderstanding your arguments. The less educated and disrespectful ones are very poor at hiding their logical blunders, and end up literally talking nonsense at some point. If you pursue this path, I'm just letting you know what to expect. The biggest obstacle (as you can probably imagine) is pride. It is not that the reasons aren't there, it is that they will do anything they can to show that they are "above" all of this "religious mumbo-jumbo", and that they do not need Jesus as an "emotional crutch".

Your best tools are your own reasons for believing (assuming you still do), knowledge of what Scripture says (and means), and good, solid logical and analytical prowess. Although I repeat my praise for arunma's statements, above, they will immediately run into trouble when put before the atheist looking for reasons to believe. This is because none of those wonderful qualities about Christianity necessarily make it right.

Being intellectual, well-developed, having the appearance of genuine spirituality, thematic application of general concepts across various components, an apparent historical context, and so on ... atheists will argue that these things about Christianity may make it appealing to people looking for a sense of significance, but that, again, they don't necessarily make any of it actually true.

The one about themes and patterns across various components of the Christian experience is actually one of the most powerful ones. But it is also one of the most arduous to go about demonstrating. This is one reason why it takes years of experience as a believer to gain a truly comprehensive appreciation for the beauty and solidity of the faith.

But you needn't worry about being deluded. You are most certainly not. The topics that arunma touched upon could each be (and probably have been) expanded upon and exposited to fill volumns of truly mind-blowing truths about God's design in the overall plan of man's salvation. And I, for one, am a strong supporter of the fact that the Christian faith is a completely rational and logical one.

One fundamental basis for our belief is that Jesus was telling the truth. So why do we believe this? Of course I will now begin to speak for myself so as not to represent the opinions of others beyond what I know about them from having simply proclaimed their faith. Yet I will venture to guess that what I say applies to many of them as well.

You have to understand human nature. People don't give up their lives for things they basically don't believe in. They might do it for glory, but then it makes no sense that such a person (for example, the Apostles) would center their entire basis of self-centered self-glory on the spreading of the message of selflessness and humility. Also, such a person would not want to share such glory with a bunch of others, all of whom together keep reiterating the fact that no glory belongs to them, but that all of it belongs to someone else!

This makes no sense whatsoever. The Apostles had very little to gain in spreading a message that goes contrary to the central, pride-based system of almost every human being on the planet -- by claiming that no one (not even themselves) except this one person, Jesus, is capable of doing good. And that only the subservient acceptance of His Lordship will save us from the wretched state we didn't even know we were in until Christianity came along and told us. That our only chance for having any true value and goodness to call our own is to take on the spiritual likeness of this man, who was and is God.

Almost no atheist I have ever met claims that the truths that Jesus and the Biblical authors proclaim are philosophically or ethically flawed. They usually argue that there are logical contradictions to believing in our God, and that the historical evidence is conjured up for purposes of manipulation. If I can find it, I will post a little "theoretical debate" that I came up with to demonstrate how ridiculous much of the atheistic argumentation against Christianity can be.

Hope this helps.


Arythmael

Thank you brother, for your kind words. I just hope I can take them in a humble manner, and give all glory to God through Christ.

[arunma]

More Christians died for their faith in the 20th century than in all the preceeding centuries put together.

Dying for faith in Christ is not a thing of the past or an isolated occurance, it is now more likely that you will die for your faith than ever before in history.

Quite true, and I wouldn't mean to portray the situation any other way. Martyrdom is a crown that is still awarded to many believers today. Actually, when I visited a different church this last Lord's Day, the pastor's sermon was on Christ's teaching on counting the cost of discipleship. He pointed out that when most godly, believing Christians in America preach the Gospel, we do not always give unbelievers the whole story. We talk quite a bit about God's love, and about what Christ has done for us, but we do not always inform new converts to the faith that they are signing up for a possible martyrdom.

In America this turns out to not be of the greatest importance, since the vast majority of people who remain within American borders will not be killed for being a Christian. But until recently, being a Christian was a very dangerous thing in many Eastern European nations. For example, when new catechumens gave their public profession of faith and were baptized in a church, government officials would be among the crowd taking names, so as to harass these people later. Anyone who became a Christian found it increasingly difficult to find employment or to be treated with equity.

So we can see that while freedom of religion is certainly a blessing, it is one that not everyone enjoys. It's important for us to have an awareness of this.

[ZiSunka]

But until recently, being a Christian was a very dangerous thing in many Eastern European nations. For example, when new catechumens gave their public profession of faith and were baptized in a church, government officials would be among the crowd taking names, so as to harass these people later. Anyone who became a Christian found it increasingly difficult to find employment or to be treated with equity.

So we can see that while freedom of religion is certainly a blessing, it is one that not everyone enjoys. It's important for us to have an awareness of this.

I was just in Slovakia, formerly part of the Communist bloc, and my cousin Katka told me that when she was growing up, her mother was a very faithful Christian, but she was also a teacher. In communist Slovakia, teachers would be fired if it was found out they were Christians.

Katka said that her family would sneak out to church (the government allowed churches to be open, but they severely restricted what they could say and who could go), acting like they were going to the park or to visit relatives and hoping the neighbors believed it.

And every week they had to go to a different church so that no one would get to know them and find out her mother was a teacher. She said her family lived in fear that someone would find out her mom was a Believer and she would be fired and they would be forced out of their home.

She said November 17th, 1988 was a great day for her family because it meant that her mom was no longer a criminal. That was the day Slovakia was liberated from communism.

[RichardT]

Why not believe in Jesus, you got nothing to lose except eternal life if you do not.

Hey, do you really live in antarctica?!

[RichardT]

If I may say so, this is one of the more brilliant and edifying posts that I have seen after nearly 3 years of Christian discussion and debate forum activity. I suggest that others reread it carefully, slowly, and soberly.

RichardT,

I've had quite a few debates with intelligent atheists. My finding is that the more well-educated and diplomatic ones become very clever at misinterpreting, misapplying, and (apparently) misunderstanding your arguments. The less educated and disrespectful ones are very poor at hiding their logical blunders, and end up literally talking nonsense at some point. If you pursue this path, I'm just letting you know what to expect. The biggest obstacle (as you can probably imagine) is pride. It is not that the reasons aren't there, it is that they will do anything they can to show that they are "above" all of this "religious mumbo-jumbo", and that they do not need Jesus as an "emotional crutch".

Your best tools are your own reasons for believing (assuming you still do), knowledge of what Scripture says (and means), and good, solid logical and analytical prowess. Although I repeat my praise for arunma's statements, above, they will immediately run into trouble when put before the atheist looking for reasons to believe. This is because none of those wonderful qualities about Christianity necessarily make it right.

Being intellectual, well-developed, having the appearance of genuine spirituality, thematic application of general concepts across various components, an apparent historical context, and so on ... atheists will argue that these things about Christianity may make it appealing to people looking for a sense of significance, but that, again, they don't necessarily make any of it actually true.

The one about themes and patterns across various components of the Christian experience is actually one of the most powerful ones. But it is also one of the most arduous to go about demonstrating. This is one reason why it takes years of experience as a believer to gain a truly comprehensive appreciation for the beauty and solidity of the faith.

But you needn't worry about being deluded. You are most certainly not. The topics that arunma touched upon could each be (and probably have been) expanded upon and exposited to fill volumns of truly mind-blowing truths about God's design in the overall plan of man's salvation. And I, for one, am a strong supporter of the fact that the Christian faith is a completely rational and logical one.

One fundamental basis for our belief is that Jesus was telling the truth. So why do we believe this? Of course I will now begin to speak for myself so as not to represent the opinions of others beyond what I know about them from having simply proclaimed their faith. Yet I will venture to guess that what I say applies to many of them as well.

You have to understand human nature. People don't give up their lives for things they basically don't believe in. They might do it for glory, but then it makes no sense that such a person (for example, the Apostles) would center their entire basis of self-centered self-glory on the spreading of the message of selflessness and humility. Also, such a person would not want to share such glory with a bunch of others, all of whom together keep reiterating the fact that no glory belongs to them, but that all of it belongs to someone else!

This makes no sense whatsoever. The Apostles had very little to gain in spreading a message that goes contrary to the central, pride-based system of almost every human being on the planet -- by claiming that no one (not even themselves) except this one person, Jesus, is capable of doing good. And that only the subservient acceptance of His Lordship will save us from the wretched state we didn't even know we were in until Christianity came along and told us. That our only chance for having any true value and goodness to call our own is to take on the spiritual likeness of this man, who was and is God.

Almost no atheist I have ever met claims that the truths that Jesus and the Biblical authors proclaim are philosophically or ethically flawed. They usually argue that there are logical contradictions to believing in our God, and that the historical evidence is conjured up for purposes of manipulation. If I can find it, I will post a little "theoretical debate" that I came up with to demonstrate how ridiculous much of the atheistic argumentation against Christianity can be.

Hope this helps.


Arythmael

Thanks Arythmael, for the wonderfully composed post.. But you see, the atheists that I was talking to, they didn't believe Jesus or the apostles actually existed. Are there historical records that actually cover this?

edit: nm, I read your other post, awesome stuff :)

[JPPT1974]

Thank you brother, for your kind words. I just hope I can take them in a humble manner, and give all glory to God through Christ.

Praying for you my friend
And that the Lord bless and keep you
As well as be with you!

[arunma]

Praying for you my friend
And that the Lord bless and keep you
As well as be with you!

Why thank you! I can always use more prayers for humility.

Thanks Arythmael, for the wonderfully composed post.. But you see, the atheists that I was talking to, they didn't believe Jesus or the apostles actually existed. Are there historical records that actually cover this?

edit: nm, I read your other post, awesome stuff :)

Richard, in addition to what Arythmael has said, let me also remind you that the Bible itself constitutes a valid historical record. The binding of the Scriptures into one book is a man-made invention (not that this makes it a bad thing). Although the practice of binding Scriptures into codices is a very ancient practice, the various books of the Bible were written by different authors.

Why is this important? When the Bible is presented to an atheist as a single book, it can give him the impression that the whole of the inspired Scriptures are the work of a single man. It diminishes the magnitude of the fact that so many works by so many different authors teach one consistent theology. Furthermore, it makes the Scriptures appear like a "religious book." As such, the atheist will claim that Biblical evidence of the existence of Christ and the Apostles does not count as evidence, but that proof of their existence must come from outside of the Bible.

But when the Apostles and Prophets wrote the Scriptures, they were not writing religious pamphlets. They viewed their works as legitimate historical accounts. In fact, the early church fathers referred to the four Gospels as the "memoirs of the Apostles." And it should not surprise us that almost half of the New Testament is correspondence. Letters are generally not used to record fanciful mythology, but to communicate facts or commands to another person. As such, the books of the Bible are by all rights valid historical accounts than can be tested for genuineness, just like Herodotus or Thucydides (two prominent Greek historians).

[ZiSunka]

Thanks Arythmael, for the wonderfully composed post.. But you see, the atheists that I was talking to, they didn't believe Jesus or the apostles actually existed. Are there historical records that actually cover this?

Oh, they are conspiracy-theorists. I get it now.

They believe that the stories of Christ were concocted over centuries to convince people to support the catholic church in it's plot to take over the world? I've heard that theory before and it's total bunk.

Ask them how it could be that someone who never lived could influence the lives of billions of people over the course of millenia, all without anyone ever confessing to fraud, or even anyone being charged with fraud. That's some magic lie, if they can fool billions of people without ever making a mistake that reveals the fraud!