Subjects in the Labels List (Labels Which Begin with the Letter A, with a range of am to ar)

This blog is ακωλυτως, unhindered. (Acts 28:31) Any subject is fair game. Below is a listing of the LABELS which begin with the letters am to ar. All can be searched from the list which follows the last posted article on this page or by using the SEARCH button at the top of the page. Most will call up multiple postings in which they appear.

            Amaziah, Amazing Grace, amazon, ambition, AME Church, Amelie, America, American Civil War, American football, American Idol, American Indian, American Sign language, Amharic, amillennialism, Amin al-Rihani, Amish, Amos, Amoz, Amsterdam, Amy Grant, Anabaptists, Ananias, anarchism, anathema, anatomy, ancestors, Andrew, Andy Kauffman, angel, angelology, angels, anger, Anglican, Anglo-Saxon, Angola, animal cruelty, animal intelligence, animal rescue, animals, animation, Ann Coulter, Annabel Chong, Annas, Anne Frank, Anne Rice, Ant Man, Antarctica, anthropic principle, anti-christian, Anti-Defamation League, anti-intellectualism, anti-rejection drugs, antibodies, Antichrist, Antigua and Barbuda, antihero, Antikythera Mechanism, antinomianism, Antioch, Antiochus Epiphanes, antipope, antiquity, Anton LaVey, Anto Szandor LaVey, apathy, aphorisms, apocalypse, apocrypha, Apollos, apologetics, apostasy, apostle, Apostles, apple, April Fools joke, Aquaman, Arabia, Arabic, Arabs, Aramaic, archangel, Archbishop of Canterbury, archeology, archery, archetypes, Archimedes, architecture, Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?, Argentina, argument, Argument from Design, arguments for God, Arianism, Aristarchus, Aristobulus, Aristophanes, Aristotle, Arius, Ark of the Covenant, Armenia, Armenian, Arminianism, Armstrongism, arrogance, art, Art Linkletter, Artaxerxes, Arthur Balfour, artificial intelligence, Aruba.

Christian Doctrine

         Doctrine must be based on the Bible only, and not on traditions, the declarations of self-appointed "prophets" or mystics, and not on the decisions of scholars or councils. Doctrine must not be declared based on individual verses taken out of the context in which they appear. Doctrine should be interpreted by its consistency with the totality of scripture. Knowledge of biblical languages, history, culture, science, religious traditions, and other religions are all extremely useful but must never, by themselves, determine doctrine.

        We must reject any doctrine derived from eisegesis (doctrine read into the scriptures) and accept any doctrines only if they are derived from exegesis (from or out of the scriptural texts). Any doctrines which we derive from the scriptural texts must be consistent with the full body of scripture to be sure that we are not misreading the intent of the texts.

        We have allowed the progressives ("Progressive" is their current self identification. They have also been known as liberals and relativists) to define themselves as "mainstream" or "moderate." They insult historical Christianity by labelling it as backward, racist, reactionary, homophobic, sexist, intolerant,  irrelevant to the modern world, judgmental, imperialistic, sexist, anti-intellectual, etc., etc., etc. Yada, yada, yada. Blah, blah, blah. You get the picture.

        Historical Christianity is none of these things. Part of the reason that this insulting situation has arisen is that many churches have not adequately fulfilled their function to hand on the faith to the following generations. A helpful start would be a renewed emphasis on Christian education in history, doctrine, interpretation,  apologetics, and application of the Christian message in day to day life. We need to be equipping modern day Christian warriors. (Ephesians 6:13-18)

        (... but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks         you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; 1 Peter 3:15)

        Historical Christianity is the "mainstream."  Absolute agreement on all points of discussion among Christians is not required. There is a small remnant of true Christians in every truly Christian body. The Lord knows those who are his. Those who wish to redefine the faith are the ones who are creating another doctrine. Many have already crossed the threshold and have effectively left the mainstream historical faith.

Book Comment: The God You Thought You Knew

 

In his book, The God You Thought You Knew, Alex McFarland responds to ten common secular objections to Christianity.

Some of the objections discussed in this book include:

1.     Christianity is judgemental and intolerant.

2.     Evil and suffering exist and a real God would not allow that.

3.     Christianity is totally made up and not based on any facts.

4.     Modern science disproves Christianity.

5.     Religion is not for the educated.

6.     The whole thing is boring and a waste of my time.

7.     Since I do not like it, it cannot be true.

8.     The Bible is full of errors.

9.     Dead people cannot come back to life.

10.  A loving God would not send anyone to Hell.

As with most books such as this, what you get from the book depends on what you bring with you. You may not agree with everything the author says. Luke (see below) advises to think for yourself.

Information you will need to search for this book: McFarland, Alex, The God You Thought You Knew. Exposing the 10 Biggest Myths About Christianity (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 2015)

___________________________________________________________________

A general caution: books may give you wonderful new insights and explanations of subjects, but you should never base your Christian beliefs on any one book or the teachings of one person, no matter who they are. All teachings must be consistent with scripture. Read as the Bereans did, with discernment. “… for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” Acts 17:11 NASB

Any doctrines must be consistent with the historical full body of Christian thought. Doctrines or teachings inconsistent with scripture in any way must be rejected. You would not eat cheese which had a fuzzy fungus growing on it.

The Classical Arguments for the Existence of God

 

There have been many attempts made to prove the existence of God but none have been definitive or inarguable. Some have pointed out that even if definitive proof existed that would not be enough. Knowing is not the same as believing.

There are three classical arguments for the existence of God. Argument to most people carries

the idea of an angry exchange of words sometimes leading to a physical altercation, but there is also an understanding of the word from a classical legal background. Ancient orators (the forerunners of attorneys) and their descendants, modern scholars, professors, and attorneys offered arguments on numerous subjects, giving persuasive statements for or against a particular matter or understanding of a subject. Modern lawyers present closing arguments to a jury at a trial.

The three classical arguments for the existence of God are the ontological, cosmological, and the teleological. The English-language word ontology is derived from the Greek words ὄν or ὄντος (being, that which is) and λογία (word, study). The English-language word cosmology is derived from the Greek words κóσμος (order, arrangement, or adornment) and λογία. The English-language word teleology is derived from the Greek words τέλος (end, aim purpose, goal, finality) and λογία.

The Ontological Argument says that since we can conceive of a perfect being, then God must exist. The weakness here is that we can also conceive of H.P. Lovecraft’s extremely complex mythology of ancient gods like Nyarlathotep, Yog-Sothoth, or Cthulhu but that does not mean that they actually exist.

The Cosmological Argument says that everything in the universe has a cause and that there must be a first cause, which is God. The weakness here is how to explain how God can be an uncaused cause. To say that God caused himself is just talking in a circle and does not answer the objection.

The Teleological Argument: is generally considered to be the strongest of the three.  This is also known as the argument from design. This argument points to the apparent order, purpose, and complexity of the universe as strong evidence pointing to an intelligent designer. This argument often mentions the fine-tuning of physical constants which must be the way they are for the existence of life, and of multiple complex biological systems which must all function correctly together the very first time or the organism will not be viable. The weakness here is that this argument can point but cannot prove. It can only define a degree of probability.

This argument cannot answer numerous objections. Was God designed by another designer who also had a designer who also had a …? Are there other designers creating other universes? Do suffering and natural disasters show God to be cruel or evil? Does the designer care at all about what he designed? Do we so much want to see design that we see it when it is not really there? Does the apparent presence of design point to the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition or to some other deity? Every one of these questions and objections and many others have been brought up over the centuries and have led to the development of the field of apologetics.

Apologetics absolutely cannot prove the existence of God. What it seeks to do is to find and explore every possible provable fact which adds to the probability of the truth of the Judeo-Christian tradition. There are literally thousands of these provable facts. Do not expect any of this to convince a true confirmed skeptic.

One can easily get bogged down in all the arguments, but I believe that the point of apologetics can be summed up by a line from the Jean-Pierre Jeunet secular comedic film masterpiece, Amelie: “When the finger’s pointing at the sky, only a fool looks at the finger.” 

The field of apologetics attempts to pile facts upon facts to raise the probability of God’s existence to the point at which even hostile total skeptics have to admit that it is at least a viable argument.

Book Comment: The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?

 

Almost everyone acknowledges that the original text documents of the New Testament have been lost. The originals were written on perishable materials and were hand copied onto other perishable materials to be distributed among the churches. Constant use, environmental factors, and sheer age led to the degradation of the documents which had to be recopied repeatedly. What we now have has been reconstructed from thousands of early textual fragments and the earliest known full copies of the books.

In the 120 pages of his book, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, F.F. Bruce presents a detailed but highly readable statement about the proofs that the modern New Testament as it stands represents as much as a 99.9 percent recovery of the original documents. Through the comparison of numerous copies, scribal errors and intentional editing can be detected and rejected. The oldest copies and those with the hardest to accept meaning (and therefore most likely to be "corrected" by the scribe) are favored.

Comparing the extant New Testament documents to those of secular antiquity, Bruce shows that the texts of the Christian scriptures are actually far better attested than those of universally accepted secular books.

                            ______________________________

F.F. Bruce, who died in 1990, was a highly influential British conservative evangelical biblical scholar and university professor. He wrote numerous books and articles.  https://www.eerdmans.com/9780802867230/f-f-bruce/

Information you will need to search for this book: Bruce, F.F., The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Downer’s Grove, Ill: Inter-Varsity Press, 5^th ed., 1960).

A similar book with a very apologetic bent is:

Sala, Harold J., Why You Can Have Confidence in the Bible (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2008).  (This is an apologetics book comparing the extant biblical documentation to that of classical documents from antiquity.)

___________________________________________________________________

A general caution: books may give you wonderful new insights and explanations of subjects, but you should never base your Christian beliefs on any one book or the teachings of one person, no matter who they are. All teachings must be consistent with scripture. Read as the Bereans did, with discernment. “… for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” Acts 17:11 NASB

Any doctrines must be consistent with the historical full body of Christian thought. Doctrines or teachings inconsistent with scripture in any way must be rejected. You would not eat cheese which had a fuzzy fungus growing on it.

Follow the Finger

 

Apologetics, derived from the Greek word, ἀπολογία, translated in English as "defense," consists of logical arguments and the presentation of provable facts which are intended to explain or justify religious doctrines and is aimed at defusing objections to the faith. This occurs in every religious tradition but, for our purposes, refers to Christian Apologetics.
            

It is difficult to understand how people can ignore or entirely discount some of the facts brought to light by Christian Apologetics, but some always do, sometimes vehemently. Some will insist that apologeticists are misinterpreting facts or taking them out of their proper context. Others outright reject any supernatural interpretations of any facts.

One can easily get bogged down in all the arguments, but I believe that the point of apologetics can be summed up by a line from the Jean-Pierre Jeunet film masterpiece, Amelie: “When the finger’s pointing at the sky, only a fool looks at the finger.” 

            Amelie is a quirky, but beautiful, French-language comedy and is not a Christian film. I, admittedly, am quoting the film totally out of context. The quote is a perfect fit for the point I am making in this post.

The Fine Structure Constant: 1/137

 

In physics, the fine structure constant, a,  is 1/137, or 0.0072973525693, the reciprocal of which is 137.03599084. Paul M. Sutter, an astrophysics professor at the State University of New York, Stony Brook, has said, “It’s a measure of the strength of the interaction between charged particles and the electromagnetic force … if it had any other value, life as we know it would be impossible …”

a was first noticed in 1916. Going back, physicists began to see it in many earlier calculations. The speed of light, atoms, numerous physical constants, gravity, stars, Fibonacci numbers, dark energy, parts of Einstein’s field equations, and electromagnetism are a few. It occurs almost uniformly around the subject of physics.

http://www.fine-structure-constant.org/

Some see from this that the ultimate nature of reality is mathematical. Others deny this but say that we can exist only because of the fortunate occurrence of the exacting physical conditions necessary for our reality, the anthropic principle. They would say that mathematics is a strictly human invention used to describe reality.

To those who see reality as mathematical, this is one of the arguments for the existence of God. They say there is an external reality totally independent of man. 1/137 cannot prove that God exists (none of the proofs can do that), but some see it as a finger pointing to him. (See this post:  https://saintsontheloose.blogspot.com/search/label/Amelie )

Saints on the Loose! Tools: "Search This Blog" and "Translate This Blog".

        On this blog, Saints on the Loose!, there are two useful tools: "Search This Blog" and "Translate This Blog".

        The "Search This Blog" drop-down tool provides the reader with access to over 1700 subject listings from Christian doctrinal issues, social and cultural issues, sports, health, movies, food, books, television programs, history, Christian heresies, apologetics, and many other subjects.

        The "Translate This Blog" drop-down tool allows the the reader to select a language other than English in which they may read the blog post. This tool uses the Google Translate function and, as of January 2025, can translate 249 languages. A detailed but not excessively technical discussion about Google Translate can be found on Wikipedia.

        Use of these two tools in tandem can greatly increase the usefulness of this blog to you.

        The Google Translate tool provides what is probably a very literal, but readable translation.  Idiomatic meaning and some subtleties unique to particular languages may be lost. The following two example translations are of a portion of this post, in Traditional Chinese and in Spanish..

在這個部落格 Saints Loose! 中，有兩個有用的工具：「搜尋此部落格」和「翻譯此部落格」。

        「搜尋此部落格」下拉工具為讀者提供了數千個主題列表，包括基督教教義問題、社會和文化問題、體育、健康、電影、食品、書籍、電視節目、歷史、基督教異端、護教學，以及許多其他主題。

        La herramienta desplegable "Buscar en este blog" proporciona al lector acceso a miles de listas de temas, desde cuestiones doctrinales cristianas, cuestiones sociales y culturales, deportes, salud, películas, comida, libros, programas de televisión, historia, herejías cristianas, apologética, y muchos otros temas.

Emphasis on Christian Education

We have allowed the progressives (This is their current self identification. They have also been known as liberals and relativists) to define themselves as "mainstream" or "moderate." They insult historical Christianity by labelling it as backward, racist, reactionary, homophobic, sexist, intolerant,  irrelevant to the modern world, judgmental, imperialistic, sexist, anti-intellectual, etc., etc., etc. Yada, yada, yada. Blah, blah, blah. You get the picture.

Historical Christianity is none of these things. Part of the reason that this insulting situation has arisen is that many churches have not adequately fulfilled their function to hand on the faith to the following generations. A helpful start would be a renewed emphasis on Christian education in history, doctrine, interpretation,  apologetics, and application of the Christian message in day to day life. We need to be equipping modern day Christian warriors. (Ephesians 6:13-18)

(... but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; 1 Peter 3:15)

Historical Christianity is the "mainstream." Those who wish to redefine the faith are the ones who are creating another doctrine. Many have already crossed the threshold and have effectively left the mainstream historical faith.

"Scripture quotations taken from the New American Standard Bible®,
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973,
1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation
Used by permission." (www.Lockman.org)

Are People Afraid of the Truth?

I was walking in to my workplace when a fellow employee whom I did not know spoke to me.

"Is that a murder mystery? ... That book you are carrying."

In my hand was The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel. I planned to do some reading in the book during my lunch break from work.

As we walked, I explained that the book was a work of apologetics. It responds vigorously to the numerous modern attempts to discredit the historical accuracy of the Bible and, more specifically, its depiction of Jesus.

A strange look spread across the face of the woman. She backed away and said, "It's because of all the translations and all the edits. That's why it doesn't have any credibility." The same unsupportable, incoherent, historical fact denying, vapid popular culture, anti-intellectual charges that we hear over and over and over!

She sped up and walked quickly away, probably to escape from the crazy religious person. She never looked back. Perhaps she feared for her life.

My thought was, "Wow! You really do need to read this book." Perhaps she was afraid that she might hear something which challenged her shallow postmodernist views.
 

Book Comment: The Bible as History

Werner Keller's, The Bible as History, has sold over three and a half million copies since its first publication in 1956. There is clearly a reason why. Though there can be no absolute proof that the Bible is what it says it is, there is a continually building body of evidence that the Bible is historically accurate in its claims. Kings and cultures are mentioned in their correct historical context, the presented customs and practices reflect those which prevailed at the time the individual books were written, mentioned individuals are found in extra-biblical documents and archeological sites, and recorded weather and natural events correspond to known science.  Individuals and cultures mentioned only in the Bible have later been confirmed by archeology to be historical.  As Dr. Keller states, " Many events that previously passed for pious tales must now be judged to be historical."

In the thick book (almost 500 pages), Dr. Keller brings together evidence from archeological sites, history, meteorology, astronomy, architecture, sociology, geography, topography, agriculture, language translation, textile technology, and even botany, to give, as he calls it "a confirmation of the Book of Books." The massive weight of the evidence clearly points to the historicity of the Bible. This is a major work of apologetics.

Some readers may not appreciate or wish to accept all of Dr. Keller's conclusions, but as the renowned archeologist Andre Parrot said, "How can we understand the Word, unless we see it in its proper chronological, historical and geographical setting?"

___________________________________________________________________

A general caution: books may give you wonderful new insights and explanations of subjects, but you should never base your Christian beliefs on any one book or the teachings of one person, no matter who they are. All teachings must be consistent with scripture. Read as the Bereans did, with discernment. “… for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” Acts 17:11 NASB

Any doctrines must be consistent with the historical full body of Christian thought. Doctrines or teachings inconsistent with scripture in any way must be rejected. You would not eat cheese which had a fuzzy fungus growing on it.

I Don't Know

Recently the comedian/actor Robin Williams committed suicide. This has set off intense discussion in the United States about suicide, depression, and several other mental health issues. And, of course, those in the religious community are right in the middle of the discussion.

There is little unanimity or consensus among declared believers about some of these issues. One of the most argued questions is, “What if a born-again believer commits suicide?”

The fast response is that a born-again believer would not commit suicide because suicide indicates despair and hopelessness and a failure to trust in God to be in control of any situation. Also, suicide can be understood as the sin of self murder.

Early Christians believed that suicide was blasphemous. In the sixth century, suicide was declared to be a secular crime. Statement  2281 of the Cathechism of the Roman Catholic Church states that “Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.” Many, but not all, Protestants would agree that a true believer will never commit suicide.

There are numerous questions which have arisen out of this discussion.

1.     Are not all of our sins washed clean forever at the moment of our salvation?

2.     If one is truly born again, can they ever be lost again?

3.     Is despair truly a rejection of Jesus and a rejection of our salvation or merely an intense emotional state? Can despair possibly be the result of a physiological imbalance and, therefore, out of our control?

4.     Repentence for suicide is not possible because one is dead.

5.     If, as some assert, there is an after-life period of Purgatory, can one atone for the sin of suicide?

6.     What if the suicide is to prevent torture or to escape a painful, slow death by disease? Some women have committed suicide to avoid rape.

7.     What about participation in mass suicide to prevent oneself from being forced to violate one’s religious beliefs?

8.     Can suicide be a form a mental illness?

There are seven suicides presented in the Bible but truly definitive answers to all the questions raised by  suicide do not seem to be presented. One’s personal understanding on this issue would seem to fall into the category of a persuasion or opinion, often strongly held.

Some persons insist on a definitive answer to every subject as if any ambiguity threatens to collapse the entire “house of cards.” I think this belies a lack of grounding on their part. Christianity is not an unstable house of cards. There is an extremely strong rational and historical basis for our faith. I would suggest that they read Josh McDowell’s Evidence That Demands a Verdict (1972) and other Christian apologetic works.   

“I don’t know” is a valid answer to some questions.  God is just and He knows the answers.

Messianic Prophecies from the Bible: The Virgin Birth

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14, KJV

"almah" עַלְמָ֗ה  is a Hebrew word for “young woman" or "virgin.”  There is much controversy over the translation of this word as “virgin.” Hebrew scholar Michael L. Brown has pointed out that a young maiden in Isaiah’s time was expected to be a virgin.  Another Hebrew word, “betulah” בְּתוּלָ֕ה  (used in Genesis 24:16) more properly means “virgin” but can also mean “young woman” or “maiden.”

Many Jews point out that the context of the verse seems to show this as being a sign given to Ahaz, King of Judah, who lived centuries before Jesus. (Ahaz was a descendent of the line of David, as was Jesus). They also say the prophecy cannot refer to Jesus because He was not named Immanuel.

Professor Brown answers that Ahaz was addressed in two verses in the plural. (The divine right of kings or were two persons being addressed?).  Brown sees this as “a promise to the house of David as a whole” and says that “the birth of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz seems to take the place of the Immanuel prophecy in terms of the immediate historical context.”

The “virgin” translation was used in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures which was in use during New Testament times.  The Greek word used here is “parthenos” ( “παρθένος” ; “virgin”).  The Septuagint was translated hundreds of years before Jesus was born and was quoted by Matthew. 

That not all Jews object to the translation of “almah” as “virgin” is shown by a quotation from the respected rabbi Rashi: :”And some interpret that this is the sign, that she was a young girl and incapable of giving birth.”  Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitschaki, 1040-1105) did not himself believe that Isaiah predicted a virgin birth.

(A Jewish rabbi discusses this question here.)

http://www.outreachjudaism.org/uploads/pdf%5CDUALVIRgin%20website.pdf

(A Christian response.)

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/isaiah-7-14-ahaz-sign.htm

It is true that Jesus was not literally named Immanuel (Eμμανουηλ), which in Greek means “God with us,” but this is exactly what Christians believe about Jesus.

“Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.” Matthew 1:23, KJV

.....................................................................
The Virgin Birth narratives occur in Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38.   Michael L. Brown is quoted from The Case for the Real Jesus (2007) by Lee Strobel.

Fiction in the Bible?

Critics of the Bible often decry it as a massive piece of fiction. Some even deny that Jesus existed at all. The Christian response is often to launch into an effort to convince the non-believer that the Bible is true and, of course, it is.  But angrily rushing at critics is probably not the best way to respond.   

It is a provable fact that the Bible is more historically attested than many ancient secular documents which are themselves almost universally accepted as genuine.  Whether or not the Bible is accepted as a supernatural book, it is increasing being proven as a historically accurate document.  The kings and kingdoms mentioned actually existed.  Many of the places mentioned have been found by digging where the Bible says they were.  The problem for the Christian apologist is that these arguments will probably fall on skepticism-deafened ears.

I recently found an old book from 1946 which gave me an insight about which I had never before thought.   The book is How to Read the Bible, by Dr. Edgar Goodspeed.  Dr. Goodspeed points out that the parables of Jesus were fictional.  Jesus was a master storyteller; it was his “favorite and characteristic vehicle.”  He used his stories, some of which are as short as a sentence in length, to teach spiritual insights in a simple and clear manner.

A very good opening to start with a non-believer might be Jesus’s parables.  Once the non-believer is interested in the parables, the Christian should point out that though the parables are clearly fictional, the Bible itself is historically based.  Even if the non-believer cannot be brought to a place of conviction, they may at least come to a place where they recognize that the events depicted in the Bible actually happened. This is progress which may later bear fruit.

A Response to "God Blames Us for His Mistakes"

To the question I posed yesterday, I would answer that this is a case that there are ways of knowing beyond that which can be seen, heard, and felt.  The empiricist/naturalist would say that if something cannot be observed or measured, it does not exist.  They are unable to see what is demonstrably directly before them. (Romans 1:20)

I will make the assertion that Christians can and do understand things which non-Christians cannot.  This is because we, as members of the Body of Christ, have the Mind of Christ.  Though it may seem alien, even to some Christians, the closer we are to Christ the more we think with one mind, the Mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:16)  Non-believers, expecially those who totally dismiss any idea of the supernatural,  are incapable of understanding or believing this.

The non-believer looks at Christ standing right in front of him or her and does not see Him.  I believe that they cannot see Him. Christians, whose minds have been “renewed,” see Jesus in every situation.  (Romans 12:12)

Tomorrow, I will amplify my answer to this question.

What They Think of Us: God Blames Us for His Mistakes

“We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing, all-powerful God, who creates faulty humans and then blames them for his own mistakes.’  Gene Roddenberry (1921, Texas, USA - 1991), American television screenwriter and producer, World War II combat pilot, police officer.  Roddenberry was the creator of the classic television program, Star Trek.  He was inducted into the Science Fiction Hall of Fame and the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Hall of Fame.

This is a common criticism of Christianity from nonbelievers and it should not just be dismissed out of hand.  It assumes that God, if He exists, is flawed and imperfect, or even that He is unfair.  The challenge requires an answer.  How would you answer?

Can You Respond to These Criticisms?

Christian Apologetics is the study of defending the faith against intellectual attacks and explaining biblical truths and concepts to non-believers in ways which they can understand.  It also attempts to give believers a rational footing on which to base their faith.  Some of the attacks are quite harsh.  See how you would respond to these ten criticisms … if you can.  If you cannot, don’t expect that our critics will be swayed by “because the Bible says so.”

http://con-w.com/top-ten-signs-youre-a-fundamentalist-christian/

The Importance of Christianity

"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, is of infinite importance.  The only thing it cannot be is moderately important."  C.S. Lewis (b. 1898, England - d. 1963) Writer, Christian apologist.

Book Comment: The 10 Most Common Objections to Christianity

The 10 Most Common Objections to Christianity (2007), by Alex McFarland, is a book of Christian apologetics which addresses what McFarland says are the ten criticisms he most often hears as he speaks in all fifty states of the United States and internationally. He points out that these objections are repeated almost verbatim wherever he goes. In the book, McFarland addresses each criticism individually and gives a reasoned, rational biblically-based response to each, pointing out the weaknesses and intellectual inconsistencies of each attack.

The ten objections are:
1. God is not real.
2. Creation is a myth.
3. The Bible is not completely authentic.
4. The Bible is not completely accurate.
5. Jesus was just a man.
6. Jesus is not the only way to Heaven.
7. A loving God would not send people to Hell.
8. People are basically good.
9. Christians are all hypocrites.
10. A merciful God would not allow suffering.

I heartily recommend this book to you. You have probably heard or will hear most or all of these charges at one time or another. Don't allow yourself to be left standing flat-footed.


"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" 1 Peter 3:15