Can you prove Christianity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rosejmj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rosejmj

Guest
I don’t think I can accept that Christianity is true in it’s fullness unless there are some sound rational arguments to support it.

All I hear is people claiming that it is true because they believe strongly that it is but without good reasons it seems . Just because it makes sense to them and they believe it is from God.

And does it really matter which religion is followed as long as people try their best to be good people? Wouldn’t it be better to seek truth and to be good then to put a ton of energy into some religion that could turn out to be false. Unless it makes you feel happier and live a fuller life. But if God made us for himself does he even care which religion we follow? We are so limited anyway and it’s not as if a good God would condemn all those who through no fault if their own for some reason did not adhere to the right religion if there is one.
 
“Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
- John 20:29
 
Well, you seem to be assuming that God has not spoken on these matters. The reality is that God has spoken, first and foremost through Jesus Christ, and through the prophets and scriptures. What did they reveal? I would start there for your answers.

Your Questions: Does it matter which religion people follow as long as they try to be good people?

My Question to you: What does Romans 1-3 say on whether we are good people?

Your Question: Would it be better to feel happy and live a fuller life?

My Question to you: What does Ecclesiastes say about what makes a full life?

Your Question: Does God even care which religion we follow?

My Question to you: What does Deuteronomy say about if God cares? What does Christ say about the way to the father (how many ways does Christ offer in John 14)?

Your Question: Why would God condemn those who no fault of their own reject God?

My Question to you: What does Genesis 3 reveal about the responsibility man has in rejecting God?
 
This is assuming someone believes the Bible is actually divine revelation. Before using the Bible to defend your points you would need to prove that it is from God
 
Your answers assume belief in the bible. Must people don’t, unless they already buy into the religion.
 
I am comfortable about that. However, I am assuming that this person by virtue of the fact that they are here has at least some respect for scripture or Christ. Maybe that’s a wrong assumption, but I will start with that premise. Ultimately, if they reject Christ, they reject Christ. Doesn’t stop me from pointing to him though.
 
Last edited:
That is fair but if you wanted to get on common ground with a non Christian and help lead him to the faith using reason your arguments would not help. It’s good to be able to explain what you believe to someone of a different faith too I’m a way they can understand
 
Agreed. That is why I pointed to those places. Just because it kind of shows you what we believe so that you understand what you are asking about.
 
May I suggest to all of you a very readable book? C.S. Lewis’ "Mere Christianity’. He starts right out for those who do NOT ‘accept the Bible’ --it takes a while to get to The Christian God, but it’s not dull and it’s easy to follow. The book comes out of radio talks he made during WW2, so it’s not like he is talking in some cozy little place where ‘nothing bad ever happens’; you have people with these big questions when they are dealing with literally not knowing if they’ll be alive the next day. . . I think he does a good job. Most libraries either have it on the shelf or can easily order it for you.
 
It is rational to believe that the Apostles actually believed what they were saying, because it never made them rich and it got all but one of them killed in really nasty ways. None of them jumped off the bandwagon when the going got rough and their successors were also martyred for generations after them. They had no motive for laying down their lives except that they deeply believed what they were saying about what they had seen with their own eyes was true.
It is reasonable to believe the Apostles, as eyewitnesses, weren’t deluded or duped. The writings of contemporaries indicates that Jesus of Nazareth actually did exist and preach and actually was crucified by the Romans. The Apostles did not claim that the Risen Jesus was only seen by one of them or twelve of them, but by lots and lots of people. Their most ardent member, Saul of Tarsus, was an adversary of the movement until he had a personal experience.
To believe in Christianity is to believe in the testimony of the first Christians as it has been handed down. It is reasonable to believe they were not lying. It is reasonable to believe they weren’t lunatics. It is reasonable to believe it is physically possible they saw what they said they saw. Therefore, it is rational to believe that they were telling the truth and Christianity is true.
I’m not saying that a rational assessment of the situation couldn’t possibly leave room for doubt. I can say that it does leave room for a rational person to believe it. Absolutely, without a doubt, it is rational to have the opinion that Christianity is true.

A good explanation of why it is rational to believe in Christianity, written by a convert who was nothing if not rational and who made his decisions based on logic, is Mere Christianity, written by C.S. Lewis. His book Surprised by Joy describes how he went from not believing to belief, including the rigor of thought that he was taught by a tutor he had as a young man. You might also be interested in reading the work of his contemporary, G.K. Chesterton.
 
Last edited:
PetraG said:
It is rational to believe that the Apostles actually believed what they were saying, because it never made them rich and it got all but one of them killed in really nasty ways
Click to expand...
The problem I have come across with this theory is that there is not a good reliable, ancient, historical source that attests to what happened to them after Jesus died. We have legends, which are quite apocryphal. I have yet to come across any accounts that critical scholars would consider historically reliable. Do you know of any?
 
Is your question about whether God exists? Or whether Jesus was/is God? Or something else?
 
rosejmj said:
But if God made us for himself does he even care which religion we follow? We are so limited anyway and it’s not as if a good God would condemn all those who through no fault if their own for some reason did not adhere to the right religion if there is one.
Click to expand...
For the most part I agree with you. Surely God does not expect us all to be Doctorate level theologians & it is a confusing mindfeld (pun intended).

For me, the whole reason I began searching for truth was when I experienced true love & knew love was real. & if love was real where does it come from? & when I say true love, for me it was the first moment I held my newborn daughter.

What I felt in that moment was more real than anything I could touch with my hands, or read in a book, or even understand. Of course I experienced love for my parents, my brothers and sisters, my friends, girlfriends along the way, & my wife. But as you know, they’re all different. There’s a common thread so much they can all be called “love.”

What I felt for my daughter that day, what I’m calling “true love” brought it all together. & that love helped me understand all the other types of love I had experienced in my life.

From then, my search has led me to the Church & a fuller understanding of that love that is true, that is everlasting, that is more real than what the eye can see.

I don’t need for any one to prove Christianity is real. I know that love is real.
 
Last edited:
rosejmj said:
Wouldn’t it be better to seek truth and to be good then to put a ton of energy into some religion that could turn out to be false. Unless it makes you feel happier and live a fuller life.
Click to expand...
Well, there’s your problem - each religion teaches a different truth. Buddha taught that you don’t even exist! Protagoras taught that “truth” is relative. But Christ said the most profound thing ever uttered by a human: “I am the truth.”
rosejmj said:
But if God made us for himself does he even care which religion we follow?
Click to expand...
Of course, because only the right faith will show you who God is.

The Vikings believed all their Gods would die in a massive, fiery battle. The Greek “King of the Gods” Zeus regularly turned into animals and had sex with (or raped) women. The Muslim god wants you to slaughter animals in the direction of Mecca. And the Yazidis believe the Universe is managed by a giant peacock named Melek Tawus.

Clearly these are all different destinations. Only our faith teaches that God loved man and became man to bring us closer to him.
 
Last edited:
Can you prove Christianity?
No I can’t.
There are proofs for Christianity that are logical. You can look into those.
But no, Christianity cannot be proven in the way you are asking for, which seems to be materialist. Christianity is about a relationship, and your relationship with Christ can’t be proven any more than your relationship with a spouse.
It’s a different level of knowing.
 
Scientist know the universe is not only expanding, but accelerating in its expansion. They also can estimate the time since the Big Bang, so at this rate of acceleration, the universe should be a soup of articles by now, having torn itself apart. What is holding it together? enter two new concepts: dark matter and dark energy, they interact somehow to make this possible. Where is the proof, where are the calculations where are the explanations for all this? they even call it a ‘mystery’. Well, God is a mystery too, one that we will never be able to fully understand.
 
ForeverLearn said:
The problem I have come across with this theory is that there is not a good reliable, ancient, historical source that attests to what happened to them after Jesus died. We have legends, which are quite apocryphal. I have yet to come across any accounts that critical scholars would consider historically reliable. Do you know of any?
Click to expand...
This is probably the best I can do:

www.nationalgeographic.com

These 12 men shaped Christianity—but did they really exist?

Historical evidence of the Apostles is scarce, and some of it contradicts core Christian beliefs.
www.nationalgeographic.com www.nationalgeographic.com

The author went looking for evidence; he did not conclude that Christianity was not believable. He mostly concluded that it is was not a period in history that had a “journalistic impulse.” There weren’t people making an effort to appease the standards of evidence required by modern sceptics. No matter what you do or don’t believe about the past, that’s what you’re going to run into.

So–as I said, I’m not saying that a rational assessment of the situation couldn’t possibly leave room for doubt. I can say that it does leave room for a rational person to believe it. Absolutely, without a doubt, it is rational to have the opinion that Christianity is true.

If your concern is that you’ll accept something that no rational person would accept if you accept Christianity, that is misplaced. Lots of very rational people accept Christianity and sleep very well. If you don’t want to accept anything that you can’t be sure happened, well, no matter where you draw the line you’re going to have to believe somebody. Some things have evidence that is more unassailable in a “court of law” sense than anything about Christianity or anybody else who lived in that period who wasn’t politically very important. Jesus of Nazareth and the Apostles didn’t have enough political importance to leave the kind of trail of evidence you may be looking for. That isn’t evidence that they didn’t exist.
 
Last edited:
rosejmj said:
I don’t think I can accept that Christianity is true in it’s fullness unless there are some sound rational arguments to support it.

All I hear is people claiming that it is true because they believe strongly that it is but without good reasons it seems . Just because it makes sense to them and they believe it is from God.

And does it really matter which religion is followed as long as people try their best to be good people? Wouldn’t it be better to seek truth and to be good then to put a ton of energy into some religion that could turn out to be false. Unless it makes you feel happier and live a fuller life. But if God made us for himself does he even care which religion we follow? We are so limited anyway and it’s not as if a good God would condemn all those who through no fault if their own for some reason did not adhere to the right religion if there is one.
Click to expand...
Paul’s whole argument for our faith

1 Corinthians 15:13-23
 
There’s no way to prove Christianity. I used to wonder why, if God existed and wanted us to believe in him and do certain things, wouldn’t he reveal himself and make it clear. Why require faith when he can appear and remove all doubt? What might convince one person might not convince another, but an omniscient God would know what was needed for each individual. It eventually occurred to me that there might not be any manifestation of God within the material universe that couldn’t be doubted. Sure there’s evidence that can get you closer. But there’s no rock solid proof. This is actually true of anything. At some point you just have to jump. But there are very reasonable reasons for doing that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top