A friend of mine shared an incredible illustration with me today. He isn’t a Christian, but he’s desperately seeking. The 12 inches between his heart and his brain keeps getting in the way. The story he told perfectly illustrates the way God tries to guide our lives:
During my first skydive, me and my instructors did three “practice pulls” during free-fall. Right out of the plane, I was supposed to reach my hand toward the device that would open my parachute, touch it with my hand, and get in position to be ready for parachute opening. The device I was grabbing for was located on the bottom of the “back pack.” Turns out I never really grabbed it but rather I just grabbed the side of my pants. When it came time to open my parachute for the first time, adrenaline peaking, I grabbed my pant leg with all I had, trying to open what would save my life. That’s when I realized that I did not have the device in hand. I felt the instructor’s hand on my wrist trying to pull my hand away, fear crept in and my hand held all the tighter on the wrong thing. After what felt like an eternity, my brain turned back on and I thought, “He’s not trying to take away my hand from that which will save me, he’s trying to take my hand away from the wrong place toward what WILL save me. I let go. I let my hand go limp and sure enough he brought my hand right to what I needed. The parachute fantastically opened and I landed like a pro.
I’m not sure what’s cooler; the fact that this is exactly how God is or that my agnostic friend could tell this story and relate it to God.
Wow! Thanks for sharing that story.
[Reply]
That’s incredible. Was your friend just saying that he recognized what Believers feel sometimes, or has he expressed this as a step in his acceptance? I have a dear friend who is definitely atheist, but a recent long-term tragedy caused her to talk with me sometimes about how she wished I was right about God and an afterlife. She is someone who graciously accepts Christians’ prayerful wishes and the types of things we say to others when we think they are Christian, but in private she has told me they offer her no comfort, because she doesn’t believe. I’m hoping that one of these days when we are talking, I will say the right thing or I will be silent at the right time so that God speaks to her heart. If you have time at prayers, I would love it if you would pray for her.
[Reply]
Obviously prayer is pretty much a non-issue for me, but my thoughts will be with your friend.
If she does turn to Christianity, I hope it’ll be because she believes it to be true – not just because she needs it to be true.
[Reply]
Lifewish, as a Christian, I would pray exactly the same thing. Christianity isn’t merely a therapy for the believer. Trusting our creator and worshiping him for who he really is is something he commands and deserves. I for one am glad to do so!
[Reply]
Which leads itself to an interesting question: would you prefer for someone to share your beliefs for bad reasons, or to reject your beliefs for good reasons?
[Reply]
It’s a step towards acceptance. He has already admitted that he can come to no other conclusion except that there is a God. He just isn’t ready to surrender.
Lifewish: I would prefer someone to reject my beliefs for good reasons. Because sharing my beliefs for bad reasons isn’t really sharing my beliefs at all!
[Reply]
Lifewish, it is not about my wanting people to share my beliefs. God is the one who cares most here. He commands that we believe and he is faithful to clean up our motives as we steadily grow in Christ’s likeness.
There are no good reasons for not trusting Christ. But to answer your question, if someone could prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead, I would stop being a Christian. However, the historical evidence is to the contrary. The mistake you’re making in your mind right now is assuming that your materialistic view of the universe (i.e. this is all there is and there isn’t anything else) is true. It is woefully inadequate to explain all that you do see, hear, smell, taste or touch. The Big Bang itself requires an explanation outside the laws of science we know today.
For Christianity, the apostles had hundreds of eye-witnesses on their side who touched Jesus after he rose from the dead and they who were witnesses themselves died horrible deaths defending this very truth. The Bible is built on the foundations of history.
[Reply]
Amanda:
I would prefer someone to reject my beliefs for good reasons. Because sharing my beliefs for bad reasons isn’t really sharing my beliefs at all!
My feelings exactly, and expressed better than I could
Bill:
There are no good reasons for not trusting Christ
There are certainly bad reasons for trusting in Christ. What I’m getting at is: if someone were to accept Christianity primarily on the basis of those bad reasons, how would you feel? Would it be preferable to them not believing in Christ at all?
The mistake you’re making in your mind right now is assuming that your materialistic view of the universe (i.e. this is all there is and there isn’t anything else) is true.
Dude, you’re talking to the guy who spent most of a summer vacation trying to find out if psiballs really worked (the answer, as best I can tell, is no).
I don’t have a “materialistic” view of the universe in the sense you describe. What I do have is a criterion – predictivity – for whether a model of the universe is worth accepting as accurate. At present, the best models all seem to be mostly materialistic. That could change – if, for example, someone were to win the Randi challenge.
For Christianity, the apostles had hundreds of eye-witnesses on their side who touched Jesus after he rose from the dead and they who were witnesses themselves died horrible deaths defending this very truth. The Bible is built on the foundations of history.
Or so the Bible claims. I’m aware of only two or three independent sources that can be even remotely considered to be supporting evidence for Jesus’s existence, let alone His miraculous powers. If you disagree, I’d be very interested in any examples of corroborative evidence you can provide.
Also, this might be getting a little off-topic. I’ll leave that for Amanda to rule on, though.
[Reply]
There’s pretty much no such thing as off-topic.
[Reply]
You say that now…
[Reply]
“Or so the Bible claims. I’m aware of only two or three independent sources that can be even remotely considered to be supporting evidence for Jesus’s existence, let alone His miraculous powers. If you disagree, I’d be very interested in any examples of corroborative evidence you can provide.”
You speak of the Bible as if it were written by one person. In reality, it is a collection of books (there are 27 in the New Testament) by different authors who all saw the same things. The people and places in them are real and be corroborated by other histories at the time. What you would call internal evidence today was “external” prior to the canonization of Scripture. These books are the most well preserved books of any book of antiquity. The accounts therein were accepted by the people who lived in those times and the fact that they have existed and people have been basing their lives on them ever since Jesus ascended makes their authenticity hard to refute as a passing fad.
We’re not talking about those people living moral lives. We are talking about believing Jesus is who he said he was, God made flesh, and putting their hopes on him, living their lives as if they were going to be judged by him and justified by him. Those very people of that same generation died as martyrs rather than deny their faith in him. And that’s continued for 2000 years. And in those 2000 years, nothing has come to light that would refute those claims.
Is that scientific evidence? No. You can’t do history that way. But there’s enough there to believe in. If you haven’t already, give the book of Luke a read. His Gospel is full of historical references that must have been corroborated to be believed.
[Reply]
In reality, it is a collection of books (there are 27 in the New Testament) by different authors who all saw the same things.
To which things are we referring? Only the four Gospels spend much time discussing Jesus’ life. Of these, Matthew and Luke appear to be based on a combination of Mark and an unknown “sayings gospel”. There were a few of those around – for example, the sayings gospel of Thomas found at Nag Hammadi.
So there are probably only two original sources on Jesus’ life still extant (Mark and John). Even making the most liberal assumptions about the veracity of those, that’s not a lot of corroboration.
The people and places in them are real and be corroborated by other histories at the time.
Could you give examples please? Are we talking merely on the level of knowing that Roman-era Israel was ruled by Pontius Pilate, or is there corroboration for specific events and otherwise-unimportant individuals from the Gospel stories?
What you would call internal evidence today was “external” prior to the canonization of Scripture.
But there’s also a lot of external evidence that didn’t toe the party line. I already mentioned the Gospel of Thomas, and there’s half a dozen others that are known of. I wonder how many more there might have been that simply didn’t survive to reach us? There’s even supposed to be a secret version of Mark, of which only a couple of verses are known (the version we have is supposed to be the sanitised public document).
These books are the most well preserved books of any book of antiquity.
Apart from Mark, the most ancient copies of which all end suddenly at chapter 16 verse 8. No-one quite knows why, but one popular hypothesis is that the full version would have been disharmonious with the other Gospels. Does the harmony of the Bible still count for much if it would have been so easy to edit?
The accounts therein were accepted by the people who lived in those times and the fact that they have existed and people have been basing their lives on them ever since Jesus ascended makes their authenticity hard to refute as a passing fad.
Accepted by all… except for those who didn’t. Of the three groups of early Christians, the Gnostics got completely wiped out. Not entirely coincidentally, they also had several gospels of their own.
It’s not uncommon for legends to build themselves quite quickly around a person or group. Just look at Uri Geller, and all the other professed “psychics” out there. Or consider the creation of the Mormon Church – many of the early followers of Joseph Smith Jr. reported miraculous events. On what basis can we accept Jesus’ story as any more valid than these?
Just because something isn’t a “passing fad” doesn’t mean it’s right.
Those very people of that same generation died as martyrs rather than deny their faith in him.
Same goes for many of the early Mormons. Although I’d note that, for many of those early Christians (in particular the Jewish followers of the Apostles), that martyrdom was probably just part of the same zeitgeist that led to the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem.
And in those 2000 years, nothing has come to light that would refute those claims.
Depends what you think Jesus meant when he reportedly said “I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.” It’s 2000 years on and we’ve still seen no apocalypse of the sort the Gospel describes.
Is that scientific evidence? No. You can’t do history that way. But there’s enough there to believe in.
If there’s enough for some people to believe in in the laugh-a-minute Book of Mormon, there’s certainly enough for some people to believe in in the Gospel. But enough that all who hear it are left “with no excuse”? I’d say not.
[Reply]
[...] I just spent an hour on the phone with the guy I’ve had a crush on for over a year. He told me, “I dig ya.” That looks so small and insignificant when it’s typed [...]