What If I Was Wrong?

Many people ridicule Christians for believing in a man who resurrected from the dead. They laugh at Christians and criticize them for basing their faith on an event that lack proof and evidence. However, the evidence that skeptics use to challenge the Christian faith, in actuality, support the claims that Jesus truly was the God that he claimed to be. The evidence that affirms Jesus’ claims to be true include his lifestyle and teachings, the prophecies that he fulfilled, historical facts, and the dramatic transformation of the lives of his disciples. Many may ask Christians how they can believe in a Savior without proof of his divinity; but, in reality, God has given us an abundance of signs. He is still providing us with compelling evidence

Award-winning journalist, Lee Strobel wrote The Case for Christ to retrace and enlarge his journey toward becoming a Christian. Strobel once atheist, and now Christian, shares how he began to look upon the Bible and God. As an atheist, Strobel lived the life of selfishness and only worried to please himself. When his wife began to go to church he wasn’t very pleased until after he saw the positive and attractive change in her. This is the start of his curiosity and investigation about Christianity. He wanted to understand what changed her like this. He wanted to relate with his wife so he decided to study about this and attend church services with her. Strobel began his journey and interviewed thirteen leading scholars who defended their views concerning the historical reliability of the New Testament. Strobel splits the case for Christ into three basic sections: Examining the Record, Analyzing Jesus, and Researching the Resurrection.

The most rebutted aspect of the work done by the scholars was their idiosyncrasy to equate “unverifiable” with “unauthentic.” Most scholars who study the elements attribute to the life of Jesus stand on common ground when it comes to the realization that many of the sayings and deeds associated to Jesus in the Gospels lack sufficient evidence to establish authenticity. However, to many scholars insufficient evidence means an element cannot be verified, and therefore should not be deemed as historical. In contrast, the Jesus Seminar went beyond this scope and maintained that Jesus did not say or did not do things that cannot be authenticated by evidence. For example, it is widely accepted that there is very little evidence to support whether or not Jesus was born from his virgin mother, Mary. As a result, this element of his life has just been something that one would believe on the foundation of religious faith rather than historical science. However, the Jesus Seminar applied a post-Enlightenment historical scientific view to this element in order to determine authenticity. Under this assessment, they determined not only what is confirmable but what also is scientifically possible. Therefore, the scholars deemed the virgin birth as non-historical, concluding that Jesus had been conceived through normal sexual intercourse between a male and female because it fit the paradigm known today. This stance held by the Jesus Seminar “turn[s] a corner in the traditional understanding of the relationship that faith and philosophy bear to science and history” (Powell, 115). For this reason, I reject the integrity of their work. I believe faith and philosophy should be kept separate of science and history, unless the two aim to support one another. Rescinding concepts of faith simply because they do fall within current scientific boundaries is illegitimate. The major flaw of the Jesus Seminar is their

Beilby, James. Thinking about Christian apologetics: what is is and why we do it. Downers Gove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011.

The battle between the relationship of science and religion has always been a controversial topic in society. It has been a subject of study since the classical era from scientists, theologists, philosophers, and regular citizens. It is understandable that the perspective on culture and religion are unquestionably varied due to different geographical regions, but why are there so many heated debates regarding the global discussion and what is it that causes those controversies? Is it possible that there is more than two outlooks and theories? Jerome Lawrence and Robert E.Lee contrasts the two perspectives in Inherit the Wind by bringing back an historical and legendary trial. Matthew Harrison Brady, an established lawyer in America demonstrates his ideology in God. Addition to Mr. Brady, his arch nemesis, Henry Drummond, defends his morals by expressing his vision that evolution is where human come from.

From the very beginning the author puts forward his disagreement with Professor Weinberg’s argument and refuted his claims. The author says even when Weinberg is saying he doesn’t mean to humiliate the association of people with religion his argument is indeed a humiliation. Standing in the middle of fundamentalists of science and fundamentalists of religion, the author censures Weinberg’s act – trying to disturb the orderness among those who value religion. Referring the example of life after death, Berry reproduces and questions the citation “more and more of us know that after death there is nothing”. If anyone doesn’t know, does it mean there is nothing? In Berry’s words Weinberg tries to power his opinion like those politicians in the battle of chair, or in the field of technology, science and religion. The author denounces Weinberg’s act of total humiliation to the fundamentalists of religion. He believes the argument must be conducted in absence of material evidence which stands as proof in lab or court and it can neither

According to the Gospels in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), the purposes of Jesus’ life was like no other. Jesus was a perfect, innocent man (HCSB, 1 Peter. 2.22). He was sent by God to fulfill the bountiful number of prophesies in the Old Testament. These prophecies predicted a perfect man being sent by God to be the Messiah for Israel. Jesus was not like the rest of the world. The perfection of Jesus was unique in the world because, as the Apostle Paul states, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (HCSB, Romans. 3.23). Jesus’ perfection proved he had been sent by God and would fulfill a duty that no others

This professor was disappointed with the students who were in graduate school at BU and graduated from the school of theology since they didn’t know anything about Christianity. He pointed out that American students go to church and do not know the history of Christianity, while Austrian students do not go to church but know the history. This is counterproductive and calls for a reformation of the religious sector in the United States. Today, the history is not emphasized as much as the lessons that are learned and the correct way to act. He points out that we do not need to learn how we are supposed to act according to the bible by attending church.

Christianity claims that 2,000 years ago God the son came to the earth to reveal the father to us and then die to save us from our sins. This claim needs to be further elaborated. God the son; Jesus Christ came to earth to remove sin from the lives of people so that he could come into the lives of those who were ready to accept him into their heart and transform them. The relationship with God is based entirely upon the relationship with Jesus.

Ronald H. Nash (1936-2006) was an Evangelical Baptist philosopher and apologist in the Calvinist tradition.1 He received his PhD. From Syracuse University and was a professor for over 40 years teaching and writing in the areas of worldview, apologetics, ethics, theology and history. 2 He taught at Western Kentucky University, Reformed Theological Seminary and the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. His favorite philosopher was Augustine and during his scholastic years he favored the theological teachings of Carl F. H. Henry. Besides Is Jesus the Only Savior?, He wrote several successful books, among them are, Life’s Ultimate Questions; Faith and Reason; Worldviews in Conflict: Choosing Christianity in a World of Ideas; The Word of God and

Authors Steven Prothero and Robert Orsi have taken strong, unyielding opinions on Dennis Covington’s work Salvation on Sand Mountain, and debated the ethics behind Covington and his research. Robert Orsi claims that researches in the field of religious studies should keep a level of otherness with their subject of research to keep an objective standpoint, so religious studies can maintain a social sciences level of prestige. On the other hand, Prothero argues that religious studies should be free to have emotion and empathy, and to let these emotions shape arguments and research. Although both arguments are compelling, Robert Orsi’s idea of ethical research is correct, because if emotions enter into research then the reader is not receiving

In the assigned reading, Dr. Wilkens has outlined the “Not-So-Great Divide” that exists between the University and the Church. This divide is the incompatibility of practical education and the theological connections between an institution and a church. Dr. Wilkens has proposed that the contradiction is “not” so great, and it only exists because of miscommunication. Institutions tend to encourage doubt, which harms a student if he or she is trying to avoid questioning his or her own faith. Expectations that do not align with the outcome also leads this division between a student’s faith and education. Students who grew up in a Christian community will attend Christian universities, expecting to encounter a similar environment. The process

God sent Jesus to save us for our repentance with the promise to those who choose to follow Him will be saved (Romans 5-6).

Jesus became the incarnation in order to restore the human race and revive all creations on Earth. Jesus himself said, “I came to seek and to save that which was lost” (Athanasius, 13). With humanity’s free will there was a fall that needed God’s redemption. God could not just leave his creations to follow a path of complete destruction. In the text, Athanasius discusses that repentance may stop future sins, but it will not restore the corruption from the previous sins. He also implies that once humankind sins, they are bound to sin again. According to Athanasius, Jesus had to enter the world to undertake a human body so that he could die for us on the cross in order to forgive our sins.

Jesus came so that each of us could know and understand God in a personal way. Jesus alone can bring meaning and purpose to life.