Question for Christians ...

[McCulloch]

I would like someone to recommend to me a really good book of Christian Apologetics. Surely someone can do better than Josh McDowell's Evidence Demands A Verdict.

[Rob]

I would like someone to recommend to me a really good book of Christian Apologetics. Surely someone can do better than Josh McDowell's Evidence Demands A Verdict.

Ok, I admit I am cheeting on the question a bit, but McCullock, I say this will all sincerety, the best "apologetics" in the best and most honorable sense of the word (and I don't like apologetics) is the Life and Teachings of Jesus as I read them in the Urantia Book. And I only say this because you asked.

I say this because it was this story that led me to realize the difference between the teachings about Jesus vs. the teachings of Jesus, and thereby made it possible for me to find the living Jesus in Christianity, rather than turn away from the dogmatists and miss the best it has to offer.

Read it like a good fiction story.

And by the way, after reading the Life and Teachings of Jesus in the Urantia book, you won't have any need for apologetics anymore, as you will see these living teachings in every religion at it best.

The many religions of Urantia are all good to the extent that they bring man to God and bring the realization of the Father to man. It is a fallacy for any group of religionists to conceive of their creed as The Truth; such attitudes bespeak more of theological arrogance than of certainty of faith. There is not a Urantia religion that could not profitably study and assimilate the best of the truths contained in every other faith, for all contain truth. Religionists would do better to borrow the best in their neighbors' living spiritual faith rather than to denounce the worst in their lingering superstitions and outworn rituals. (1012)

[McCulloch]

Ok, I admit I am cheeting on the question a bit, but McCulloc[h], I say this will all sincerety, the best "apologetics" in the best and most honorable sense of the word (and I don't like apologetics) is the Life and Teachings of Jesus as I read them in the Urantia Book. And I only say this because you asked.
I say this because it was this story that led me to realize the difference between the teachings about Jesus vs. the teachings of Jesus, and thereby made it possible for me to find the living Jesus in Christianity, rather than turn away from the dogmatists and miss the best it has to offer.
Read it like a good fiction story.
And by the way, after reading the Life and Teachings of Jesus in the Urantia book, you won't have any need for apologetics anymore, as you will see these living teachings in every religion at it best.

Thanks Rob. I might read it. Though, I would hardly call something that I would read as fiction, apologetics. I don't think that it will serve the purpose that I had intended. I wanted a sound defence of the truthfulness of the traditional Christian doctrine. I find it hard to believe that so many believe it without such a thing in existence.

[Cathar1950]

McCulloch I couldn't tell you maybe something by like "the size of God", or "Metaphorical Theology: Models of God in Religious Language, by Sallie McFague. I once was a read on called "Christianity on trial" it is much like Josh McDowell's Evidence Demands A Verdict Christian Apologetics mean for the believer that has bumped into the world and isn't looking for skepticism and can overlook or not recognize the flaws.

[Rob]

Thanks Rob. I might read it. Though, I would hardly call something that I would read as fiction, apologetics. I don't think that it will serve the purpose that I had intended. I wanted a sound defence of the truthfulness of the traditional Christian doctrine. I find it hard to believe that so many believe it without such a thing in existence.

You welcome, and you are right 100% in my view, it is not "apologetics." In fact, in my view, and I believe the UB supports this view, apologetics is fruitless, as the only way to validate spiritual truth is experientially; there is no argumentative proof for the existence of God, only experience in and with living truth, beauty, and goodness, which by faith-experience is the experience of experiencing that God is the source of this living truth, beauty, and goodness.

No matter how reasonable the philosophy (apologetics in some cases) it can never go beyond reason and logic, which has its limitations. I am sorry my friend I don't have a better answer, but I personally don't believe there is one. The only proof of God I can offer is my experience thereof, and of course both you and I know this is no proof which meets the standards apologetics claims to meet, but which I believe I can muster a philosophical argument which refutes apologetics can prove God.

I can only share with you those experience I have had that have led me to believe God exists. Nothing more, nothing less, can prove God in my own limited experience.

[youngborean]

The Testimony of the 4 Evangelists by Simon Greenleaf

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah by Alfred Edersheim

Both are great books on this side. The first does not attempt to reconcile differences, but takes the writer's expertise on oral testimony (he was the national authority on this in his time in law schools) and uses that model as an examination of the different gospels. The second explains the differences in cultural context through a historical perspective. Both are lengthy and more the reference variety unless you are really looking for some piece of mind in this area.

[Bugmaster]

You welcome, and you are right 100% in my view, it is not "apologetics." In fact, in my view, and I believe the UB supports this view, apologetics is fruitless, as the only way to validate spiritual truth is experientially; there is no argumentative proof for the existence of God...

I agree with you on that, for what it's worth, seeing as I'm a godless atheist and all. An interesting corollary of this is that missionaries are wasting their time, "witnessing" is fruitless, and all these people who knock on your door at 9am to give you their tracts are not accomplishing anything. Sorry if that sounds harsh -- I mean no disrespect...

...only experience in and with living truth, beauty, and goodness, which by faith-experience is the experience of experiencing that God is the source of this living truth, beauty, and goodness.

That's probably true of theists, but atheists take "truth, beauty and goodness" in a person to be an indication of the goodness of that person -- nothing more, nothing less. And, naturally, most monotheists take virtue of any kind to be evidence for their god, not the virtuous person's god. So, all we can really do -- atheists and liberal theists alike -- is to try to live better lives, and hope it all turns out for the best. Well, not all of us, sadly; some of us are still stuck in jihad/crusader mode :-(

[achilles12604]

I have found three that are all pretty good with the apologist arguements.

1) Reasonable Faith; William Lane Craig
2) The Case for Christ; Lee Strobel (this is more of a glossing of many topics rather than indepth study)
3) JEsus under Fire

If you are interested in Creation arguements . . . .

The Creation Hypothesis; William Dembski

For a good overview of biblical archeology . . .

Archeology and the New Testament; Dr. John McRay

There are a few. What do you think?

[myth-one.com]

Of course, the best book to study is the Bible. But be aware that the scriptures are sealed up from man's understanding until the end of times. Even the disciples could not understand the scriptures until Jesus opened their understanding shortly before He ascended to heaven:

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures. (Luke 24:45)

What can we do? How can insignificant mortals (like me) ever hope to understand the scriptures? The answer is also there in the scriptures:

Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. (Mark 11:24)

And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. (Matthew 21:22)

Therefore, before studying the Bible (the closest thing we have to the scriptures), get on your knees and ask God to open your understanding of the scriptures, believing that He will do so! Then you can understand the Bible! It is the one big flaw in the Bibles's security system. If God says He will do something -- He will do it!

It worked for me, even on individual verses. I struggled for hours with Matthew 13:12. Why would God give even more to those who hath, while taking away everything from those who have not? Finally, I was on my knees asking God to let me understand that verse. On my way back up, it hit me as to its meaning. That meaning is too much to post here, but is explained in detail at www.myth-one.com/chapter_18.htm

That's the secret to understanding the scriptures. If for whatever reason, the believing part is difficult for you, I recommend reading the reflections of someone who did believe. It is free online to anyone at: www.myth-one.com No donations accepted, no advertisements, no obligations.
The good news should be free to all who seek it!

[McCulloch]

What can we do? How can insignificant mortals (like me) ever hope to understand the scriptures? The answer is also there in the scriptures:

Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. (Mark 11:24)
And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. (Matthew 21:22)

Therefore, before studying the Bible (the closest thing we have to the scriptures), get on your knees and ask God to open your understanding of the scriptures, believing that He will do so! Then you can understand the Bible! It is the one big flaw in the Bibles's security system. If God says He will do something -- He will do it!

Are you saying that in order to understand the Bible, you must first believe it?

[myth-one.com]

I do not totally understand your question, but will try to give an answer.

I have been a Christian since the age of nine, basically due to an accident of birth. Had I been born in Israel I would probably be Jewish. Had I been born into a Muslim family in Lebanon I would be firing rockets into Israel today. But I was born in northern Mississippi.

I religiously believed what I was told by other Christians and religious leaders, even though most of it could not be proved in the scriptures. Finally, I asked myself where might the truth lie, and by then I knew the answer was not in the churches. If what they said was true, it must be presented that way in the scriptures. I took the thesis that man is born as an immortal soul living within the human body and began reading the Bible from page one to prove or disprove this basic church belief. That false belief did not survive the first three chapters of Genesis! I kept reading!

So I guess the answer to your question is no. I began reading the bible thinking that I believed it. Actually, I had no idea what it actually stated. The truth of the scriptures is infinitely better than anything ever told in a Christian church. So one does not have to originally believe the Bible in order to understand it -- seek and ye shall find. Humans seek knowledge and understanding, most often this seeking is unfortunately futile.

The Bible is sealed from man's understanding, and I was suggesting a way around this from my reading of the scriptures. Before reading the scriptures now, I ask God to allow me to understand them as he did for the apostles, believing that he will do so. Being only another ignorant human, the scriptures were sealed from me also, until God showed me the loop hole.

In fact, man seals the Bible from his own understanding when he believes the lie of Satan that "Ye shall not surely die." From that point on, man believes a part of him lives forever. The remainder of the Bible must then be interpreted to support the original myth - man's immortality. Thus perish cannot really mean perish in John 3:16. It must mean "eternal separation from God." -- yada, yada, yada. And the private interpretations man was warned against making go on, and on, and on:

Knowing this first, that no prophesy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (II Peter 1:20)