Reddit reviews Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World

We found 8 Reddit comments about Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Check price on Amazon

8 Reddit comments about Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World:

u/sad_State_of_Affairs · 20 pointsr/greatawakening

Nice idea, but Christ was a real person, documented in both religious and secular documents.

What follows is not meant to be disrespectful, but I think you are missing the entire point of what the Christian Faith is.

You cannot overlook the evidence.

Chris was actually killed and rose from the dead seen by over 500 witnesses

If you look at the evidence and decide that it is worth looking at what Jesus actually stood for.

There are actually over 300 "Q Type" prophecies in the old testament, that are all fufilled in a single man, Jesus Christ. These are prophecies that took place over 400 years before he came.

If nothing else, take a look at the evidence in light of "Q type" prophecy.

Two good books are

The case for Christ

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0310345863?aaxitk=9l74.ycRWveaIQm-t.ZSYw&amp;pd_rd_i=0310345863&amp;pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&amp;pf_rd_p=3534726502&amp;pd_rd_wg=81HhE&amp;pf_rd_r=7FYJ4V7SAWEVC6JM4FA7&amp;pf_rd_s=desktop-sx-top-slot&amp;pf_rd_t=301&amp;pd_rd_w=eRa1R&amp;pf_rd_i=the+case+for+christ&amp;pd_rd_r=ff665252-4ebd-4d59-b4cf-4d52f112cbe2&amp;hsa_cr_id=7480256250101

Evidence that demands a verdict.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1401676707?aaxitk=BXAaSaaijsgYqtj3gEbPXw&amp;pd_rd_i=1401676707&amp;pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&amp;pf_rd_p=3534726502&amp;pd_rd_wg=jYd2I&amp;pf_rd_r=93P85JRNR7JSJ5EMWG2M&amp;pf_rd_s=desktop-sx-top-slot&amp;pf_rd_t=301&amp;pd_rd_w=7nLcY&amp;pf_rd_i=Evidence+that+demands+a+verdict&amp;pd_rd_r=e38ece30-f389-4c68-8dcb-ff7abce12a76&amp;hsa_cr_id=5187726210201

As far as your math equation of "we do this and we get that. The bible teaches that salvation is a GIFT' and you cannot do anything to earn it. You could argue that you have to believe, and that is correct, but that is all you can do. In fact the teachings of the bible tell warn against trying to get back
into that mindset.

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

I am not one to argue that you need to believe the way I believe, but I do see that you are teaching (maybe a strong word) something very different than that the documents that uphold the entire christian faith represent.

Christ also taught us that this world is not our world.

He also taught us that our struggles are not flesh and blood but really against good and evil. (That is what we are seeing)

For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

The real gospel is very simple and it is a secret.

We are all sinners (everyone)

The penalty for sin is death.

Christ died once for all

He rose again defeating death

He sent his Holy Spirit here to help us

He does not force himself on anyone.

It is impossible to believe in Him without faith. You can argue facts until you are blue in the face, but you will never be able to prove it. Plenty of circumstantial evidence though.

u/worldgobble · 1 pointr/Christians

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/Christianity

Have you seen Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell?

https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-That-Demands-Verdict-Life-Changing/dp/1401676707/

u/Lucid4321 · 1 pointr/funny

The existence of God doesn't have immediate evidence like a cancer diagnosis, but that doesn't mean there isn't any evidence for God. Christianity is not a blind faith.

https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-That-Demands-Verdict-Life-Changing/dp/1401676707/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1543478665&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=evidence+that+demands+a+verdict&psc=1

https://www.amazon.com/Cold-Case-Christianity-Homicide-Detective-Investigates/dp/1434704696/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1543478756&sr=8-1&keywords=cold+case+christianity+by+j.+warner+wallace

Both of those authors were atheists or agnostics until they took the time to examine the evidence for the claims of Christianity. People like that don't completely change their life just because someone told them 'Yes, there is a God.' Wallace was a cold-case homicide detective and mocked Christians he knew.

>When I finally examined the evidence fairly using the tools I learned as a detective, I found it difficult to deny, especially if I hoped to retain my respect for the way evidence is utilized to determine truth. I found the evidence for Christianity as convincing as any cold-case I’d ever investigated. . . . I’m not a Christian because it “works” for me. I had a life prior to Christianity that seemed to be working just fine, and my life as a Christian hasn’t always been easy. I’m a Christian because it is true. I’m a Christian because I want to live in a way that reflects the truth. I’m a Christian because my high regard for the truth leaves me no alternative.

I'm not saying you should believe just because I say so or because a few authors write a few books about it. But doesn't it seem like there's enough evidence that you should take a seriously? If you're right about this, then you can move on with your life like nothing happened, and you would have more ammo if any other annoying Christians tried to convert you. But if you're wrong, then your eternal destiny hangs in the balance.

&#x200B;

u/ralphthellama · 1 pointr/IAmA

> Nope. Theories are tested against evidence.

Once the theories have been made, sure. But the hypotheses that are made to describe new phenomena, or to better describe what was once believed to be fully understood when new evidence is presented, still comes from reason and thinking critically on the subject until such experiments can be designed to test said theories. For example, the direct detection of gravitational waves was not accomplished until the LIGO experiment in 2016, even though we were holding to the existence of such long before then on account of Einstein's work. To say that this was the first time that Einstein's proposition of the existence of gravitational waves was challenged, simply because it was the first time that it was experimentally shown, is ludicrous.

I've not yet had the chance to read The Big Picture, but I would like to point out even from the brief quote that you provided a fascinating aspect of the nature of the world and indeed the universe that we are coming to appreciate more and more: how little we truly know. Imagine the entirety of human knowledge as a sphere, where the extent of human knowledge is contained by the sphere, that which humans have not yet learned being outside the sphere, and the surface of the sphere representing that which we know that we don't know. As the sphere expands, i.e. we learn more about ourselves, the world, and the universe around us, so too does that border of what we know that we don't know, and the more we realize we don't yet truly understand. For example, let's look at flight. The earliest scientific consensus on the matter was that an airfoil must be shaped just so in order to maximize the Bernoulli effect and generate lift via differentiated airflow. In many cases the classic airfoil pattern is still used, but you will be hard-pressed to find any modern fighter aircraft that still hold to that design over a delta-wing or extended delta-wing configuration. Instead, most if not all high-speed aircraft these days generate lift more from angle of attack than just from the Bernoulli effect. My point is that while there is much that we have learned about how nature does work on its deepest levels, there is still much more that we do not yet know, e.g. an adequate phenomenon (or phenomena, if such turns out to be the case) to describe how quantum acausality seems to uniformly cause at the macro scale effects which can be described causally. To borrow your baseball metaphor, since we know that the universe itself doesn't play baseball at its fundamental core, then why does all of the non-baseball-playing end up looking like baseball when we look at the big picture?

> I didn't say it was unknowable. I said I didn't know.

I would urge you then to branch out beyond just the humanistic works that you are familiar with. A valid criticism of all humans is that they prefer to listen to the voices that tell them what they want to hear, and that is no less true of theists than it is of atheists and agnostics. If your desire is for truth and not just for science, then I would recommend reading the works of people who hold to their beliefs because of the evidence, rather than just in spite of it. Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict is one place to start.

Of course intuitive physics is insufficient. We see that in the existence of gravitational waves which I mentioned above. The point is that "scientific consensus" is continually changing as we learn more about existence around us, and discover new phenomena, e.g. the double-slit experiment, that shows us how much more complicated the universe really is than we imagined.

I've read Russell's "Why I'm not a Christian" and found it thoroughly unconvincing and fraught with error. Specifically from the passage you cited, let's look at his assertion that

> There is no reason to suppose that the world had a beginning at all. The idea that things must have a beginning is really due to the poverty of our imagination.

The problem here is that the very same science he urges us to pursue in his closing paragraph agrees that the universe, and indeed the Earth as a part of it, did have a beginning. Granted, we can forgive Russell his oversight since the experiments that proved the existence of the cosmic microwave background radiation wasn't proven until the '60s, but that experimental evidence still puts to death Russell's theory that the universe had no beginning. After all, if we are to test theories against evidence, then the evidence is not in favor of Mr. Russell.

As for the rest of that piece, Russell routinely waffles between making an assertion about Christ and then relying on a worldview that is inconsistent with the worldview that Christ preached to disprove Christ's statements. His methodology is akin to setting up arguments for why the tooth fairy doesn't exist, and then showing these arguments to be fallacious because he knows that the tooth fairy does exist on account widely attested reports from children around the world that their teeth disappeared from beneath their pillows. He is correct that not all those who call themselves Christians do in fact follow Christ, but he is thoroughly mistaken to judge the words of Christ as though He were a man, when He makes it abundantly clear that He is God.

> And yet we haven't found it yet. That is, in all the laws of physics that we have found so far there doesn't seem to be any distinction of the past and the future.

Right, and once again we have a theory that has not yet been born out with evidence or experimentation. For one so dismissive of theories that are argued before there is evidence to support them, I'm surprised you put stock in the works of theoretical physicists, whose very domain is by definition that which has not yet been proven. But there's that word again, yet. Feynman recognizes the inconsistency between what we know to be implied by the laws of physics as we currently understand them and what we know experimentally based on our ability to bear out the results of these theories in the real world. I would argue that he was keenly aware of that boundary layer between what we know and our increasing knowledge of what we know that we don't know.

u/Delk133 · 1 pointr/Christianity

Thank you for giving me some insight into your story and background. And I definitely do understand the concern regarding emotionalism as a basis for truth. I agree with you wholeheartedly - at the end of the day, emotion is a terrible standard by which we judge truth.

There are several intellectual and reasoned arguments for the faith. Jesus Christ was a real man. Several hundred eyewitnesses saw Him risen from the dead. There are excellent resources out there that address the historical facts and claims of Jesus. For example:

The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel
Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell

However, as a former Mormon, I'm sure you are aware of these resources and arguments.

At the end of the day however, salvation in Jesus isn't found in intellectual arguments. It's not found in reasoning and logical deduction. It is found in a personal relationship with a living and breathing God.

I know as a fact that Jesus is real and Jesus is God. I don't say this based purely on logic. I say it based on my experience. I have personally witnessed unquestionable miracles at the name of Jesus. I have seen incurable medical conditions disappear immediately at the name of Jesus. I have witnessed dead limbs come to life during prayer in the name of Jesus. I have trusted in God's Word which says things like "God will provide for all of your needs" in times when I had no money in the bank account - and God worked miracle after miracle. In one situation, I calculated that I would run out of money in one month but said, "God I trust you". And literally that second I received an email. My university sent me an email saying, "we billed you incorrectly - here's $1,100".

I understand the skepticism to this type of personal experience. Even many Christians doubt that God is real and knowable in an experiential way. But don't take my word for it - here is a medically documented case study in which 24 deaf and blind people were healed immediately during prayer. These are medical doctors and PhD researchers doing scientific studies to see if this is true: it is. It's dense academic writing, but the bottom line is that at the name of Jesus the deaf are hearing and the blind are seeing.

So my challenge remains. I have never once seen God not be faithful to His Word. I have never seen a bridge that Jesus won't cross to bring His children home. Jesus loves you. Jesus wants you to accept His death on the cross and resurrection from the grave as your only hope for salvation. Jesus wants to speak to you right now and give you a life of adventure. I think a really good place to start is this: are you open to Jesus appearing to you in a dream, vision, or very strong impression and telling you that He is the only way? Do you believe that if Jesus is God, then He can do this? A simple prayer to God like this can express your openness:

"God, I really want to know You. Jesus, if You are God, please show me. I am open to whatever way You want to speak. If you're real, I must know. If you're God, I must know."

I know of a Muslim man who prayed this prayer for 3 days straight while fasting. At the end of the 3 days he came to my missionary contact and said that Jesus appeared to him. My contact asked the Muslim what Jesus was like. And the Muslim began describing Jesus straight from the Bible: "He is the image of the invisible God. It was like I was seeing the exact representation of His being!" So this stuff is real - the only question is: How open and hungry are you?

u/EsperCS · 1 pointr/Apologetics

There are tons of books with evidence that the events in the Bible actually took place. A book I just bought, but haven’t gotten the chance to crack into yet, is Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell. From what I’ve heard, it provides some super concrete evidence for Biblical events. I can’t wait to crack into it when I get home in a few days.

u/jud50 · 0 pointsr/Christianity

Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1401676707/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_BpmvCbAVGFXZY

Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1434704696/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_0qmvCbH2E153C