http://strangenotions.com/jesus-did-exist/ .

Edit: Also, This book is completely free on Google...

https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-Demands-Questions-Challenging-Christians/dp/0785243631

Written by a guy who wanted to disprove Christianity and then became a Christian.

Loved it.

For those interested, I am 100% sure this is the book his father was referring to: http://www.amazon.com/Evidence-Demands-Questions-Challenging-Christians/dp/0785243631

My father and mother (when I was about 10 years old) bought me this book and asked me to read it. Its basically the author's life account about how he was an atheist (or agnostic, I'm unsure) while a law student and was writing a paper in which he would disprove Christianity's historical background.

While attempting to write the paper, he became a Christian. Its been a decade since I read the book so I cannot remember what was the turning point in his research, but maybe one of you knows?

Also, some have said around here that his father would make him read "the bible cover to cover" and at times I see other atheists like myself claim that they read the Bible in the same fashion. Most educated Christians would argue that you reading the Bible cover to cover does no good because of the organization of parables and metaphorical stories, and that it should be read with a guide. When I finished reading the bible it was after much guided reading in the way that most pastors are told to read it when studying it. I was and am an atheist, but I just thought I'd share that little bit of info.

Here's a good start: [I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist](
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Have-Enough-Faith-Atheist/dp/1581345615).

I too was raised Lutheran, and I too am a man of science, logic, fact. I've been convinced by the evidence and do not struggle with trust in God.

There is hard evidence out there, ie: Josh McDowell's "Evidence that Demands a Verdict"

And in the philosophic and scientific origins cases in the first book I linked. What also compels me is the case against biogenesis. I have never been able to accept the agnostic argument for how life arises from non-life. Most accept it on the basis of materialism, but materialism is an unproved assertion. And knowing something about chemistry and the function of even the simplest cells, there's no way life can come from the primordial soup they want to imagine it came from.

I also recommend Classic Christianity to escape many of the doctrinal errors you, like me, were likely raised in via Lutheranism (ie: in and out of fellowship via sin, etc.).

Anyway, good luck with your quest for truth. You'll find answers.

Hey OP if you are interested in reading a well put together presentation you could do worse than looking at Evidence that demands a Verdict.

The author was a legal student who set out to disprove the resurrection, but ended up converting because of what he found. It has multiple sources and while it has a Christian bias, it collects nearly every argument you will hear to support Christian ideas in a cogent readable way.

Hundred of authors spanning hundred of years, yes. The bible could have been written and then re-written to collaborate and re-infirm what it says.

It could have been edited. More to the point. It was edited. And you could NEVER know for sure the truth of it. That is why there is multiple bibles, saying different places, with different times for the same described event.

I read this just recently. It had some really good information in it. With sources to back up key points. And I looked. But. There were holes and points missed and avoided in arguments about times and facts. That there are other books and scriptures that have not been included in the bible because it was inconvienent for the Church at the time. These holes and peaces of information that are missing tell the reader to "Go on faith".

How do you have faith in something when the book that gives direction, has so many contradictions.

Here bake this cake.

3 eggs
1 1/4 cups of water

1 box of cake mix (any kind)

1/3 cup of cooking oil


Procedure:

1 Take your mixing bowl, open the box of cake mix and pour it in the mixing bowl.

2 Take the three eggs, crack them and put them in the mixing bowl.

2 Feed one egg to the dog. And use the other two for breakfast.

3 Take 1 1/4 cups of water and put them in the mixing bowl.

3 Take the 1 1/4 cups of water and drink it.

4 Take the 1/3 cups of cooking oil and put them in the mixing bowl also.

5 Mix with mixer (or by hand)

5 Don't mix anything.

6 Pour the mix in the 13'' by 9'' pan, after greased.

7 Put the 13''by 9'' pan in the oven on 350 for 25 - 30.

8 After baked let it cool off for at LEAST 10 MIN.

8 Bake for another 15 minuets.

9 After it cools down you may decorate with any cake decorations.

• Your cake will be different from my cake. The directions are contradictory with options that aren't clear.
  
  Edit: I see you read that book too! I'll hammer threw it a find some points!

Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.

I am glad that this was useful in some way.

While I cannot speak on behalf of those who oppose evolution, I was raised attending a private Christian school that taught me (in my science books) why they believed evolution was a scientifically unsound theory. They attacked all science that objected to a young earth. I was taught that isometric dating produces inconsistent results (such as producing dates thousands of years off on different ends of a fossil). They attacked the astronomy of the big bang expansion as speculative and inconclusive (as the big bang is still hardly agreed upon today). They basically take all of the evidence as circumstantial and inconclusive. They search for evidence to establish an alternative scientific narrative (things that corroborate a literal interpretation of the Bible).

If you are interested in understanding a fundamentalist's rationalizations, the fundamentalist "bible" of apologetics is probably New Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell. As far as I know, it contains every possible justification for a fundamentalist/literlaist interpretation of the Bible.

P.S. For those of you who are now worried about my scientific education, fear not. This was my Jr. High experience. I went on to public High School where I was taught the opposite.

Read this.

And if you believe that what God says is true, then you can justify that he is outside of space and time because what he says is true.

> if requiring a sound basis in evidence matters to you, then faith will never satisfy because it is by definition a "firm belief in something for which there is no proof".

I wholly (but respectfully) disagree. What you linked contains multiple definitions of faith, and the one you quoted is not one I've ever been encouraged to embrace by any religious teachers I've had. While I'm sure that some Christians discourage asking hard questions, my experience with Presbyterianism (which, granted, has a reputation for heavy intellectualism) has been anything but what you described.

While I have heard that logic must be paired with faith, I don't think it's ever been in a sense different from, say, a physics major might take to learning. It's well beyond most people to conduct experiments to figure out what the gravitational constant on Earth is, yet almost everyone is content to just believe what their physics textbook tells them. This faith in academics is well justified, as we can see the incredible effects physicists have had on our world over the centuries. These effects include not only improvements to the overall quality of human life, but horrific tragedies such as the dropping of the two atomic bombs.

In the same way, most people don't have the time or education to verify everything a pastor might preach to them. However, many people learn what they can (when they can) and, seeing their religious leader's lives changed by their genuine search for truth and desire to serve others, trust that what they are being taught is true.

So, this notion (that redditors seem to live in) that being Christian means automatically dismissing objective thinking isn't true. As for me, I have very little free time as a full time student with a part time job and dreams of grad school. However, in my spare time I do explore apologetics and happily welcome any objections as long as they are presented as you have acted: with respect.

I am currently making my way through Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict as it was recommended to me by one of my most influential teachers. Again, I'm happy to explore objections to Christianity from anyone as long as we're both genuinely seeking truth.

1. A large majority of books (whether Christian, atheist or some other belief) contain discussions of evidence, but the actual evidence is not contained in the book. You have to look outside of a book to confirm most evidence of any viewpoint. That being said, here's one book: http://www.amazon.com/Evidence-Demands-Questions-Challenging-Christians/dp/0785243631 Feel free to rip it to shreds and tell me why you think it's bunk, then demand another. We could play that game all day, but I don't have the time or the desire.
   
   
2. Of course opinion is not evidence. Nice story. ;)
   
   
3. I strongly suspect that you're guilty of having a viewpoint, then looking for supporting "evidence" as well. That's just typical human behavior. It may not be "a credible way to understand something", but it certainly has it's evolutionary advantages, doesn't it? ;)
   
   > you must consider it without bias
   
   If that is the requirement for having a valid viewpoint, you've just invalidated every living human being's viewpoint, including your own. No one is completely unbiased.

I do not know how commited are you to doing some research..

I recommend watching this lecture (just 40 mins).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33buor5NfcU

The speaker was an agnostic and decided to write a book to refute Christianity but ended up believing in it instead.

His book The new evidence that demands a verdict is an incredible source of the validity of the Bible. And if you are really commited to research it may be a good idea to have a look at it.

He doesn't only go through prophecies about Jesus but also about prophecies about cities, kings, etc..

I would have copy pasted the verses but it is very easy to find them.. If you google "prophecies old testament fulfilled" you will find a lot of links..

And I'd be happy to discuss this more if you want..