Does God Want Us to Go to College?

The Hilarious Timing of the Question

We had a question come up: does God want us to go to college? It was quite amusing because, prior to this, we were discussing heavy topics like suffering, children dying, and cancer. Then, from what we humorously referred to as the "Jar of the Womb of Doom," Steve pulled out the perfectly timed question: "Does God want us to go to college?"

Divine Intentions and Personal Decisions

Is College Part of God's Plan?

When it comes to whether God wants you to go to college, it's essential to recognize that it may not be explicitly linked to God, the Bible, or Christianity. The answer to this question varies; it depends on the individual and their circumstances. God might want someone to attend college, might not, or might be indifferent. For most people, it likely depends on personal preferences and decisions.

Arguments for Attending College

One could argue that God might want us to attend college to better ourselves, gain more knowledge, and secure better jobs, leading to an improved quality of life. However, this line of reasoning assumes that college isn't a financial burden or a scam, which can lead people into unnecessary debt, preventing them from pursuing business or investment opportunities on their own.

Navigating Decisions in Faith

Concerns Within the Evangelical Community

In evangelical circles, there's often a tendency to overthink decisions like whether going to college aligns with God's will. Believers might agonize over such decisions, uncertain about the right path.

Personal Reflection and Divine Guidance

If faced with someone unsure of God's plan, like the hypothetical situation where Steve meets a believer questioning whether to attend college, the advice might be: trust your instincts. Ultimately, whatever decision is made, God will work through it. There's a freedom in life choices, and responsibility accompanies that freedom. Whether or not you attend college, God will support you. If your chosen path is detrimental, God may subtly guide you towards reconsideration.

Trusting in Divine Purpose

Personally, this topic is one I'm contemplating. Questions like "What college should I attend?" and "Is college necessary?" are significant. The key is to pray for guidance and trust that God works through our lives for a purpose. Everything in life contributes to growth in faith and character. Trust in God and know that He uses all things for good.

Conclusion

Someone recently emailed me about not cursing on the podcast, which I address here as a reminder that God's guidance manifests in various ways, perhaps even in nudging us towards higher education. As believers, we should seek divine guidance and recognize that life decisions, such as attending college, are opportunities for growth and reflection.

Understanding Faith: How Do We Know What's True?

The Big Question

A classic question arises that we should address right now: How do we know what faith is true? It's a fantastic question. People receive different thoughts and revelations, especially when they pray about it. We've discussed this in our previous shows—determining truth, especially in relation to God's truth.

Evidence of Truth and Love

Is a faith producing greater love, or is it not? Besides personal revelations during prayer, there are also biblical evidence and historical facts to consider. But, what about someone who follows a different faith, like a Muslim, who believes Islam is best for them? The Bible and love may not be part of their justification.

Measuring Religious Truth

When we encounter individuals from various religions, such as Buddhists or Hindus, how do they each claim to be on the right path, and how do we judge that? To someone questioning why one faith might be superior to another, my measure would be truth and love.

Objective Truth in History

A Hindu might not understand what truth I am talking about, or a Muslim might measure truth differently. I would go with objective facts throughout history. For example, did Jesus exist? We could compare that to the existence of Buddha. Both have historical evidence supporting their existence, but it's the claims made by their followers that we inspect.

The Evidence of Miracles

A Buddhist might live a peaceful life with their beliefs. However, if Jesus performed miracles and there is reasonable evidence for these, I might lean towards Jesus because of the evidence of his miracles. For example, what proof is there of the miracles Jesus did? Historical claims by historians suggest Jesus was performing miraculous signs. Some described these as magic, while others as miracles.

The Distinction of Resurrection

Other figures, like Simon Magnus, have been said to perform magical acts, but the proof of Jesus's superiority is his resurrection. That's the central claim differentiating Christ from other religious prophets. The claims of others, like Osiris in Egyptian mythology, lack the historical evidence that supports Jesus’s resurrection.

Evaluating Historical Records

Even those who sought to disprove Christianity couldn't deny that Jesus’s body was missing from the tomb. While some argue that record-keeping is biased because the victor writes history, in this case, historical documentation supports his resurrection, even as those against Christianity sought his body to discredit the faith. It leads us to consider that while history may be written by the victors, some facts are indisputable when examined closely.

Conflicting Beliefs: A Discussion on Historical Facts and Faith

Introduction

In a recent dialogue, participants explored the interplay between historical facts and personal beliefs, particularly focusing on Christianity and Buddhism. The conversation delved into the implications of objective historical truths versus subjective faith-based beliefs.

Historical Facts or Fabrications?

The discussion began with a debate about the historical validity of events described in religious texts. It was argued that records from secular historians do not necessarily confirm certain events, such as the resurrection of Jesus on the third day. One participant, identifying as a Buddhist, challenged the notion that historical facts supporting Christianity were superior to Buddhist beliefs.

The Buddhist Perspective

The Buddhist interlocutor emphasized that his beliefs, such as the story of Buddha's enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree, are sacred and questioned why they should be considered inferior. He insisted that his beliefs were as valid as those of Christians, arguing that all religious beliefs ultimately require faith rather than historical validation.

Objective Historical Truths

One participant attempted to clarify what is meant by "objective historical facts," suggesting that a combination of gospel accounts, writings of historians like Josephus, and modern scholarship creates a historical picture with some agreed-upon truths. However, this view was challenged by others who asserted that many so-called objective truths are actually influenced by personal beliefs.

Analyzing Claims Through Faith

The conversation revealed a fundamental point: individuals often interpret historical claims through the lens of their faith. Acknowledging this, one participant suggested that belief should be openly recognized as faith-driven rather than based solely on historical evidence.

Misunderstandings and Clarifications

As the debate continued, misunderstandings about the other's arguments began to surface. The claim that Jesus existed, was crucified, and had followers who believed him to be the Messiah was presented as historical fact. Meanwhile, the Buddhist participant argued that such claims are no more historically valid than those of Buddha.

Conclusion

Through this dialogue, it became apparent that while historical records can provide some insights, personal faith and beliefs heavily influence the interpretation of these facts. It serves as a reminder of the complex relationship between faith and history and the importance of respecting diverse perspectives in religious discourse.

The Debate on Historical Claims and Religious Beliefs

Historical Claims and the Resurrection

The belief that a man was crucified and subsequently resurrected is supported by very few historical sources. The claim that the resurrection is supported only by the "winners" is incorrect. A significant number of Jewish people consider the entire resurrection narrative to be fictional. Contrary to the assertion that Jesus was taken by others and resurrected, this is seen as a falsehood by some. When discussing objective truths that are presented to prove other faiths wrong, one might be on the wrong track.

Examining Historical Sources

Biblical Sources

The scantiness of historical sources concerning Jesus cannot be disregarded by merely citing the Bible. However, some argue that Jesus and the Bible are among the most documented historical references. Yet, others, like Ethan, claim disbelief in the Bible, viewing it as a collection of books written by the "winners". The debate centers around whether one should consider the Bible as a historical reference.

Claims of Resurrection

A historical fact that remains undisputed by scholars is the claim of Jesus' resurrection. This claim includes a missing body and disciples who later died for their belief. Whether or not the resurrection literally occurred is another matter.

The Significance of Historical Claims

Some argue that a mere claim holds no significance unless proven. Comparisons are drawn to other religious figures, such as Moses and Buddha, where claims or narratives exist without definitive proof. The discussion revolves around the importance of objective realities in history and whether they can validate Christianity's truth.

The Case for Christianity

For Christianity, the foundation lies on the resurrected body of Christ. While there are claims regarding the resurrection, the objective sense isn't about whether it literally happened. The debate raises the point that other religions—Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Zoroastrianism—also build their teachings on historical claims, just as Christianity does.

Discussion on Evidence and Belief Systems

The argument extends to whether the claims of Christianity differ from those of other religious beliefs. The discussion about evidence and subjective belief systems plays a crucial role, with a focus on claims made by various religions like Joseph Smith's golden plates in Mormonism. Objective facts about claims are established to continue the debate, leaving room for personal opinions to follow.

The Problem with Historical Claims

It is often debated whether specific historical religious events can be disproven or verified. This blog post explores the arguments surrounding claims of religious events, such as the resurrection of Jesus, the experience of Buddha, or the revelations of Muhammad, and how people interpret them based on belief and evidence.

The Difficulty of Arguing Religious Claims

Many religious claims, such as the resurrection of Jesus or Joseph Smith's golden plates, are deeply rooted in belief. It's challenging to argue against these claims because they are based on faith rather than concrete evidence. We often end up in endless back-and-forth discussions that lead nowhere, especially with groups like the Mormons, who firmly believe that an angel took the golden plates.

Different Beliefs Across Religions

Every religion has its foundational claims, whether it be:

• Christians believing in the resurrection of Jesus.
• Buddhists believing that Buddha attained enlightenment after suffering under a tree.
• Muslims believing that Muhammad received the Quran from Gabriel.

These claims are inherent to each faith, and believers accept them based on trust and tradition rather than objective evidence.

The Quest for Evidence

The challenge arises when one seeks tangible evidence for these claims. There's a need for evidence to make reasonable conclusions about these religious events. However, often, all that exists are claims, such as the belief that Jesus rose from the dead or that Joseph Smith had golden plates, and these are not universally accepted as proof.

Comparing Historical Religious Events

When exploring evidence for religious claims, questions arise like: Did Joseph Smith actually have plates? Can we prove that Jesus resurrected? Historical evidence is typically assessed by examining claims and their motivations. For instance, the claim that Jesus' disciples died for their belief in his resurrection implies a level of sincerity and commitment. However, this doesn't necessarily serve as concrete proof of the resurrection itself.

Similarly, Joseph Smith had witnesses who testified to the existence of the plates, suffered for their beliefs, and later reaffirmed their testimony. These accounts are used by some to argue for the authenticity of Smith's claims, paralleling the arguments made for the disciples of Jesus.

The Challenge of Disputing Faith

Arguing about these claims often leads to impasses because they're fundamentally rooted in personal faith and interpretation. People will sometimes argue against these claims by pointing to modern examples of individuals who die for beliefs, yet such comparisons can overlook the nuances and context of original events.

In conclusion, debating the authenticity of religious claims often hinges on personal belief versus the quest for empirical evidence. Each major religion has its foundational narrative, which believers hold dear, even in the absence of irrefutable proof. Understanding this can foster more respectful and meaningful discussions across different faiths.

The Challenge of Witness and Truth in Religious Belief

In a recent discussion about religious beliefs, the idea of relying on witnesses as proof came under scrutiny. It was pointed out that even though witnesses may not later recant their testimonies, it doesn't necessarily make their claims infallible. An example was given using Judas, who witnessed Jesus' deeds but later betrayed him. This suggests that being a witness isn't an ultimate proof of truth.

Evaluating Religious Texts

The conversation continued with the question of whether religious texts, like the Gospels, could validate the claims made by the apostles. There was skepticism about relying solely on these texts as proof of truth. The argument posed was that using these texts to establish one's belief superiority might not be effective.

The line of reasoning brought up concerns about the authorship of the Gospels and whether looking at this could lead to troubling conclusions. The debate emphasized that attempting to prove one's religious truth as superior is unlikely to succeed because people often believe what they want and dismiss facts that contradict their beliefs.

The Futility of Arguing Superiority

The discussion highlighted the futility of trying to use arguments and proofs to demonstrate that one belief system is superior to another. Many believe in what aligns with their desires and perceptions, often ignoring contradictory evidence.

There was agreement that arguing one's way as the absolute truth won't work in convincing others. Instead of engaging in debates about which belief is superior, it was suggested to start conversations by acknowledging this difficulty.

Seeking Truth vs. Confirming Prejudices

The idea put forward was that seekers of truth will find what they are looking for, even if it leads them to different faiths like Islam. The suggestion was to accept that and allow individuals to embrace their truth wholeheartedly, rather than insisting one's way is the only right path.

In conclusion, it was acknowledged that most people prefer to have their prejudices confirmed, clouding their ability to see beyond their preconceived notions. This brings about a challenge when trying to convey religious truths, as many are not genuinely seeking truth but instead looking to confirm their existing beliefs.

The Purpose and Impact of Debates

The Benefit of "Beat Downs"

Discussing debates and "beat downs," it's important to highlight that engaging in these activities regularly can improve one's debating skills. These sessions don't affect me negatively because I'm not on the receiving end. People sometimes dislike my approach because I aim to challenge others to demonstrate that their arguments may not work. Many out there believe in their effectiveness, often calling themselves apologists. They produce content claiming they can prove their points, but it's often unconvincing—just air. Both atheists and others see it as a waste of time.

The Need for Defense in Christianity

I agree that within Christianity, there's a need to understand fundamental defenses, especially against intelligent atheists who can be quite confrontational. This is an issue I've observed from a young age. Many Christians are not equipped to defend their faith or the claims they make, which is why I dedicate time to teaching. For over 13 years, I've spent three hours every Sunday educating people on the essentials of their beliefs. The goal is to help them understand what they stand for, what they believe, and why.

Taking Debates to the World

When it comes to taking these debates into the broader world, I remain skeptical about our ability to engage effectively. That's a key reason behind our debates—challenging each other and highlighting areas of disagreement. During our sessions, some will side with one of us, while others will root for the opposing view. This environment is about learning and challenging perspectives.

Closing Thoughts and Future Topics

We've covered our topic thoroughly, and it's time to move on. Next week, we have an interesting topic on whether God changes. I believe in choosing engaging subjects, and this one promises to be thought-provoking. We look forward to diving into this next time. See you on the next episode.