top of page

Most common questions & objections re; Christianity

The church should welcome questions.
But let’s not pretend that all questions are equal. Some questions are looking for answers, and some questions are looking for exits.
- Mr B

If Christianity were true - would you become a disciple?


If the Christ truly is God incarnate - would you follow Him and all that He stands for (as outlined in the Bible), regardless of how you currently feel about Christians, the notion of sin, and atrocities committed by the church in the name of Jesus?


This is the question we must ask ourselves as it will reveal that most of our objections, which we will cover here, are not based on reason/truth, but based on superstitions, misunderstandings, or simply, not wanting to submit to an authority infinitely higher than ourselves.. 


In other words - are our objections reasonable (if so, this page will clear up a lot of confusion and expose prejudice and bring us closer to Christ) or emotional (meaning, we simply don't prefer who Christ truly is and all the implications for our personal lives' and no matter what the truth is, we will keep insisting on our preference)...?

Are we genuine seekers - or are we doubters?


A person can leave the visible church - a dead religious counterfeit (just as the new age is), but anyone who is in Christ, who has the Holy Spirit indwelling them, who has been made a new creation, has inherited eternal life. Eternal means what it means - it is not temporary - it is eternal. Anyone who leaves Christianity is revealed to never have been born again in the first place.

"They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us."  1 John 2:19 


In the Old Testament, God has ordered the killing of whole tribes/nations... does that make God morally evil?


Besides the fact that God had perfectly valid reasons for these (special occasion) edicts (see resources below), the real questions we must ask ourselves are


- is it evil/immoral/unjust to punish evil?

- is God allowed to be God?

- when God takes a life, does He really 'kill' someone?


Most people want to see evil punished, and voice outrage when it doesn't (especially for their favorite cause). Yet when God punishes evil, we think somehow He made a mistake. This reveals our confusion in our fallen state; we don't see punishment for evil as justice, but rather as injustice. In other words... fallen man will call evil good, and good, evil. (Isaiah 5:20)


The truth is, God is allowed to be God. Since He created all, He gets to decide wrong from right, good from evil. It is human-kind wanting to usurp this role that has led to the morally depraved and corrupt world we currently live in. Not liking something that God does - does not make Him wrong, does not make Him not God, it only exposes that we (secretly) think that we should be God. Which is the very heart of sin; wanting to share in equal power and authority as God, rather than being in humble submission to God.


Lastly, we have a completely erroneous view of life and death when we assume God shouldn't 'take a life'. God doesn't really have to actively kill someone. Since He IS the source of life - that person was already (spiritually) dead, for they were not connected to God/life in the first place. Did you know that prior to being born again, we are all 'dead in our trespasses'? We are all like flowers cut from their roots... seemingly alive and beautiful for a couple 'days' (for humans; years), but factually dead.


"Cut flowers are held in a form of suspended life that by the minute is heading towards complete death."

Inasmuch, God never really 'takes' a life - He simply doesn't give unrepentant sinners life, which is the most reasonable and loving thing to do. For a person to receive life, they have to become connected to God, and most people don't want this (and create a false 'God' instead to comfort them for the remainder of their earthly lives').



(even when we call them evil)


God doesn’t ‘murder’ in the way we understand this to mean - He simply invokes His right, as the One Being who sustains all, to suspend sustaining someone with physical life, at any

given point.

Would we call someone killing someone in self defense a murderer or evil? No. Not understanding the entire scope and context of the Bible, where it’s all leading, the backgrounds of the people involved… we will miss the point and end up with a strawman - we hate a God that only exists in our imagination, not the Bible.



These atrocities of a mean and evil God that people imagine are referring to the Old Testament - which is a historic account of a very special covenant with a special people (the Israelites) for a special purpose; the protecting of the bloodline that would birth the Messiah; God Himself. Satan was energising peoples all around the Israelites to try and thwart God’s plan of sending the world the promised savior and defeater of Satan and the forces of darkness. Had the Israelites not been protected in this way by God, the world never would have been freed and Satan would have won. 


No person roots for the bad guy in movies, all rejoice in the triumph of good over evil. If you blame God for doing what He had to do to overcome the devil and his allies - you are rooting for and have sided with the forces of darkness…

Article; is the God of the Bible evil?


Sure - just as there are awful people in every walk of life. But read what Jesus commanded us to do (turn the other cheek, pray for your enemies, love your neighbor), and you'll recognize that people who do awful things in the name of Christianity, are not actually His followers/born again.


 Christians are supposed to 'bear the fruit' of love, peace, hope, joy, kindness, self-control and long suffering. The second biggest command of Jesus (after 'love the Lord your God with all your mind, heart, and strength) is to 'love your neighbor as yourself'. Please understand that the majority of people going to church and calling themselves Christian aren't actually born again; they're merely religious.


But even if they were.... the argument still doesn't really make much sense. Do you hold the same standards for other groups of people? Just because some men are rapists, doesn't mean they're all bad (and it certainly doesn't men that the male gender isn't true...). Just because atheists/evolutionists kill people (more people than Christians, actually...), doesn't mean all atheists are immoral (nor does it prove that God doesn't exist...). 

“we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves.” (2 Corinthians 4:7)

the Bible never says Christians will be perfect in this life (only the next), but that what matters is not the 'earthen vessels' (flawed human beings) but the message that God is spreading (the gospel) through flawed humans. Those who have 'ears to hear' the truth will recognize that the message is from God, regardless of the broken vessels carrying the message...

Christianity is not about Christians -

it’s about the CHRIST.


In today's culture, love has been divorced from truth and justice and become more a feeling or an outwards appearance of people-pleasing, than what love truly is. Our God is a holy God. His love is a holy love, not to be compared by the selfish and shallow 'love' us humans are capable of.

 The love of God includes divine wrath against sin (evil).

Watch this video if you think 'love' means inclusion, non-judgement, and good-vibez-only;


If you were the Creator of all things - you would have a leg to stand on.


But seeing as how you are a creatED being, you do not. You do not get to make up any universal laws, only the CreatOR does. If you are going to say sin doesn't exist, we're all simply doing the best we can, and most of us are basically good, I would have to ask you, who made you God of the universe to decide on such a thing?


Now, you could ask me the same thing for saying sin does exist. 

But you have realize that no-one that is now a born again believer, started out with that premise.

We, like you, didn't believe in original sin. Wrote it off as religious tomfoolery too.

Until, one day, we thought to ourselves...... what if..... I don't actually know what I'm talking about?

What if.... I'm wrong? What if.... I asked God to tell me, rather than me telling Him what I believe?

That was the moment God gave us 'eyes to see'.


The reality of sin points towards an objective moral standard outside of ourselves (though written on our hearts, it's called a conscience). To deny an objective moral law and claim relativism is to descend into moral chaos (oh, perhaps that explains the pain and suffering in the world... whaddyaknow!).


"And what path has the unrepentant sinner chosen? It is, in essence, to be “God,” which is to be the center of his or her own autonomous universe, in which one’s own desires reign supreme. The obstinate rebel will not bow the knee — or at least not willingly or with joy — because submitting to the will of another is abhorrent to such a one. Yet, these sinful creatures, being creatures, live in God’s universe, governed by God’s moral laws, with God as its Lord. God’s moral laws work as invariably as his physical laws, and one either conforms to them or they dash him to pieces.

Now, one of those invariable moral truths is that the rational creature, whether human or angelic, can only find happiness in submission to God as the ground of all joy. Conversely, when one willingly separates from God and substitutes oneself as his or her own god, that individual cannot but be wretched. This is simply the way the moral universe works. Sinners may rail against this with all their being, but they may just as well rage against the law of gravity." - Alan Gomes


Yes, everyone has a relationship with God - but we have to ask ourselves, which 'god'?


Knowing a God exists isn't enough - we all instinctively know this, even atheists - but we suppress the truth so that we can worship false gods/a god made in our image and to our own liking.

Worshipping our idea of 'God' - is not the same as worshipping the one true God.

And, what we don't worship the one true God, this means we are in direct rebellion against Him.

That rebellion started at the fall, when Satan tempted the first humans to worship themselves. In other words. to worship anything other than the one true God, is to listen to Satan and inadvertently worship Satan....

'Satan, who is the god of this world.....'

2 Corinthians 4:4

This is why God calls Satan the 'god of this world (or age)'. He isn't God, of course, but the whole world currently worships him (follows after him), as such.

It is only in Christ, that this bondage is broken, we receive eyes to see (who we've really been following after/worshipping/calling 'god' all this time), and receive a new heart & Spirit that worships only the one living God.

What's more, is that God has given us saving revelation only in the Scriptures and in Christ. While we can look at creation and know there is a God, at this point in time, God has come in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ to bear witness to... Himself. Anyone that denies the Christ (as God in the flesh), denies God to follow after false god(s).....


And this is His command: to believe in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ

1 John 3:23



Which is more arrogant, to claim that 2+2 equals 4, or to claim that you get to decide for yourself what the answer is?

The first bow down to an authority outside of themselves (humble submission), whereas the latter thinks the only authority is themselves (pride).

A well-known trick of the devil, is that he makes good sound like evil, and evil sound like good (Isaiah 52:10).

In this case, he has you fooled into believing that which is humble, is proud, and that which is proud, is humble.



It’s only intolerant and divisive iF you label anyone who doesn’t agree with you as intolerant and divisive. 

You see, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t call Christian’s intolerant and divisive for believing there is only one way to God, while not also being intolerant and divisive yourself for believing their way is false and yours is true.


Every belief is exclusive, even when we call that belief tolerance.

Claiming you know the truth is not arrogant if you understand what we belief that truth to be.... namely that we, ourselves, are sinners saved by grace...

If you think exclusivism is dangerous and oppressive, watch this video;


Nothing can truly 'work for you', but the Truth.


We have all heard 'the truth shall set you free', and love to parrot that phrase. But truly, when most people say that, they mean 'my truth', which is a truth that per definition doesn't exist (truth is not personal, that's called experience or opinion or preference), but transcendent (true for everyone at any place or time).


So, if the truth shall set us free, this automatically implies that a lie keeps us imprisoned. What's truly playing out, is that people don't prefer true freedom, which is being obedient to God and His law, but prefer rebellion; imagining that they are the arbiters of right/wrong in their own little world.


People's lips say 'the truth shall set you free' while they live out 'I'd rather die than give up my comfort to having to bow down to an almighty God who created me, the entire cosmos, and everything in it, and has every right to tell me how to live my life'.


Freedom and truth go hand in hand, but freedom is more complex than simply 'live your best life now'. At present, most all people live in a shadow matrix where very real realities such as love, freedom, and truth, have lost all meaning, and have been replaced by mere shadows (in the new age, all the more). People live in bondage to deception and lies, but because they prefer it, they call it freedom. Freedom no longer means knowing the truth and having the power to act on it.... but only to act in accordance with ones own fickle and self-centered desires.

Truth has a quality that we have to confirm to it, rather than it, to us. 

2+2=4 has never bend itself to someone who would rather have 2+2 be 5. Truth exists outside of us, and therefore has a humbling quality to it. Acknowledging truth, means acknowleging that we are not the end all and be all, the center of even our own existence, and therefore, truth doesn't begin nor end with us.... it means confessing that truth is going to be truth regardless of my feelings, my experiences, my preferences.... and exactly this is why people avoid the truth. It feels oppressing, confining, and narrow minded - only to those who wish to remain the be all and end all of their own existence. Freedom for such individuals is not knowing the truth and humbling bowing down to Him.... but piecing together little bits of their own experiences and ideals and values and preferences... and smacking the label truth on it. But, a rose by any other name is still a rose, and a lie by any other name, even 'truth', is still a lie.

If you imagined yourself to be a butterfly and you wanted to jump off a building fully convinced you will flutter out into the wonderful world, rather than smack dead to the pavement, someone stopping you, warning you, and pleading with you until you come back to your senses, or rather, to reality (truth) - will feel confining and annoying at first. You imagined you could fly! You imaged you had so much freedom! 

But being free means conforming to reality as it really is, which is extremely humbling, whereas the lie grants people an illusion of power and self-sufficiency, of being in charge of their own destiny, as being virtuous good and kind people, as being spiritually awake people.... and the truth is.... many people prefer this delusion over the shocking realization that we are none of those things....


Truth feels like a bitter reality to wake up to at first, but those who love truth and value life, will gladly swallow the bitter medicine until they're all better and will then continue to give praise with their whole life to that which saved them (truth) from certain death (deception of freedom).


Science has proven without a shadow of a doubt, that the universe, creation, is not infinite/eternal, but came into existence. It is an effect, that begets a cause, creation that begets... a Creator - like a painting begets a painter. God is not the universe, the universe is not God, God is holy, meaning transcendent, meaning unique and like nothing else in the universe. Creation is like an echo of God's glory, but it is not God in and of its own.

Video; why the universe can't be the uncaused cause



If heaven is to be in the presence of God, God simply lets unrepentant sinners have their way by not forcing them into His presence... and the only other option is hell. God doesn't 'send' anybody to hell who deeply desires to have a relationship with Him.. in fact God doesn't 'send' anybody to hell in the first place, He simply gives people over to their desires. The only people ending up in hell, are those who are headed there by their own volition, those who refuse to submit to God as their Creator and Redeemer.


We can't understand the justice of hell until we deeply know the injustice of sin. People who object to hell, erroneously believe that the punishment is worse than the crime. That is the same as to say that you know better what is right and wrong, than God does. Nobody gets angry that we need to drink water, or we die; so why do we get outraged or incensed when someone tells us we need to submit to God or we'll go to hell?


Because we don't like it - that's all. The outrage at God being God, is simply further proof of our intense hatred and rebellion towards Him.


“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, in the end, 'Thy will be done'. 

- CS Lewis


Do all roads lead to your house?

Or, more to the point, would you let everybody into your home?

It isn't so much about getting to God's metaphorical house.. but whether or not He will let you in.

Imagine knocking on the door of the most famous, wealthiest person on the planet, and insisting they let you in, not on the basis of a personal relationship, but because 'you are a good person'. Only those who have been made a new creation in Christ, can knock on God's door and expect a warm welcome.





The problem with this assumption, is that the individual is the starting point and the basis for truth. Saying that truth starts (and ends) within the individual person is actually saying... I am God.

It makes oneself the final authority on who/what God is, rather than God Himself. It also falsely assumes that because we all have a limited perspective (true) - God can't be known objectively (a truth thats true for anyone at any time) - false.


Just because we can't know truth by ourselves, doesn't mean God can't reveal truth about Himself. He is the only one who has the full picture, and He is the only one who can reveal Himself to us. God is the same yesterday today and forever, and likewise, God is the same for everyone. This doesn't exclude a personal relationship. But just like a person has a different relationship with the people around him, and even his behavior may be modified based on the relationship and setting.... the person remains the same person.


A married 6'1 Caucasian man living in Europe speaking French and English and making a living as a sales-man .... doesn't suddenly become a 5'5 unmarried Asian man living in America making a living as an acrobat.... The same goes for God. 

'I am that I am' (YHWH) is the name He has revealed to us, it means HE IS WHO HE IS - 

not who we imagine Him to be....


God allows evil/suffering, because He wants us to have free will. All evil and suffering is a direct and indirect consequence of going against God's will, of rebelling against God - we may have been tempted by Satan, we still made and make the choice to follow after our own desires rather than seek God and His righteousness.


Why doesn't God stop all evil? He did. Jesus' death and subsequent resurrection overcame the devil and was penance made for all sins past present and future. Those who accept Christ' sacrifice for their sin will one day join Christ/God in the entirely new heavens and earth (which will be one again), where there is not a hint of evil or suffering. The time in between Christ's first and second coming (the first for salvation, the second for judgement), is God being patient and giving people ample time to come to their senses, turn from evil and turn to Him.


The cross was the only way to deal with evil without destroying all humans, as well as giving fair punishment for all evil committed. 


Seeing God with clarity and truth is not a limitation (box) but liberation (from making a false god/in our own image).


God wants to have a relationship with us, and a relationship is not (truly) possible with a concept, or a projection of our own ideals.

You can't have a relationship with 'the universe' (you can relate to it of course, but that's not the same as a two-way relationship between 2 beings of similar likeness).

God made us in His image, meaning He actually is a Being, with a mind, with feelings, with a will, and with morality.

When we say God is 'love' or 'consciousness' or 'the mystery' - or any other beautiful but vague sounding concept - relationship is not possible.

The more clarity we get on who God is and what He is like, the more intimate and healthy and satisfying the relationship will be.

The Bible is one of the foremost ways God has given us to get to know Him. Because of the Bible, which is written by the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of God/Jesus), we can see God clearly albeit it not completely.

While it may feel counter-intuitive at first, especially if we've been relating to 'god' in a more mystical way, we actually see way more of God when we see Him clearly-but-with-limitations (due to being fallen humans in a fallen world until we enter heaven, His presence), than if we were to shun this clarity that comes with limitations than if we choose a mystical, mysterious, nebulous idea of 'god' which isn't grounded in reality yet doesn't have any limitations (including limiting error).

The only reason we wouldn't want to 'limit' God, put Him in a box, aka, define Him, is because we don't truly want to know Him as He is - we want to see God the way we would like god to be.

It's like idolising a celebrity from afar and projecting all our fantasies onto them, which may feel incredible, but is nonetheless a fantasy.

Whereas knowing someone up-close-and-personal may be at times more challenging and confronting; it's also ultimately that much more rewarding.


One of the primary knee-jerk reactions of people against religion, and therefore Christianity, is the erroneous belief that religion is one of the main causes of war and violence in the world. Just because you have heard something a thousand times, doesn't make it true..

"History simply does not support the hypothesis that religion is the major cause of conflict. The wars of the ancient world were rarely, if ever, based on religion. These wars were for territorial conquest, to control borders, secure trade routes, or respond to an internal challenge to political authority."

But more importantly, we can't lump all religions together as if they all teach the same thing. Let's compare and contrast Christianity with Islam;


The Bible says; turn the other cheek (Matthew 5:38), pray for your enemies (Matthew 5:44), and that vengeance belongs to the Lord (meaning, we are to leave justice into God's hands and not our own) (Romans 12:19)

The Quran says "Then kill the disbelievers (non-Muslims) wherever you find them, capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush."  

(Surah 9:5)

If we are going to speak of atrocities committed by certain people groups in the name of their beliefs - and use that as an argument against such beliefs - then what about the Nazi's who were occultists, who practiced yoga and astrology and consulted mediums, as do new agers?

In conclusion, it is false to claim that religious people are harmful, and 'spiritual but not religious' folks are peaceful. All humans are fallen, sinful creatures, who need salvation and redemption, in Jesus' name.




On the contrary, the Christian religion was revolutionary for its fair treatment of women. At a time when Greek women were forced to leave the room when a male visitor arrived, when Greek women were not allowed out of the house without a male escort, when Jewish women were forced to sit in a separate section of the synagogue behind a screen and women were not allowed on the Temple precinct at all, Christian communities allowed women to worship openly with men, recognized several prominent female disciples, allowed women to act as teachers and maintained as a matter of doctrine that there was no distinction between male and female.


Claims, questions, and concerns like these always come from people who have not truly read the Bible, for it is impossible to read there bible, in context, and come to such conclusions.

1) the Bible was the first to introduce the idea that both men and women were equal; both equally created in the image of God (this was unheard of in ancient times)

2) the Bible is chockfull of heroic women (remember; the Bible was written in a time where women were considered inferior)

3) while God reveals Himself with a masculine pronoun, the bible makes it clear that God is neither male nor female. Calling God 'Him' or 'Father' is not a veneration of men/a denigration of women, but rather tells us of his position in relation to us (He provides). God is portrayed to have both masculine and feminine qualities - but his position will always be masculine (which is different from male, aka , this has 0 to do with gender, and everything to do with order).

Those who have studied polarity, though it will be forever incomplete without a biblical perspective, will be able to understand that masculine/feminine is not about which one is better, but about their unique and complementary roles.  Complementarianism means; men and women are completely equal in value and worth, yet each are created with different and unique gifts, dispositions, and roles.


If this angers you, if you believe this shouldn't be so, simply look at the difference in male and female biology, the fact that woman can bear children and men cannot, and it should be clear that to argue this simple fact is moot. (Of course with our culture moving futher and further away from God and moral order and descending into moral chaos; we are now busy developing technology that can make it so that men can bear children too...)

The truth is, much of the equality we see between men and women today, we have to thank to many nations being founded on Christian principles in the past 2 millennia. We are now moving away from this Christian heritage, but that doesn't mean we don't owe a great of our current comforts to the Biblical foundations of our countries.

"In many ways, the Bible countered the truly misogynistic treatment of women in ancient times, and the effects of this radical worldview are reflected in history. Those criticizing the Bible for its attitude toward women should consider the status of women in the pagan cultures of the Old Testament, New Testament, and early church eras. Even in our modern era, one has only to contrast the status of women living in nations with a Christian heritage to those living in nations without it. Likewise, one should consider the horrific misogyny of industries such as pornography and the sex trade, both of which exist in direct opposition to biblical commands."

"But the most compelling witness against biblically endorsed misogyny is Jesus. Jesus welcomes women, empowers women, is funded by women, and teaches women. 

Women are drawn to Jesus. They anoint him and wash his feet. They are last to leave the cross and first at the tomb. What women see in Jesus is what they have longed to see in the world around them but haven’t. 

Women were drawn to Christianity because they were valued there. They joined the early church in strong numbers (and were praised by Paul for their leadership in Romans 16). Celsus was a second-century Greek writer who attacked the church for its welcome of women: “(Christians) show they want and are able to convince only the foolish, dishonorable, and stupid; only slaves, women, and little children” (Cels. 3.44). While the general population at the time was two-thirds men and one-third women, Christian communities were two-thirds women and one-third men.

Women were drawn to the church as a community in which they mattered and their gifts were celebrated."



Can you say with absolute certainty that God is in favor of homosexuality? Or do you simply believe He should be, and by extension, we should be too?


Can you honestly deny that when you really think about it, there does seem to be an inherent logic and coherence to a relationship between man and woman, like two puzzle pieces fitting together, that is missing from same sex relationships...?


Just like a bird wasn't made to mate with a cat, nor a human with an inanimate object... this world simply doesn't allow for same sex relationships to be natural, regardless if they have become normalized.


Is it normal that people get sick? Yes. Is it natural? No, it is actually a distortion of health.

Just because something is normal, doesn't mean it's natural.

Just because someone is born that way, doesn't mean God created them that way.


Now, affirming what is normal and healthy, doesn't mean hating what isn't. It's simply a recognition of what's what.

I've seen non-Christians be downright homo-phobic, whereas (true) Christians wouldn't treat homosexuals any different from anyone else; a sinner in need of grace.


It's true that love is love - yet lust and sex and attraction are different from love, and God made us male and female, not male and male or female or female, for that same reason. 


The question one needs to ask themselves is, do I want to be correct (meaning, agreeing with God), or do i want to be politically correct (do I want to fit in and be accepted by the culture)?


Socio-politically correct woke-ism (affirming peoples behavior regardless of truth or consequence) is not true tolerance, as it doesn't tolerate anything or anyone that doesn't conform to the ever changing and shifting standards of culture and society. Just because it's not cool or woke to not affirm same-sex relationships (which is not the same as hating gay people....), doesn't make it wrong or hateful.


True Christians would be friends with people who are gay, they would treat them like everybody else, they would help them if they saw they were in need.... and all of this without affirming their sexual orientation, which is not God-given but a result of sin/fallen human nature. That is not calling gay people sinners in a way that singles them out from the rest of society; it's affirming that they, like all of us, are experiencing and acting out the sinful nature we have all inherited.


It is absolutely, unequivocally, true that the institution of church (which isn't the true church of Christ...) has caused untold damage to people with same sex attraction. Even truth, when delivered without grace and love, can cause damage to an individual. So, like with many other sin issues, it's an issue that must be treated with the utmost care and love for the individual. 


But truth, in the end, must prevail, and must be shared, if one is to be truly loving, and not just nice.



No, not only does the Bible does not condone slavery as we understand it today - it was actually Christians who drove the abolitionist movement that led slavery to be outlawed.

"The seeds of the emancipation of slaves are in the Bible, which teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27), which condemns those who kidnap and sell a person (Exodus 21:16; & 1 Timothy 1:8–10), and which shows that a slave can truly be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16)"

"In fact, the abolitionist movement was dominated by Bible believing Christians so moved by their faith (and God’s Word), they felt compelled to eliminate slavery altogether."


All people throughout all time have been saved by one

thing alone; faith.

As God is omniscient; knows all things from eternity past to eternity future, and sees all hearts and hidden motives of all man(kind) - He knows who seeks after Him regardless of the age or culture they live in. If there is anyone, anywhere, in the world, that desires to know God and be saved, God would make the gospel known to them, whether that be through a dream, a vision, a missionary, etc.


Evidence or exposure to the gospel is never the issue, because then everybody (this side of the cross) would (eventually) be saved. It is our response to the evidence and the gospel that determines whether we are saved or not. What saves us, is our desire to be saved. To know the one true God, and fully submit to Him as Lord and savior.

"No matter when a person has lived, their salvation is ultimately dependent on the work of Christ and a faith placed in God, but the amount of knowledge a person had concerning the specifics of God’s plan has increased through the ages via God’s progressive revelation. "


This question reveals a hidden bias; the same people who will claim christianity is outdated, will point to other religions being older as though older means more authentic or holding more weight. Older doesn't always mean more accurate.

We used to believe the sun revolved around the Earth, before we discovered the Earth revolves around the sun.  It's not a matter of which belief came first (nor last!)

but which one is true.


Man-made religions came before Christ's incarnation, yes.

But Jesus, being God, has existed since before the beginning of time, as God the Son.

He is the One who walked with Adam and Eve in the garden, before any kind of religion or spiritual 'path' to God, was even necessary (made necessary by the fall).


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14)

No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, He has made him known. (John 1:18)

Jesus is the Word of God incarnate, just as the Bible is the written Word of God. There is no 'before' God, since God is eternal and created time (space and matter).

Worshipping the one true God (Yahweh) is the oldest religion, always closely followed by idolatry; falling into the worship of false gods. When Christ incarnated some 2000 years ago, he simply revealed more of that living god than had ever been revealed before.


"As Christ Himself said: “I am the Door for the sheep. All who came before Me are thieves and robbers”. That is, before Christ’s incarnation, anyone who has claimed to be the way back to God is an impostor. This includes Buddha and Vishnu. Only Christ is “the door”." - Alan Morrison


Lot had sex with his daughters. David, a man after God's own heart, killed someone so he could have his wife. Solomon had hundreds (!) of wives.....


The majority of the Bible is a historical account, openly documenting what actually happened without editing out the less than flattering bits. It shows human nature and it's tendency to not live up to God's standard for morality

Not all that is described in the Bible was prescribed by God.

Simply because a newspaper documents a murder in the town does not mean it supports the murder - it is simply recording the facts of what happened.



Sure, if you want to read one verse, out of the context of the other 31,101...........



"I feel it is important, at this point in the book — having looked at the essential hallmarks of all heathen spirituality — to highlight the fabrication of a classic syncretistic claim in the interfaith scene. I refer here to the entirely false notion that Christ endorsed “the god within” of Eastern mysticism or the “Christ Consciousness” of the New Age people when He is alleged to have said, “the kingdom of God is within you”. The contextual mistranslation of the Greek word, ἐντός, entos, as “within” in the Gospel of Luke, chapter 17, verse 21, so that it reads “the kingdom of God is within you” (as in the King James Version), has given further excuse for interfaith people to claim that the Bible teaches the same “God within all people” philosophy as Eastern mysticism. But Jesus would hardly be saying to the Pharisees, of all people (for it was to them to whom He was speaking), that they had God within them! In any case, it was obviously not the Divine godhead to which Jesus was referring here. He is speaking instead of “the kingdom of God” which, incidentally, would also not be within the Pharisees.


The translation of entos here is dictated by the genitive next to it — ἐντός ὑμῶν, entos humon — so that it should really be translated as “in the midst of you” or “among you”. Jesus was saying “the kingdom of God is here right now, in your midst”. It had come at last, exactly as prophesied and as perfectly personified by the Christ being right there before them, in the midst of them, among them, but most were too blind to perceive it, as they still are today.


The idea of achieving the illusion of personal divinity through one’s own efforts always seems more enticing to the narcissistic unregenerate mind rather than dwelling in a spiritual kingdom created by the omnipotent God who they reject."






The Bible records only things pertaining to Jesus' ministry, not to the 20 or something years He worked as a carpenter, simply because it has zero bearing on what's important for us to know. It's not omitted out of some sort of conspiracy - but because, especially at that time, it's not prudent nor necessary, to know every detail about a person's life, to receive their most important teaching. Jesus came to die for our sins and reveal the Father to us - not to teach us about carpentry.....

"Also, they often talk about Jesus' missing years. They say that Jesus went to the far east to study yoga, which is what accounts for his miraculous abilities. But this is just patently false.  Jesus was never missing, He lived in Nazareth all his life after his return from Egypt. We know this because, when He went back to Nazareth to preach in the Synagogue, everyone recognized Him, they knew exactly who He was, and who His father, and family were. They were intimately familiar with Him, and it is exactly this familiarity that made it so difficult for them to accept Him as the Messiah. 

If Jesus lived in India to become a yogi of the calibre they ascribe to Him, then he would have been in training for 20 to 30 years, which is how long it take's for the average yogi to become an adept. This would mean that nobody would have recognized Him as an adult when He returned to Nazareth.

And then of course there is the fact that Jesus is on record as being very outspoken against any and all forms of idol worship and sorcery, like yoga. Jesus did not entice or teach people to practice yoga or the occult, but actively called them to repent from it."


bottom of page