This is the web site of Peter Hinchley (Hinch). I live in Canberra, Australia, with my wife, Megan, and our miniature schnauzer, Holly.
John Loftus totally hits the mark with this post over at Debunking Christianity. It can seem easy to believe something when, as an “insider”, you are already convinced of its truth. However, as an outsider looking in, “don’t you just shake you head in utter amazement that anyone could ever believe it…”. We all do, until of course we find ourselves on the inside of something that sounds a little cockamamie.
Little bits and bobs on my mind.
Finally kicked the bag and joined Twitter. Come follow.
There are few things better in life than overtaking a runner whilst walking.
The most recent comments on this site.
Recommended links from other places.
The word on the street.
I like protein like a fat kid likes cake. On a t-shirt at the gym.
You told me victory’s sweet, even deep in the cheap seats. Conor Oberst on Cape Canaveral.
It’s mad. It’s sick. It makes me so happy. - The proud owner of a new iPhone.
The mob has spoken.
I don’t want to sound harsh, but I’m sick of people saying they need rock solid scientific proof of the authenticity of Christianity. Yes it would seem strange from an outsiders point of view, that’s probably because the real understanding happens on the inside. Not the inside of the church, the inside of each person, it’s about the heart and soul, not the head. I don’t need science to tell me I love my wife and children, or that music can change my whole mood and outlook on life, and I don’t need it to prove to me that God exists, it’s called love and faith. As for people who believe just as strongly in other religions, that is out of my control, I can only truly know myself and in what I believe. John 20:29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Adam, i think we need to clarify a few points. Firstly, although you may not “need” evidence to tell you that you love your wife or that you enjoy music, the evidence is nevertheless available. An outside observer can tell you love your wife by the manner in which you treat her, the way you speak to her, the gifts you bestow upon her, etc. I could even attach electrodes to your body and through observation of specific brain activity that is typical for those “in love” confirm that your feelings are indeed legitimate. You don’t need to be convinced of what you feel, but evidence supporting your feelings is available, and it can be tested.
In a similar manner, you may not need evidence to tell you that you love your God. Even so, there is ample evidence to suggest you do. Once again, your behaviour testifies to this point. However, and this is the important point, there can be no connection between your love for God, or even your certainty of his existence, and his ACTUAL existence, without measurable evidence. You may know what you believe, I don’t doubt your certainty, but you cannot suggest for a moment that your conviction makes it true.
You quickly passed over the point that people of other religions are as certain in their beliefs as you are in yours. I think this is an extremely critical point that requires further reflection. Let’s take islam. The muslim loves Allah, they are convinced that he exists, that the koran is his word, that he answers prayer, that he transforms lives, that he can be known personally. You of course deny this. Why? I suspect you would say something like… because, unlike christianity, there is no evidence to support the claims of islam. At this point you may even start to list the “evidence” supporting christianity (eye witness accounts, the transformation of the disciples, etc) as a means of validating your decision to accept christianity and reject islam.
Although we may claim otherwise, we all need evidence; we tend to only forgo the requirement when we find that suitable evidence isn’t available. And that is indeed what christians typically do. When the “evidence” supporting christianity is shown to be nothing less than highly circumstantial, many christians will fall back to an argument founded on personal experience (i.e. if the first argument fails, try another). However, an argument of personal experience can never be anything but subjective, and therefore, incapable of representing objective truth.
If evidence is not required, no claims can be tested, and all faiths, indeed any crazy idea at all, must be considered as truth. I know as a christian you don’t believe this. Neither do i. It is important that we do not confuse what we feel, what we experience, and what we want, with what really is. The latter can never be supported without some kind of evidence.
Without evidence, you, the muslim, the scientologist, the mormon, the jew, the buddhist, and the hindu, all subscribe to a set of beliefs that are immune to open and reasoned discourse. Ideas cannot be challenged. Correction is impossible. Conflict cannot be resolved. Everything is relative. And conversation is dead.
Finally, in relation to the verse you reference, John 20:29, all i can say is “how convenient”. I suspect that cult leaders use similar words, “what i’m about to tell you may seem strange, but if you believe it without question, without evidence, you will be praised”. I find it strange that in every area of life, other than religion, we call a person who believes without evidence gullible. Why is religion any different?
You have an opinion? Share it.