Jesus commanded His followers to serve the needy, help the sick, and minister to the suffering. Where karma fails to encourage a believer to serve the community around them, Jesus succeeds.

A common feature among the Yogic religions (which include Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, among others) is the concept of karma. Karma “is the cosmic law of cause and effect that ensures that whatever a person does, good or bad, has ultimate consequences.”[1] Such consequences are distributed through the process of reincarnation “into a better status if a person has behaved well; if badly, a person can be reborn and pay for past sins by suffering.”[2] But if a person’s circumstances are the result of karma, should anyone seek to try to help their common man?
When one sees a person struggling through life or suffering from some affliction, it may be natural to feel a certain sense of compassion.[3] Yet, under a karmic worldview, one’s suffering is justice done as a result of the bad deeds of a prior life. If suffering poverty, etc, is what a person deserves, by what right would anyone else feel they should alleviate it?
Read More
Related Posts:

Scientism’s inability to answer so many questions, including its inability to account for itself, clearly shows that a robust understanding of reality will rely on many disciplines of study, not just science.

Peter Atkins, scientist and fellow at Lincoln College, University of Oxford, recently wondered, “As a scientist, I am led to wonder whether [science’s] ability to provide understanding is unlimited. Can it in fact answer all the great questions, the ‘big questions of being’, that occur to us?” [1] Many would answer Atkins in the affirmative; those that would are said to subscribe to the idea of “scientism.”
Scientism can be defined as “the view that the hard sciences alone have the intellectual authority to give us knowledge of reality,” [2] and that “at some stage in the future, science will be able to explain everything, and answer all our needs.” [3] Essentially, scientism is the belief that science is the beginning and ending of knowledge. However, there are several critical problems with this belief.
First, and perhaps most importantly, scientism cannot meet its own standard. [4] The claim itself, that science is the sole manner in which one can gain knowledge, cannot be arrived at through scientific means. It is not through the use of the scientific method that one would end up at scientism; scientism is a philosophical belief which must be assumed prior to engagement with scientific inquiry. But if this belief is held without regard to scientific evidence, then it fails to live up to itself.
Secondly, there are a number important truths which cannot be measured or tested scientifically. [5] The existence of moral laws or the value of human life cannot be answered by science. If one adheres strictly to scientism, they then must conclude that these concepts are not real or true in an objective sense; there would be no good, no evil, no value, no purpose.
Read More

Contributions to science and medicine are just a portion of the overall influence Christianity has had on the world. Christian influence has been so positive and pervasive in the west that many likely take it for granted.[10] However, a careful consideration of history reveals that much of what has made the western world so advanced and so prosperous and been a direct reflection of underlying Christian values.

There is a growing question related to the overall impact religion has had on the world. A 2014 HuffPost poll revealed more than half of Britons believed religion did more harm than good, a sentiment shared even by 20% of those self-described as “very religious.”[1] This appears to go hand-in-hand with a sharp decrease in Christianity in the country, from 72% to 59% between 2001 and 2011.[2]
A Pew Research study of Americans also conducted in 2014 found that 34% of the religiously unaffiliated believed “religion’s declining influence… [is] a good thing.”[3] Given the growing belief that religion does more harm than good, it is worth considering the influence Christianity has had, both in the past as well as the present. A careful study of the Christianity reveals the faith has had an extremely positive impact.
Christianity has had a positive impact on the development of the sciences. Central to the Christian worldview are three intellectual presuppositions necessary for the advancement of scientific study: 1) the intelligibility of nature, 2) the idea that the details of nature can be known by observing them, and 3) an affirmative attitude towards nature.[4] Christianity teaches a high value for truth and teaches that the truth about the existence of God can be discovered through observation of the natural world. In Romans 1:20 the Apostle Paul wrote:
Since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, being understood by what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
These concepts, and the encouragement to embrace study of the natural world, were carried along with Christianity as it spread throughout the Roman empire and the rest of Europe.
Read More

The Christian faithful need a community of believers who are confident in their faith, who understand not only what they believe but why they believe it, who are encouraging and supportive when people ask questions (even difficult questions), and who love their members even when their members question the truth of their faith.

In a 2019 study, the Pew Research Center found that the percentage of “religious nones” (those that identify as atheist, agnostic, or “nothing in particular”) rose from 17 to 26 percent in the previous ten years.[1] During this same time, the number of self-identifying Christians declined 12 percent.[2] This study is not the first to find a pattern of overall decline in the American Christian church; it is clear that Christianity is shrinking as a percentage of the population.
When asked, those who leave Christianity give reasons for doing so that echo statements made by their non-religious counterparts. One of the most common of these reasons is a lack of belief, sometimes characterized as “common sense,” “logic,” or a “lack of evidence.”[3] Simply put, many doubt that Christianity is actually true and as a result are uninterested in engaging with the religion.
In discussing the Christian church (as a whole rather than a particular congregation), Christian writer Gary Habermas identifies several “myths” which have persisted within the Christian community and which are damaging to those experiencing religious doubt.[4] Three of the most crucial of these myths state that Christian doubt is uncommon, that true believers never experience doubt, and that Christian doubt is always bad.[5] Historically, many Christians have preferred to ignore, suppress, or dismiss religious doubts, essentially telling their members (as characterized by Os Guinness), “Believe this! Believe that! Stop doubting and believe more firmly!”[6]
Unfortunately, as can be seen in the data from Pew Research Center, traditional strategies for responding to doubt appear to be ineffective as more and more Christians are leaving the faith. Research into religious doubt supports Guinness’ criticism of the church; religious persons who suppress their doubts and / or do not have a supportive Christian community with which to share those doubts are likely to see their experience of doubt accelerate.[7] If the church is to stop the “bleeding” it must address the doubts and concerns of its members head on.
Read More

The problem of evil, pain, and suffering is difficult to bear on a personal level. Christians should be careful not to too-quickly dismiss the concerns of people who have experienced these very-real realities. However, the presence of these in our world does not rule out the existence of God. In fact, the presence of evil only makes His existence more likely. One may not understand why God chooses to allow evil, pain, and suffering to occur now, but scripture makes it clear that one day all pain will end and God’s ultimately justice will be accomplished.

Three centuries prior to the birth of Jesus, Greek philosopher Epicurus posed an enduring question related to the existence of God: “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?”[1] Two thousand years later Epicurus’ words still resonated and influenced the writings of atheist philosopher David Hume. (Hume 1779, 186) A 2018 Barna study showed that this question is still important today; the “problem of evil” is the highest barrier to faith for members of Gen Z and second highest (after Christian hypocrisy) for Millennials. (Barna 2018)
The question as originally posed appears on its face to be a logical proof, suggesting God must be either unable to prevent evil, unwilling, or a combination of the two. This line of reasoning rests on the idea that an all-loving, all-powerful God could not have a reason to choose to allow evil to occur. However, this conclusion does not necessarily follow: it is possible that such a God could exist and choose to allow evil for some unknown reason, even if this possibility initially seems unreasonable. It is not logically impossible for God to allow evil, regardless of personal opinions as to the reasonableness of such a God existing. Christian philosopher Peter John Kreeft makes just such an argument, stating, “Even David Hume… said it’s just barely possible that God exists… there’s at least a small possibility.
Read More