TRUTH MATTERS, A LOT--But, how do we rationally find it?
Is there solid evidence for God? Why should no rational person reject evidence for God?

These seem to be the most important questions in life to focus on. Can you think of others that truly have more value than these? Others can be important, but it seems to me that these should be the priorities.

One of the really cool things is that if the Bible is correct (and as we'll see on this page and others, there is much science that confirms it is in the most important areas), genuine godliness gives us the best of both worlds, this earth and for eternity. This is basically the argument of Pascal's famous Wager that is almost always misunderstood, but is based on this verse. You can't lose by following God since in general it gives the best life on earth and you have a great opportunity at eternity to boot:
“Physical training is good, but training for godliness is much better,
promising benefits in this life and in the life to come.” Paul (1 Timothy 4:8)

This claim of the Bible and the first 2 questions above have already been vindicated by much independent scientific research and historically documented facts. Over 80 years of research for example shows that religion improves self control significantly & this is also a major factor in many kinds of success.

"Michael McCullough..and fellow psychologist at the University of Miami, Brian Willoughby, have reviewed eight decades of research and concluded that religious belief and piety promote self-control....[as a result] Researchers around the world have repeatedly found that devoutly religious people tend to do better in school, live longer, have more satisfying marriages & be generally happier."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/science/30tier.html
See also: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/244/4907/933.abstract and
http://www.psy.miami.edu/faculty/mmccullough/Papers/Relig_self_control_bulletin.pdf.

There are many other lines of evidence on this page, other pages on this site and links and by many of the most elite scholars and scientists in history who have been convinced that the evidence for Christianity is VERY compelling, far more than any other worldview.. This is a pictorial summary of some major lines of evidence for the God and the Bible.

HOW DO WE FIND TRUTH?
But, how do we know if the claims or views of the Bible or buddhism, secularism, atheism, scientism or anything are true? Many atheists ask some very serious and honest questions about religion.  What makes Christianity right and all its competitors wrong? Why not believe Zeus of the Greeks or the millions of Indian gods or the oracle at Delphi? All of these have made many claims in history, sometimes claims that they have been given instructions by gods through prophets/seers, etc. And why not atheism or agnosticism? And then what about the different religions claims about creation? How do you know which one is correct? And then we have denominations as well. How do we choose the correct one and why should we?

These are all very good questions.

There are several ways people use to decide what truth is. But, which one is best to follow? I suggest that it is the one that has the best track record of producing benefits for humanity.
1) Tradition: Just follow the elders. Why change? Sometimes OK. But, sometimes not.

2) Pragmatics: Do whatever seems to work best for immediate decisions.

3) Trust important people/institutions: Listen and follow friends, parents, schools, establishments (religion, science, historians, politics, etc.) without caring much about checking evidence.

4) Use Fallacies:  Some establishments unfortunately use a priori fallacies to arrive at "truth". They decide what is true first and then look for evidence to confirm it and deny anything that conflicts with it. This, which is kind of like hoping you'll win a million dollars at Las Vegas. 2 common types are:

A) Methodological naturalism which has been adopted by most atheists and some theists says,
‘Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.’ Kansas State University immunologist Scott Todd, correspondence to Nature 401(6752):423, 30 Sept. 1999.

B) Presuppositional apologetics theology which says,
"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record." http://www.answersingenesis.org/about/faith (The Bible does not anywhere make any claim like this. See http://www.truth-is-life.org/GoodFaithNeedsEvidence.html)

Both of these are fallacies and are no different from saying:
"Even if all the data point to a spherical earth, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not a flat earth conclusion that lines up with our dogma."

There may be sincere and smart people with these views who can do find legitimate evidence and do good work. But, their conclusions cannot be objective because they start reasoning from fallacies and censoring rival evidence. 

A bigger problem is that if we follow a priori fallacies, then we have no way to rational compare the truth of our view against any other view, because each camp denies that the other has evidence.  This is one example of what Dr. Thomas Kuhn called incommensurability in his seminal work in the philosophy of science, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions."  There is no objectivity, no standards that apply to all competing views, etc. So, rational discussion is impossible. They do not have a fair playing field and it's impossible to change any views since by definition no contrary evidence is allowed to count as evidence. This and other fallacies as well as indisputable reality of significant bias in academia and in every human being is probably the biggest reason why you see many scientists and academics having radically different views on some topics at times.

5) FOLLOWING THE EVIDENCE WHERE IT LEADS:
When scientists/historians do their research, Ph.Ds. write academic papers, why do they think their hypothesis or theory is true instead of any of the many rivals that exist? It is of course because of evidence and they write to show that their idea/concept/theory has more and better quality evidence than any rivals. This is the same exact reason why 1000s and 1000s of scholars in many fields converted to Christianity as well as its claims about creation science (in certain cases some became creationists first due to evidence and then Christian because the Bible's specific claims matched the physical evidence best). It was precisely because they saw convincing evidence that met the highest standards required of worldviews in a variety of areas and no other competitors with more and better evidence. They then made the rational choice to follow the theory/worldview with the most evidence in the most important areas. This ranged from personal experience (no empirical evidence can be discovered, studied or reported without using human senses and experiences of people past and present. As academic textbooks rightly say,personal experience is the foundation of all empirical evidence) to historical to scientific to philosophical and others. 

A FAIR AND RATIONAL PROCESS TO FIND TRUTH:

1) CONSIDER ALL HYPOTHESES: It's very important to question all establishments (political, educational, scientific, religious, historical, etc.) since NO establishments on this planet have ever been infallible. In order to do and to make the most progress, we must allow all hypotheses, especially dissident ones that rival establishments, to compete fairly with the dominant ones. When this is done it has produced many of the greatest progress in all fields in history. Don't use dogma or establishments to ban rational investigation. If an idea is wrong, the evidence will falsify it. That's the only way to do rational investigation.

2) GATHER EVIDENCE: Search for and gather evidence of a variety of kinds (pragmatic, scientific, historical, philosophical, mathematical and other kinds of evidence are all valuable and helpful types of evidence, but the most important kind is pragmatic evidence). Learn about evidence from thinkers on both sides. Don't ignore or distort evidence for the dominant or dissident view.

3) LISTEN TO DIFFERENT HYPOTHESES/THEORIES THAT CLAIM TO EXPLAIN THE EVIDENCE BEST
(using the scientific method, historical method, etc. )
Consider all the evidence you have learned about. Listen to leading thinkers and which hypothesis/theory they think explains the evidence best using the scientific, historical methods and other objective tools. Which accounts for the most evidence best? Are they ignoring some evidence? Are they using fallacies in their reasoning?

If you see establishments using fallacies in their reasoning, that's a major red flag and a good reason to very seriously investigate their rivals to see if evidence is being censored. If you don't know that propaganda is used in the west as well as in communist countries, just consider the stories of Julian Assange, Edward Snow, etc.

4) FOLLOW THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE/USE THE GOLDEN RULE IN ANALYZING EVIDENCE /NO FALLACIES: Use the golden rule in reasoning which theory is correct. Almost all worldviews agree that the golden rule is a foundation for ethics. It's true in reasoning as well. It's very important to use the golden rule in reasoning as well if we want to find truth. If we don't, it's very easy for us to deny evidence and truth.

This means that we must use the same standards for all competing hypotheses, whether we like them or we don't, as much as we can humanly do. The fundamental reason that fallacies are wrong is because they violate this intellectual golden rule and have a really bad track record of finding truth. Avoid these and other fallacies like the plague, since you don't want them used against you (See https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ for examples):

Peter Lipton, Gilbert Harmann, Wesley Salmon, William Lycan, Paul Thagard, and others list these ways for helping evaluate evidence to decide which theory is most likely to be true:

1. Testability: better explanations render specific predictions that can be falsified or corroborated.
2. Scope (aka “comprehensiveness” or “consilience”): better explanations explain more types of phenomena.
3. Precision: better explanations explain phenomena with greater precision.
4. Simplicity: better explanations make use of fewer claims, especially fewer as yet unsupported claims (“lack of ad-hoc-ness”).
5. Mechanism: better explanations provide more information about underlying mechanisms.
6. Unification: better explanations unify apparently disparate phenomena (also sometimes called “consilience”).
7. Predictive novelty: better explanations don’t just “retrodict” what we already know, but predict things we observe only after they are predicted.
8. Analogy (aka “fit with background knowledge”): better explanations generally fit with what we already know with some certainty.
9. Past explanatory success: better explanations fit within a tradition or trend with past explanatory success (e.g. astronomy, not astrology).

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=11046

6) ACT TO FOLLOW TRUTH:  If you know truth and don't follow it, you've just wasted your time and life. Truth is useless unless it is put into action. JUST DO IT!

7) STAY OBJECTIVE/KEEP LEARNING: Never treat any position as set 100% in concrete. Always be open to letting other views demonstrate that they have more evidence than your current view does and to considering changing if they do.

This last verse is similar to a statement of Darwin's that I STRONGLY agree with:

"A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question" Charles Darwin, 1859, Introduction to Origin of Species, p. 2

We should NOT just believe whatever people claim. That's irrational and can be deadly as many cases in history have shown. But, it is equally irrational and dangerous to be too skeptical.

DANGERS OF EXCESSIVE SKEPTICISM

This is a story that always reminds me to have healthy skepticism of establishments. But, it's important to be a bit skeptical about every group, establishments OR dissidents. Skepticism has important value for sure (as the Bible advocates repeatedly. But, it can be excessive and misused. When skepticism causes people to deny legitimate evidence or use fallacies, then it become irrational and sometimes very harmful and even deadly. An example of this is the case of Dr. Semmelweis whose story you can watch summarized here:

Blood and Guts - A History of Surgery [5 of 5] Bloody Beginnings  www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5I9JoFR8NU (~42:40-~55:00) 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT/BACKGROUND--COMMON SENSE VS. EVIDENCE
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. " Einstein

Before we continue, there is a significant difference between common sense and evidence/rationality. It's important to understand that much of the common sense that everyone learns in school now regardless of whether you are atheists or theists, is directly due to ~4,000 years of the Judeo-Christian worldview sacrificing enormously to promote concepts of human rights, health, public education and rationality in western civilization that simply did not exist much if at all in the ancient world.  Many lay people and even many scientists and historians aren't very well informed about facts that have been solidly documented by highly respected historians and scholars. Some people critize concepts given in the Bible without realizing their value, context or the reality that these principles gave birth to many of the most important freedoms and knowledge that we have today. Most ancient cultures simply did not have the values in most areas that modern people do. They ran mostly on the golden rule, whoever has the gold, makes the rules. They boasted of torturing and abusing people and posted in on murals. Common people were mostly just pawns to be used by the powerful to enrich the wealthy, cannon fodder or to build up state glory, etc. Up to 99% of people in history were often illiterate due to not having public education (which Judeo-Christianity also pioneered). Without Judeo-Christianity and it's influence, there's a very high likelihood that most of us would just be serfs slaving away at the whim of some chieftain, maybe working on something like the Great Wall of China (where ~1 milllion Chinese died).  And it is absolutely impossible that we would be communicating with people around the world by internet as we are. See more of this explained in these links.
www.truth-is-life.org/GoodLifeEvidence.html & http://www.truth-is-life.org/ScientificEvidence.html  

The Bible records God reasoning with a group of ignorant, illiterate and incredibly stubborn slaves to persuade them to follow principles that would empower them to become a world leader and a blessing to all. Israel was at first nearly at ground zero rationally and morally and many other cultures were not that much different. God had to deal with them kind of like Einstein teaching relativity to kindergartners. The rules he gave them were ideal for their maturity level and the cultural context around them. Nobody else at their time had hardly any comprehension of the value of the many principles of human rights, economics, justice, equality, health, etc. that God was trying to imbue in the Israeli culture. God promised:

"If you fully obey the Lord your God and carefully follow all his commands I give you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations on earth. All these blessings will come on you and accompany you if you obey the Lord your God" Deuteronomy 28:1-2

Sometimes skeptics will wonder why God didn't give more advanced principles in the Bible. Well, if you look at the surrounding cultures, the principles God gave to Israel were light years ahead of the principles of other cultures and sometimes are in advance of even modern cultures.  And if you consider how frequently they stubbornly rebelled against the baby steps out of ignorance that He did give them, you will have another answer. It is quite unreasonable to demand that God require illiterate slaves to be at the same level of maturity as we who are benefiting from ~4,000 years of Judeo-Christian influence on the world that has RADICALLY changed it? that's just not reasonable. Wise teachers give students only what they are able to handle. God gave them as much as they were able to handle, but not too much.

The principles of the OT were the best for their time, but they were not the ultimate level God wanted them to achieve. They were just 1st steps on the path to greater progress. Even much later in the New Testament Jesus told his disciples who had been with Him 3 years.

Unfortunately Israel rebelled so much that God eventually abandoned them to their own stubbornness. But, even though they only partially followed the principles of God with much rebellion, the promise that God gave to Abraham has come true.

Some of the great progress that the entire world has been blessed with in many important areas comes from the Judeo-Christian worldview and is summarized in these websites.

http://hebrewhistory.info/

Other cultures have made significant progress in different areas, through much trial and error, failure and success. But, no one had the incredible template for individual and national success that exists in the Bible that has dramatically changed the lives of almost every person living in the modern world.

Unfortunately, modern atheists, skeptics and all too many Christians as well, are repeating the same stubborness of Israel, failing to understand the reason for many principles God has given. Because of this, they also fail to solve many modern problems as quickly as they could and fail to incredible heights of success that God has given foundational principles to help us achieve. It is quite an irony that modern people are repeating the stubbornness of ignoring God's ideal principles of Israel and then criticizing God for not giving more truth when they have not even been humble enough to follow and learn from the elementary truths that God has given us already. This is another example of pride, which is a problem that cripples progress and growth at all levels more than almost anything else.

TRUTH NEEDS TO BE SIMPLE FOR IT TO BE UNDERSTOOD & USEFUL TO EVERYONE

When people look at the Bible, many parts appear simple on the surface (although some parts are quite complicated) & the temptation to arrogance kicks in. How could something from so long ago and that appears so simple still be useful for us today? But, wise people understand that:

Much of the Bible is written in simple language. Why? In law, surgery, some parts of science & other areas, it’s OK to have a few elite knowing the complex truths & then produce products for the masses or use their skills for those who need them. There’s no need for all to know complex truths. But, in other fields, it’s starkly different. In communication, literacy, health, theology & many other areas, if each individual doesn’t know the truth, they will suffer or be limited in many ways. So, God put some truths of the greatest value in the Bible in simple language so that even simple people could understand & choose to follow them.

In addition, while something may appear simple to do and use, it may take a great deal of knowledge to make it simple. Computer programs like MS Word and facebook, cell phone apps are easy to use. But, it took a great deal of knowledge and research to create them. It's similar with many concepts in the Bible. Many concepts are quite simple to understand, but it takes an incredible amount of sophistication and wisdom to create them and make them simple enough for all to understand and follow.

WHY IS THE ISSUE OF WORLDVIEW & ATHEISM VS. CHRISTIANITY IMPORTANT?

The topic of atheism vs. Christianity is by far the most important issue in history and there is nothing at all worth investigating with the highest objectivity we have. Here are some reasons why and :
1) Much scientific research demonstrates that following Bible principles great improves and advances quality of life for human beings at all levels.

2) JUSTICE FOR BILLIONS OF VICTIMS IN HISTORY AND THE PRESENT:
There have been billions of injustice, torture, abuse and mass murders in history. If there is no God, none of those people will ever have a chance to live a decent and happy life. Only God can do justice for these abused people in history. Atheism has no answer, nothing to offer at all, no solution. As someone who has worked to promote human rights for decades, I care a lot that people who have been abused have a chance at a better life. God alone is able to do that.


3) ETERNAL LIFE VALUE: Jesus said, "And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?" Mark 8:36 Paul and Isaiah agreed saying, “No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined what God has prepared for those who love him.” 1 Cor. 2:9 If there is a God, we will be able to explore this world and the universe in ways that scientists and thrill junkies would give their left arms for. Imagine surfing cosmic waves around the Orion Nebula or figuring out the mechanics of dark matter or string theory or others. If God created the universe, eternity will be filled the most thrilling adventures you can possible imagine. Here's a video tour of a small part of the universe we could explore. X

Also, if there is no God, never be able to see those you love who have died, meet incredible heroes of history, and many in history and now will never have justice for the abuse they have suffered.

4) IDENTITY/VALUES/OBJECTIVITY/ SPENDING:  The worldviews that society adopts influence our identity and lives in profound ways. They influence our choices in govt., laws that are passed, how we spend money, objectivity, how science is done, values we vote for and much more.

3) EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION:
There is more evidence for Jesus resurrection and some other supernatural events than for many figures and events in history textbooks.  See a summary of good evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, and thus eternal life for us as well, at this website:
http://www.truth-is-life.org/Resurrection.html

4) ORIGIN & AGE OF THE UNIVERSE: Matter, energy, the universe and its natural laws were created by God and since that initial creation have been expanding. At least the initial aspects of this must have been ex nihilo. The main alternatives to ex nihilo are steady state or a dozen other ancient cosmologies (debunked and abandoned by science) and infinite regression (untestable and unanswerable scientifically or logically). Creation at present has beaten all other ancient competitors in this area and current cosmology is building on this foundation(even if they want to sweep that fact under the rug due to bias against creation science). Keep in mind that Even ONE claim or prediction that is confirmed is evidence. This is just a basic understanding of science. The weight of evidence overall determines what is true to the best of our ability.

If you are unacquainted with the fact that confirmed predictions count as evidence in science and have NOTHING to do with opinions, I suggest you start by reading these 2 sites about how 2 predictions of Einstein were confirmed by Gravity Probe B and that greatly increased our confidence that his concepts about relativity are true.
http://einstein.stanford.edu/MISSION/mission1.html
and http://einstein.stanford.edu

BACKGROUND:
1^st, check out the ~20 different cosmologies that existed in history, esp. the ones ~2-3,000 years ago and compare them to the Bible’s model:
--the shape of the universe was like a man (Jainists)
--The Earth and the Heavens form a unit within infinite "waters of chaos"; the earth is flat and circular, (Babylonian)
--At the center of the Universe is a central fire, around which the Earth, Sun, Moon and planets revolve uniformly. (Pythagorean)
--Universe exists unchanged throughout eternity. (Aristotlean)
and others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmology#Historical_cosmologies (note that the description of biblical cosmology there has been copied and pasted from the Babylonian one there and biased people won't allow the facts below to be listed for Biblical cosmology, using double standards)

BIBLICAL MODEL OF COSMOLOGY
[The Bible] (c.2000 BC-100 AD)
A created universe with subsequent expansion and a round/spherical earth hanging on nothing.
Biblical cosmology speaks of God creating the universe (Hebrews 1:2) the movement of the stars after that beginning (Job 38:31), ~15 verses speak of an expansion stretching from that beginning (Isaiah 44:24, Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13, etc.) and a number of stars comparable to the grains of sand, but finite (Psalms 147:4, Genesis 22:17) and a round/spherical earth resting/hanging on nothing (Isaiah 40:22, Job 26:7).

1) The Universe had a beginning:
Hebrews 1:2 says, “through the Son He (God) created the universe.”. This is a strong statement for a beginning.

2) Science describes the universe in ~5 terms: time, space, matter, power, and motion. Genesis was written ~1450 BC. Genesis 1:1,2 and all these aspects were included from the very beginning.:
"In the beginning [time] God created [power] the heaven [space] and the earth [matter] . . . And the Spirit of God moved [motion] upon the face of the waters."

3) God created many things through the power of His word. Logically, at least some aspects of creation had to come into being out of nothing (ex nihilo).
“The Lord merely spoke, and the heavens were created. He breathed the word,and all the stars were born.” Psalm 33:6
“…for he (God) issued his command, and they came into being.” Psalm 148:5

4) God speaks of the movement of the stars:
““Can you direct the movement of the stars— binding the cluster of the Pleiades or loosening the cords of Orion?” Job 38:31

5) ~15 verses in the Bible also speak of a stretching of the universe.
“This is what the Lord says—your Redeemer and Creator: “I am the Lord, who made all things. I alone stretched out the heavens. Who was with me when I made the earth?” Isaiah 44:24 (see also: Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13, etc.).

6) The number of stars is incredibly large (like sand), but, finite since they can be counted and are named.
“I will multiply your descendants[a] beyond number, like the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore.”Genesis 22:17
“He counts the stars and calls them all by name. Psalm 147:4 

7) The earth hangs on nothing.
“He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing.” Job 26:7

In regard to how these support an expansion of the universe, consider:
a) The term stretching is linguistically about the same as expanding, considering translation from a different language/culture, the ancient minds and simplified language God had to use to make it understandable for them. 
b) The term heavens, shamayim (שָׁמַיִם), is used to refer to both the earthly sky and the universe.
3) To get from a universe with a beginning to what human beings have been able to see, an expansion is required. This is simple logic and this concept was not at all foreign to the Hebrew mind.

We have a beginning to the universe and movement of stars and stretching concepts as above and observations of a very large number of stars and constellations and more. These all together require that the biblical cosmology believes in a universe with a beginning and an expansion from that.

For 3,000+ years, while the brightest intellectuals taught dozens of ideas about cosmology, the Bible gave a model that is incredibly close our modern concept.

EVIDENCE: Many scientists have done research providing evidence of a universe with a beginning and an expansion. The red shift, cosmic background radiation, movement of galaxies, many aspects of the The Big Bang theory and more all confirm a beginning to the universe and a subsequent expansion. Arno Penzias, co-discoverer of the microwave background radiation and 1978 Nobel Prize recipient in physics, stated

The best data we have (concerning the big bang) are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, the Bible as a whole.” New York Times, March 12, 1978. http://www.newcollege.unsw.edu.au/lecture_pdf/1099874611879bb_hawk.NCL.pdf:

In a subsequent radio interview, Penzias was asked what there was before the Big Bang:
"We don't know, but we can reasonably say that there was nothing." An upset listener called immediately, accusing Penzias of being an atheist. He wisely replied: "Madame, I believe you are not aware of the consequences of what I just said. Before the Big Bang there was nothing of what now exists. Had there been something, the question could be: where did it come from?" He continued commenting that if there was nothing and suddenly things began to appear, that was sign that Somebody had taken them from nothing, and concluded saying that his discovery could bring about the overcoming of the historic enmity between science and religion.”
http://www.miradaglobal.com/index.asp?id=religion&principal=180503&idioma=en

Dr. Jastrow, director of the Mount Wilson observatory once led by Edwin Hubble, was personally agnostic about ‘religious matters,”. But, he reviewed some of the SURGE evidence and concluded, “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy.” In an interview, Jastrow went even further, admitting that “Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. . . . That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.”


5) FOUNDATION FOR PROGRESS & TRACK RECORD EVIDENCE. Ms. Lichtman interviewed John Hulley, a former senior economist with the World Bank in Washington, D.C., reported that 86% of Nobel Science prizes from 1901 through 1990 have been won by Jews and Protestants.

Ms. Lichman asked,
“Why does the Bible make the difference?"

Mr. Hulley replied,
"Scientists and inventors need a favorable social environment, one which is fair. Human relations and standards of behavior make a very big difference -- they must be based on justice. In non-Bible societies', Hulley declared, you can't expect justice. They are organized on power relations. Only in Bible-based societies is there the concept of fairness…Bible-based societies respect the rights of individuals within the framework of law."
http://plancksconstant.org/blog/2006/02/Article-19.html
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1076.html

There might be a few rare exceptions to that, but if you look at the historical records, in nearly all cultures in the world at the time of Israel, the powerful and wealthy made the rules for society for their exclusive benefit and the common people were mostly just pawns to be used for the powerful and for national glory. They didn't really have any concept of human rights for all before Judeo-Christianity pioneered them.

The Bible says that "Righteousness exalts nation: but sin is a reproach to any people." Proverbs 14:34

It’s not a coincidence at all that the birthplace of human rights and modern science were places with biblical foundations. Nor is it a coincide that leading atheists like Rene Girard of Stanford were so impressed by the radical change that Christianity brought to human rights that he converted to Christianity.  If the Bble has this track record in history, it is likely that it can do a lot of good in the future as well.