Why I Believe Christianity is True And Other Ideas Are Just False

I like vanilla ice cream. My wife likes chocolate mint. My parents like Rocky Road. It's silly to insist that vanilla is right, and every other flavor is wrong. That doesn't make any sense. Flavors of ice cream are a matter of personal preference, not statements of truth or morality.

What about religion? Many people believe this is also a matter of personal preference too. So what's up with the idea that Christianity is true, and other faiths are not? Isn't that a silly statement? It depends on what I mean by "religion."

Religion for some people is a matter of selecting a set of beliefs and practices (rituals) that helps one cope with life. They believe that centering oneself around certain practices brings peace and contentment, and that's what is desirable about religion. Religion for them doesn't really need to answer the big questions of life so much as to bring comfort. And if they do attempt to answer the big questions, they do so unrealistically. For them religion doesn't interfere with real life, as much as adding value to it.

But what I mean by Christianity is not this sort of thing. When I talk about Christianity, I am talking about the very nature of reality itself. It is a construct of what is true and inescapable. In other words, Christianity applies to everyone no matter what they believe. Christianity does bring comfort, but not all the time. Christianity does give moral direction, but it doesn't offer a mental escape from consequences when we disobey.

So, why do I believe it to be true in comparison to any other religion or philosophy. Here is a general construct I follow when I consider truth claims. (Thanks to this succinct approach by Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason.)

1. First, there is the test of consistency. Does the philosophy fit with reality? For instance, the theory of general evolution's philosophical construct posits that everything came to be as a result of unguided progressive evolutionary processes. The problem with this is that it doesn't adequately answer the big question of "how" nor does it fit the physical evidences. I am not going to deal with all the problems of this construct, but to suffice to say that Christianity's answer to this fits what we know to be true, and what makes sense: everything came from something, and information is only created by Someone rather than spontaneous processes.


2. Second, there is the test of coherence. Does the idea itself make sense? The idea that all religions (ideas about reality) are true, can't be true because the statement is inconsistent with itself. Not only does the statement fail it's own test (it can't be true that it is false too), religions hold contradictory ideas. So logically they can't both be true. The only option is that either one is right or none are right. Christianity claims that only one way of seeing reality is objectively true.


3. Last, is the test of authoritative support. Is the view attested by an authority. In the other two tests Christianity, Islam, and the Jewish faith can all pass the test to different degrees. But, this test requires an authority's testimony. In each faith, they share an authority of Moses. He testified that there is one true God who has created everything and has revealed his moral will. The authority of Moses is confirmed by prophetic revelation and by God's power.
   
   The clincher is Jesus. Here is where the major religions disagree. The argument is not with Jesus' moral teachings, but with what he said about himself. He claimed to be the very Son of God. If true, this gives him a standing of authority that supersedes Moses or any prophet. He has the authority to speak about God and reality which no other person has. The proof of his authority is what he did, his coherent teachings, his power, God's own testimony, and Jesus' resurrection. And there are many good reasons to believe these proofs are authentic, including eyewitness testimony from his enemies and early disciples.

What is central to Christianity is not the moral teachings of Jesus. What is central to Christianity is the identity of Jesus. It matters who he is. Without Jesus there is no Christianity, even with his teachings intact. Without Jesus being the true Son of God, there is no hope, no good news, and no real faith. If we do not have faith in who Jesus is, we cannot even be saved. A Christian is not someone who believes the moral teachings, does Christian rituals, or feels good about Christianity. A Christian is a person who knows Jesus is the true Son of God, trusts him with her life, and orders her life around him.…

Continue reading...

When Questions Go Bad

You've heard the saying. "There are no dumb questions. Only those that aren't asked." This motto is used as an encouragement for people to engage in a process of understanding. People need to feel that their questions are welcomed and encouraged. They shouldn't feel like they need to self-edit themselves in order not to appear dumb. "Just go ahead and ask the question. Otherwise you only have yourself to blame if you leave without the knowledge you need."

Sometimes this motto is used outside the normal circumstances of a teacher-student relationship. And it may still apply. But there is an inherent flaw, if this motto is used as a legitimate argument that there are no bad questions. Is that really true?

The reason I bring this up is that my youngest daughter asks me some very good questions sometimes. Then there are times when she asks me bad questions. I thought about this. Am I simply judging those questions bad because I don't like them, or am I picking up a general principle? After considering all sorts of questions by all sorts of people, and noticing that Jesus answered bad questions differently, I conclude that there is a general principle here. Bad questions do exist.

He's what I've discovered. Bad questions are not bad simply because they are not formed well. When that happens, questions may be communicated badly, but that doesn't make them bad. What makes questions bad is mostly the intent.

But first, let's define the purpose of questions. Previously I said the motto, "There are no dumb questions," is something that is mentioned to encourage questioning. And the reason this is important is that understanding will be enhanced when questions are asked and answered, which encourages dialog. Therefore the purpose of questions is to encourage dialog and increase understanding. Ultimately it helps to bring clarity whether there are good answers or not.

Bad questions are designed not to do this. In fact, they are formed to do just the opposite. They are designed to bring confusion and chaos. How can you tell? Well, it's all in the intent.

Here's some samples of what makes questions bad:

1. Questions where the intent is to not comprehend the answer. People sometimes ask questions to never arrive at any understanding, because they don't want to for whatever reason.


2. Questions which are designed to simply trap the one being asked. Sometimes people want to use trickery to get their own way. It has nothing to do with clarity, just a "gotcha" is sufficient.


3. Questions people use to shape their public image. They don't ask to increase knowledge or to understand. They desire to appear in a certain way, and that's what motivates them.


4. Last, questions that are only for entertainment. The questioner likes to hear herself, or wants to make people say something silly. There is no value in these questions other than amusement.

Although bad questions exist, not all questions that appear bad are really bad. Sometimes we feel trapped by a question because it is actually a good question. It may bring clarity to bad assumptions we hold. Sometimes a question is truly clever and adept at getting to the core of an issue. Sometimes questions seem silly, but if thought about, may have profound significance.

So, how can you tell? It's often revealed in how the questioner responds to your answer or when you return a question to them.…

Continue reading...

Why Living the Christian Worldview is Sometimes Difficult

Last time I discussed how the Christian worldview affects my career perspective. I concluded that living this way is not always easy.

Gray areas.

One of the reasons it is not always easy is that there are gray areas. There are things I personally don't believe are true, yet many others do believe are true and right. Also the Word of God may not specifically deal with those issues either. So, I have to make a decision based on personal conviction, rather than on whether it is a direct worldview contradiction or not.

The reason these gray areas exist is because I don't embody the truth, as much as apprehend it. I can come to the knowledge of the truth, but I cannot express it in it's totality. I can only express aspects of it and hold to what I do understand.

However, there is One through whom the Christian worldview is most sincerely represented. Jesus is the embodiment of all truth. Therefore, I choose to come to him, to follow him, to pay attention to him, and to believe him. He is the embodiment of the worldview I embrace.

Conflict.

Another reason living this way can be difficult is that it is often in conflict with other people's sensibilities. It is offensive to live like other people's worldviews are wrong. It seems friendlier to pretend that everybody's worldview is a personal heritage or preference rather than a comprehensive perspective on reality.

Seeing truth in this manner will cause friction. In other words, this leads to conflict. It is unavoidable. And most people want to avoid conflict — me included.

Immaturity.

And last, I, and others like me, still have to grow in truth. Ever since I became a follow of Christ, I've adopted his perspective on reality. But, not all at once. I had to learn, develop, and grow in my faith. And to do this not only in knowledge, but also in my conviction and confidence.

And I am still maturing. This process will never end. And this process is both from God, and through personal effort. But it is well worth it.…

Continue reading...