But have you tried any other religions? Ive always thought that if I studied the Bible and learnt about Christianity, I would think it was true as well. But if I studied any other religions in depth, I would think the same of them. Haven't you ever realized that if you were born in a different country or had different parents, friends or influences, you would believe in one of the other hundreds of religions. You would be saying the same about that religion. That the evidence is good enough for me. That I'm convinced its true. That is pretty scary to me.
Sure, there's some truth to the idea that I have the religion I have partly because of accidents of history. Were I born in India, perhaps I'd find Hinduism or Islam more compelling than Christianity simply because of the culture I was raised in. If things were different, they just wouldn't be the same.
But what am I supposed to do in light of this? Do nothing in the face of my own deeper need to understand my world and situate myself within it? Should I therefore ignore the claims made by the religions closer to hand than those far away? I don't see why. And the beautiful thing about the modern western world is that no decision goes unchallenged. Christianity makes sense to me and accords with the evidence. But I've got loads of atheists, New Agers, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, animists, spiritists, and <insert favorite religion here> with whom I can interact and who challenge me either implicitly or explicitly. So there actually is plenty of opportunity and reason to make comparisons between Christianity and other religions on an ad hoc basis. I've taken those opportunities, and, so help me, Christianity still comes out favorably.
So everyone is wrong and is going to be punished just because they have heard of the gospel and rejected it? If god is one bit fair, then this cant be true.
You're exactly right.
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but Ive always heard that the number one rule is that you "believe". But we don't choose what we want to believe in, at least I certainly don't. So how can I be doing something wrong, if I'm not choosing to reject Christ? Don't you realize that for some people it is just a lot harder to believe? What about someone who was brought up in another religion? What about someone like me, who was brought up without religion and lives in a society where religion is almost dead? Ive certainly heard of the gospel, but Ive also heard of many other religions. I know to you, Christianity is important, but to me it is just another religion. I have absolutely no reason to pick it. So I guess I am rejecting Christ, but it cant be a bad thing. Because even if you were in my situation, you would be doing the same. I hope you understand what I mean.
I get it. I really do. I was in a situation much like yours, but eventually I did investigate Christianity and found that it simply made sense more than other views. And like you, I don't have a sense of having chosen Christianity of my own accord. It's more like
it got hold of
me. So to an extent, I share your worry about how God can be fair in judging me for a failure to believe in light of the fact that I can't just up and believe something that seems flat wrong (as Christianity appears to you, perhaps). May I suggest that you read the first three chapters of Paul's
Letter to the Church at Rome? It addresses this worry fairly directly.
I called Jesus "random" because that is exactly what he is. There are hundreds and hundreds of other religions with people like Jesus in them.
Here, you're merely reinforcing my original statement.
I have no religion at the moment, so to call Jesus a "random person" is a perfect description. I dont mean a random person like everyone in the world. I mean a random person in comparison to all of the other hundreds of religions, that are equal to Christianity. I know it might be hard for you as a Christian to think of Jesus as just a random religious figure, but that is all he his.
Again with the reinforcement. On what basis do you say that Christianity is equal to all the others? You're going completely on presumption here. Has no one taken the time to explain to you the uniqueness of Jesus? Are you unaware that if there had been no Jesus, there would have been no Christianity? You might be able to substitute another person as the initiator of other religions, but such a substitution wouldn't work for Christianity. So there's no sense in which the word "random" fits this particular case.
