“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32).
In a debate, an atheist appealed to a claimed impossibility of finding an unseen, spiritual God in a totally naturalistic world. In contrast, his Christian counterpart made repeated reference to his own rebirth as evidence for God and Christianity. Did either one get the point? I wonder.
These are days when exclusive Christian claims don’t go over well. First of all, religious experience is cheap because religious authority is an easy invention in the human mind. So why shouldn’t every individual have the right to his own religious ideas? Besides, who would you be to suggest your religion is better than mine? I encounter an ongoing flow of people with a mixed religious bag, assembled out of a personal wish list of what God should be like.(Reminds me of the charms that a witch doctor would assemble.)
But why not just come down to the obvious? If God is concocted in the minds and experiences of men and women, then God is not God at all. The god-maker is of necessity greater than his god. Such a god dies when his maker dies, since he never existed except in the mind of his maker. From such a beginning, is there any difference whether one puts his faith in a door knob, in the full moon, or in some vague “man upstairs”? Any “gods” in this range are simply bogus. There is no truth in them now, and they will not save in the end. A lot of thinking people intuitively know this, and quickly dismiss all religious experiences out of hand.
If Christianity is just one more of these invented “isms,” then the debater’s claimed spiritual rebirth is yet another disgusting tool to persuade people of that which is not. The question then is not whether the Christian debater is or was saved. It must rather be in definable, unchanging, historically grounded evidence that such a salvation is even possible.
In one single objective assessment lies the answer — who is Jesus Christ?
The rest is here!