Showing that Christianity is Authentic

I had a great time with the youth last night probing the authenticity of Christianity.

First, we made up our own religion. I asked several questions about what they wanted their religion to have - from how many gods to whether or not we'd have idols to features of our holy book and what the religion would require of its members. There were two full pages of questions, which were geared toward creating a religion that would attract as many people as possible, and to be the most palatable to us. Plus we just wanted the religion to be a humanly logical as possible.

This may sound like heresy, but first, our students are sharp enough to know what I'm getting at, and second, they were quick to note when what they said wasn't really theologically true.

Then we compared their answers to the features of Christianity, and of course, we came up with a radically different religion than Christianity. We ended up with three "gods" - but they were not complete in themselves. We rejected having any hard-to-fathom realities (like a Trinity, losing your life to save it, a leader who is fully God and fully man), and salvation was based on the whims of the gods, who had to be placated and pleased (especially the "god" who was insecure!). We allowed sin, because that would attract more members. We only had 9 authors of the holy book, and they had to collaborate together in order to get their story straight, and still they had to run their writings past the gods. We would promise potential new members an easy life, not a hard life. There were many more features especially geared toward trying to make our religion popular. (By the way, all infidels are to be burned if they don't accept this religion.)

The point of the exercise was to show that no one would ever make up Christianity. If you were to make up a religion, the chances are incredibly small that you make up something that resembles Christianity. No one would make up a Trinity (a key doctrine that we can't even fully comprehend), no one would write about the first followers of the religion as a bunch of dunderheads (like the apostles are in the Gospels), no one would say you have to die to yourself as part of membership, no one could have a completely consistent holy book written by over 40 different authors over 1500 years from different languages and cultures (and some writing without the knowledge of what the others were writing), and so on down the line. We didn't ground our religion in historical events, because they could be proven wrong. Our "gods" wanted glory because they don't already have all glory. The list goes on. (We say "no one" - theoretically someone could do one or two, but the point is that if you were going to make up a religion, you wouldn't make up all the things Christianity is.)

It was also important to note that the group couldn't agree on the features of the religion. They were all in the same room at the same time from the same culture speaking the same language, and they could not agree on the features of their religion, even when they were told to. Furthermore, not even the three "gods" could agree! Each had their own ego, and they each advocated for the features they wanted, especially those that would benefit the self most.

Christianity is not something that man would make up for himself. It demands too much of the self, it defies our ability to comprehend, it does not allow us to earn anything, it has a holy book that could never be created by a committee but simultaneously bears the marks being written both by God and by men. Christianity is not geared to become as large as possible, but as pure as possible, which automatically means that most people will reject it. It paints its first leaders not as saints but as societal nobodies who get it wrong more than they get it right. You don't make this stuff up.

I found it particularly fascinating that the main leader of this new religion had to be attractive, charismatic, and have a good voice. Scripture is clear that Jesus was plain in appearance. Scripture is also clear that the Antichrist will be particularly good looking and charismatic.

What we did end up with was a religion that resembles every other religion in the world except Christianity. That's no accident.

Showing That God Exists Without Using the Bible

The Youth have been studying the book of Acts on Wednesday nights, seeing over and over again how much believers can accomplish when they just have confidence that God's Word is true and that the Holy Spirit will actively build the Church. This week, we were in the second part of chapter 17, where Paul is in Athens (the other Athens) engaging the philosophers on Mars Hill (also called the "Areopagus"). Paul knew that his normal message of how Jesus is the Messiah anticipated in the Old Testament would not work on these philosophers who knew little to nothing about the Old Testament. Instead, Paul preaches the same Gospel, but in a completely different way - in a way that did not refer to the Old Testament at all.

Discussing this passage, the students thought about ways to present the Gospel today without referring to the Bible specifically - which we need to know how to do in an age when the Bible is not universally regarded. There have been volumes written on how to do this - there are even writings from before Christ on how to demonstrate that God exists without using the Scriptures as proof.

Below is a quick summary of one such argument. Space does not allow a full explanation of this approach, but a summary will still give you a good idea of how the argument goes. Just like Paul's approach in Athens 2000 years ago, the approach starts with statements that the audience will readily agree with. Each step, however, should be discussed in much more detail when sharing this with others.

1. Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
2. The universe has a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
4. At the beginning of the universe, matter, energy and time also began.
5. Therefore, the cause of the universe cannot be comprised of matter or energy, and cannot be bound within time.
6. The universe bears evidence of design (this statement needs a lot of explanation for skeptics)
7. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be intelligent.
8. The existence of the universe is not necessary (it could have been the case that the universe never came into existence).
9. Therefore, the cause of the universe must have a will.
10. The universe exhibits beauty (ahthough beauty is subjective and could be accidental).
11. Therefore, it is likely that the cause of the universe appreciates beauty.
12. Since the cause of the universe has intelligence, a will, and likely emotions, the cause of the universe is a Being with personhood.
13. Also from evidence of the universe, we can discern that this Being is very powerful (or even omnipotent), very large (or even omnipresent), and very intelligent (or even omniscient).

So far, we have established that a Being (whom we can call "God") exists. We haven't proven it beyond all possible doubt, but at least we have shown that believe in the existence of God is rational. We have not shown, however, anything about Jesus or His Gospel.

1. The universe is finely tuned to allow life to exist (there is a lot of evidence to support this, which may be necessary to reference).
2. Therefore, God demonstrates care and concern for living creatures.
3. The basic human condition includes struggles with the existence of evil and the reality of death.
4. The nature of the universe suggests that God would be aware of man's basic condition, and furthermore, would have care and concern for it.
5. Question: Based on what we can tell about God from the universe, would you think that He would be the kind of God who would do nothing about man's basic condition, or would He be the kind of God who would do something? (If they say "nothing", then you may have to continue on the assumption that He would do something.)
6. Explore the major world religions with the one you're talking to and openly discuss which of these most effectively deals with man's basic condition. (Christianity is the only religion that offers a complete solution that fits with all we've discussed so far.)

If you can successfully walk someone through to this point, then the next step is crucial. People won't likely believe in Christ because they feel worked into a philosophical corner. So, we don't want to badger them into trying to make a decision. Simply tell them, "All we've done so far is to show that belief in Jesus is rational. So, let's conduct a spiritual experiment. Live life for the next month on the assumption that this is all true - just as an experiment. Do everything under the assumption that Jesus is who the Bible claims - follow the ways of righteousness, pray (even if you're praying to a God you don't fully believe in, yet), confess and repent, and so on. Experimentally live as you would if you knew for sure all this was true - and then after a month, assess whether or not you want to seriously explore the claims of Christ."

This is a lot fo information, and I don't expect you to absorb all of it at once. Rather, save this article and become familiar with the basic points, and when you find opportunities, explore one or two items with someone in conversation. When you become more and more familiar with the concepts, you'll find that you can talk with people about the God who exists without being preachy or pushy.

(Thanks to Dr. Doug Geivett for the idea of the "spiritual experiment".)