Why I am Not Completely Certain that Christianity is True
by C Michael Patton
Indubitable: adj – Beyond the possibility of a doubt; unquestionable
I don’t believe the Christian faith is indubitable, but I do believe that it is true.
I tell this story when talking about the bankruptcy of requiring indubitability before you believe something (Yes, I’ve told this before):
I play this game with my kids that drives them crazy. Sitting in the room, with no one but us, while they are not looking I will slap them on the rear-end and act like I did not do it. They turn and say, “Daddy! I know you did that.” I say, “I did not.” ”Then who did it?” they respond (thinking they have settled the issue with this one question). I say, “A guy ran in the front door and slapped you and then ran out.” They look at me like I am crazy and exclaim, “Daddy! We know you did it.” “Look!” I respond to their skepticism, “The front door is not locked. It is possible that someone could have come in since the door is not locked.” Upon further looks of skepticism, I force them go check the door to see if it is locked. Once they see it is unlocked, I have won the day. I have poked a hole and their certainty and even caused them to confirm it by checking the door. No longer possessing the indubitably that I have required for their epistemic verification, they now have lost poise in their former confidence. In other words, I tricked them into thinking that one has to be absolutely certain about something before it can be believed.
Ideas about the value of certainty are currently on the theological stage of debate. With the intellectual challenges of the so-called “new atheism,” some Christians are opting for a fidist approach to the faith (ignore the evidence, just believe). Others, however, are responding to their challenges with precise and cutting vigor. However, many are on wild goose chases checking doors to see if they are locked and becoming frustrated, even doubting, when they find that the door is not locked.
Objection: “You can’t be certain that Christianity is true. One scholar has proposed Christianity borrowed from other ancient religions to get its story.”
Response: Oh great. Yes, most people don’t believe this, but what if this one scholar is right? What does this mean for my faith?
Objection: “You can’t be certain Christ rose from the grave since his body might have been stolen.”
Response: I supposed this could be true. Though there does not seem to be any evidence for this, it might have been stolen. What does this mean for my faith?
Objection: “It would seem you have a problem since there are two angels in one resurrection account and only one in the other. Which one is it?”
Response: While they both agree that Christ rose from the grave, should I continue to believe when these two accounts cannot agree on this most basic detail?
Objection: “Stephen Hawking said that a black hole could have created our universe out of nothing.”
Response: I have no idea what this means, but what if Hawking is right? He is a very smart man.
Often, a skeptical world will will provoke us with the reality that we cannot be indubitably certain about any of our beliefs because of the infinite amount of alternative possibilities. No matter how unlikely these alternative possibilities are we find ourselves spending time defending against positions that are well beyond tipsy in their stability. When people poke “holes” in our beliefs with arguments that are no better than “look, the door is not locked” we find ourselves missing the big picture, backed into a corner seriously discussing the security of the door.
How do we get here? Glad you asked…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>
Why I am Not Completely Certain that Christianity is True | Parchment and Pen
/ 
/ 
/ 
You state: “Objection: “It would seem you have a problem since there are two angels in one resurrection account and only one in the other. Which one is it?””
Why is this hard to believe? Can it be that in one account they writer has only seen one or that only one was the dominate one in speaking? While, the second account saw two angels there. Also, the time frame is not stated. There could have been two at one hour and later that day, the second one left. Therefore, only one angel was there. It does not state that both of the books written with both of the writters present at the same time and seeing the same event at the same present moment.
Just like you claim to have the objective truth that you did not slap your kids on their rear end, you know that there an ultimate truth to what happened, there is an ultimate truth of what happened at the tomb. Imagine if your kids opened the front door, and saw some one running down the street. Now, would you doubt yourself that you slapped the kids or that the person running down the street really did do it? Now, all parts of your second story line up with what you told your kids, so would the conclusion actually be that the person running actually did do it or would your objective truth actually be true?
Also, the body of Jesus would not have been stolen, the Roman guards would make sure of that, since they stood guard and if the body would to be stolen, their lives would be no more. Also, the tomb was sealed with the Roman seal. If that would to be broken, the one(s) responsible would be killed. Also, the Jews would love to have the body found, Then they would definitely could prove that Jesus was a fake.
Why would the desciples want Jesus to be alive if he really was not? What did they get in return? Didn’t all of them, except John (Attempted to be boiled alive but survived) ended up being murdered for there faith of Jesus? What would it take for your own younger brother to believe that your older brother is really God? Would seeing him alive after witnessing his death on the cross be proof enough?