Why I Am a Christian

Bertrand Russell became famous for his work, "Why I Am Not a Christian." I would like to use his very same arguments to explain why I am a Christian.

Russell said that since the various religions of the world disagree, "not more than one of them can be true." I would agree, but after extensive study of all of them, I find Christianity to be true.

Russell said that a man accepts the religion of the community where he lives, so the influence of environment is what has led him to accept that religion. Looking at it from another perspective, I would say that the influence in question is one of heritage, which Russell might have easily confused with environment. It's the Christian heritage, passed from generation to generation, that has allowed the truth to be conveyed through the centuries.

Russell incorrectly describes faith as "to have a conviction which cannot be shaken by contrary evidence." Actually, faith is simply believing something without seeing it. For example, I believe that things such as wind and gravity exist, even though I cannot see them. If Russell had witnessed the biblical miracle of the ax head floating, I wonder if he would have believed it, even though this was contrary to the concept of gravity.

As with most liberals, Russell incorrectly interprets the constitutional freedom of the separation of church and state. Rather than prohibiting religious influence upon the government, it actually just ensures that no specific religion will be sanctioned by the government.

Russell incorrectly assumes that, if God is real, He is failing to perfect the world. Of course, Russell ignores the fall of man into sin (which he always ignores, by his own freewill, as the destroying factor for the once perfect world. God will indeed perfect the world in eternity, after the passage of time in which He offers salvation by grace to all.

Russell attacks the biblical command to "Judge not...," as a contradiction to having courts of law. This premise, of course, ignores the fact that God is first a God of justice, and He established governments and courts as a way of providing justice in a world of sinful men. His commandments that we should "not judge" are taken out of context here. This refers to us Christians, in that we should not have a condescending attitude which judges the faults of others while ignoring our own shortcomings.

Then Russell attacks Christ's words, "...go and sell everything you own, and give to the poor," citing that this is not widely practiced. Well, just because it's not widely practiced does not mean that it's not valid, especially when again considering the sin of mankind.

Russell says, "Historically, it is quite doubtful whether Christ ever existed at all." This, of course, is not true, because historians have ample evidence of Christ's life on earth, and all reasonable ones agree on His earthly existence, regardless of their religious beliefs.

Russell says, "... it certainly was not very kind to the pigs to put the devils into them and make them rush down the hill to the sea." This, of course, is a desperate attempt to nullify the perfection of Christ, by trying to show an instance where He was unkind. He completely ignores the miraculous deliverance of the man of the Gadarene by taking the typical liberal stance on the "unkind to animals" theme--failing to acknowledge the greater good for the human race which was given dominion over the animals--especially said dominion of Christ.

Russell says that people accept religion on emotional grounds. Unfortunately, I have to agree that many people do, and this is not right. However, the fact remains that the facets of both intellect and faith demonstrate that Christianity is true.

Russell says that religion is based primarily upon fear--fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, and fear of death. Actually, this is partially true, because we must have a certain fear of the one true omnipotent God. Christ conquered all of these other fears on the cross.

Owen Weber 2011