Why I’m not a…

I’m often asked by skeptics why I’m not a member of some other religious belief system.  Is it because of where I was raised?  How do I reject other religions without rejecting my own for the same reasons?  Simple.  There is some deeply-rooted central premise within competing religions which renders them false on their face, even if we disregard the historical problems or details they may present.  The odd thing is, the things that exclude rivals to Christianity are not complex nor are they difficult to arrive at.

Atheism requires logical impossibilities to be true.  Science, beloved science, has proven the universe began to exist.  It came from nothing — real nothing, not the kind of nothing that is actually something.  A thing, i.e., the universe, cannot bring itself into existence, and that’s just the empty space, there’s still the matter to account for.  For Atheism to be true, the universe has to be infinitely old, which is logically impossible (the problem — and impossibility — of the infinite regress), or we have to believe the universe popped into existence from nothing, by nothing, which is worse than magic — and impossible.

Islam is false because according to the Quran, the Quran is false…which means Islam is false.

Mormonism is false because though it claims to bestow salvation and redemption from sin, it is impossible for this to be done according to authoritative Mormon writings.  Not only this, but its founder Joseph Smith, who claimed to have translated the Book of Abraham in a very particular way, also claimed to have translated the Book of Mormon in the same or a similar fashion.  Since his translation of the Egyptian papyri has been shown to be fully false, it follows that his methodology of translation is fatally flawed.  A true translation of the Book of Mormon from the golden plates (if we grant his story) is required for Mormonism to be true.

As they are, I must also reject any religious view that would accept or assert religious pluralism.  The idea that all views of God or religion are more or less true can’t be since some of them claim all other religions are false.  Thus the all roads lead to Rome view of religion fails logically and philosophically.  Pluralism actually affirms religious systems as true which claim pluralism is false and this is philosophically fatal.

I think it’s possible to exclude religious systems from being possibly true when they can’t even get off the ground.  In some cases, as shown above, if they cannot even be possibly true, the rest of their claims can be rejected on that basis alone.  Of course, I would also reject these and other religious systems for other reasons as well, but those other reasons only ice the cake.

When asked what would make me reject Christianity I’ve answered that if it were shown that it can’t even be possibly true, logically speaking, I could renounce my Christian convictions.  I’m always open to arguments which claim to ‘debunk’ Christianity, but most who have that opportunity retreat to ‘it’s not my job’, so I’m still waiting.