I suppose it all depends on who you ask. Many skeptics would suggest it’s true, that I wouldn’t be able to objectively assess arguments critical against Christianity (not that I’ve been offered any). On the other hand, I would suggest it wouldn’t. Of course, most people likely don’t think they’re so biased that they can be objective when considering any particular issue. However, in this area, I think I can demonstrate that at least in principle, I’m likely to be objective.
You see, I’m not wedded to Christianity. Let me explain. I think it’s true, but I don’t need it to be true. Many people do. It’s part of who they are, part of their very fabric. But I haven’t been a Christian my entire life; I wasn’t raised in a Christian home. So I don’t think I’d lose ‘who I am’ if it were shown to be that my religious convictions were false. Of course I’d be surprised, but I wouldn’t be destroyed.
I believe Christianity is true because I have been convinced that it is. It’s not a feeling I have, it’s not an emotional conviction. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever had what I’d describe as a ‘spiritual’ experience. In other words, I’m not emotionally attached to this, so I don’t feel a need to preserve my faith at all costs if and when confronted with arguments undermining it.
So I’m willing to consider anything that might lead me to what’s true. My life’s philosophy has always been: I’d rather be correct and uncomfortable than wrong and happy (or ignorant) about it. I could deal with having been mistaken for the last decade or so, it wouldn’t be the first time. I’d get over it, especially if it meant I was now right. That’s always been somewhat of a character flaw of mine. If I’m wrong, I want to know. I like being right.