How Do We Know Christianity Is True?

crosses

I was asked this question by a young man.

Hello Pastor Zahnd. I have a question; I hope you can give me some input. I recently became friends with people of the Muslim practice. We exchanged what our beliefs were and how they differ. (In a friendly way.) But this thought has ached at me for months now. How do we know, as Christians, we are correct? How do we know our religion, our denomination, our practice is correct?

S.

Here is my answer

Dear S.,

You have asked an important and complicated question. How do we know that our religion is correct?

Of course, we have valid reasons to be a bit uncomfortable about the implications within the question. It’s disconcertingly easy for the Pakistani Muslim, the Indian Hindu, the Thai Buddhist, the Israeli Jew, and the American Christian to each simply assume that their native religion is the true one. So is it just a matter of geographical luck if you happen to end up in the true religion? After all, the vast majority of Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and Christians did not undertake an objective study of comparative religions and arrive at a conclusion. No, they were born into a family and nation where their particular religion was culturally dominant. (Yes, every religion has its converts from other religions, but these make up a tiny minority.)

But am I suggesting that we should engage in an objective study of comparative religions? No. In fact, I think such an undertaking is impossible. Not inadvisable, but literally impossible. You can only experience a religion by being a believer within the faith and practice of that religion. Religion cannot be approached objectively. The very nature of religion prevents this. For example: One can be thoroughly versed in the teachings of the New Testament (a scholar even) and be well acquainted with Christian theology and worship, church history and practice and still not believe. Which is to say it is thoroughly possible to be an expert on Christianity and not be a Christian. Bart Ehrman would be an example. (And Bart Ehrman would agree.) Or to say it another way: I could become an expert on the Koran and Islam, but that alone would not make me a Muslim. Faith is the essence of religion, not empirical knowledge. We cannot study religions like we do insects. Well, we can, but being an expert on grasshoppers does not make you a grasshopper. And being an expert on Hinduism doesn’t make you a Hindu. Religious faith is a subjective experience — not objective empirical knowledge.

Which is to say you don’t know what it means to be a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Jew, Christian…until you are one! And to be one, is to not be the other. So comparison becomes impossible.

The modern, sloppy notion that we can mix-and-match religions like we do pants and socks is utter nonsense. The modern person who says, “I’m a Buddhist-Hindu-Muslim-Christian” is in reality a secularist wearing religious accessories. The truth is they know virtually nothing about what it means to actually be a Buddhist or a Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian.

The nature of religion based in faith makes the comparative religion project ultimately impossible.

To be an adherent of a religion is to believe, and faith is not an object of empirical inquiry.

I believe Jesus is risen from the dead. But I cannot prove it.

(I do believe the resurrection is the most reasonable explanation for the empty tomb and the rise of Christianity, but it cannot be proven.)

I have my own subjective experience with the risen Christ. But I cannot prove it. I can only witness to it. It will be up to my hearers as to whether or not they believe my witness.

That which actually makes me a Christian is nothing that can be empirically proved…which is why it’s called faith!

(Attempting to worship at the altar of Christ and the altar of empiricism at the same time creates the terrible conundrums suffered by modern Western Christians — ultimately one must be subordinate to the other.)

Furthermore, in the framing of your question you hint at an additional problem. If we want to empirically “know” that Christianity is the true religion, that leads us to the next question: Which Christianity? Orthodox? Catholic? Anglican? Protestant? Evangelical? OK, let’s say you choose Evangelical. Which Evangelical? Baptist? Which Baptist? (There’s hundreds of species of Baptist!) You see the problem. With an empiricism-based approach to religion you wind up in the dead-end alley of “I’m right and everybody else is going to hell.” Which I think you are instinctively trying to avoid.

So what are we to do?

We are to believe in Jesus.

By a leap of faith we believe in Jesus because of our own subjective (and unverifiable to anyone else) experience with the risen Christ.

I only believe in “Christianity” because I have come to believe in Jesus.

I don’t spend a lot of time (none really) arguing with a Muslim or Hindu that Christianity is “correct” and Islam and Hinduism are “wrong.” That’s always going to be a dead-end.

I do talk about Jesus. I do tell the gospel stories. I do witness to my own experience with Jesus.

In other words, I put my faith in Jesus to personally reveal himself to other individuals in a way that only he can. It’s not my task to prove Jesus or Christianity. I am simply a witness to Jesus. And Jesus will have to do the heavy lifting. Jesus will have to prove himself.

So in a technically empirical sense I do not “know” that Christianity is correct as compared with any other religion. But I don’t need to. I know Christ. Non-empirically. Subjectively. Personally. By the Spirit. And this is enough. More than enough.

If Jesus can’t prove himself, then Christianity is not worth proving.
To the Christian who feels the need to anxiously defend Christianity in an empirical sense vis-á-vis other religions I want to say this: Just know Jesus. That’s enough. Just witness to Jesus. That’s all you can do. If Jesus can’t prove himself, then Christianity is not worth proving. I believe Jesus can prove himself — he can make himself known. He made himself known to me. And that’s all I can say.

I hope this helps.

Blessings,

Pastor Brian

P.S. I recommend being friends with everyone you can be friends with!

  • http://www.fivedills.com Greg Dill

    It’s important to know that God is on mission too. He doesn’t rely on Christians alone to make himself known. We believe. We tell. But, we don’t convert people. God changes the heart of man. And, God is on mission. He is already at work in places where we would least expect it.

  • http://brianzahnd.com Brian Zahnd

    Amen, Greg.

  • Derick

    BZ, do you think that post-modernism is helping direct us westerners away from empirical-based religion? Also, is the quest for the historical Jesus a worthwhile enterprise for Christians?

  • http://brianzahnd.com Brian Zahnd

    Yes. Post-modernity is a much needed and welcome critique of arrogant empiricism. It’s not the answer itself, but it does us a service in cutting modernity down to size. Much of Western Christianity accepted empiricism’s terms and tried to accommodate Christianity to it — giving us the Josh McDowell style of apologetics. This project was doomed from the start and should be abandoned.

    There may be reason for being suspicious of the quest for the historical Jesus (C.S. Lewis certainly was), but as long as folks like N.T. Wright are leading the quest I’m good with it.

  • http://twitter.com/Coltenbarnaby Coltenbarnaby

    Apostle Zahnd, great article! I absolutely agree with you, however, there is a question that haunts me and I’d like to hear your response. You said, “By a leap of faith we believe in Jesus because of our own subjective
    (and unverifiable to anyone else) experience with the risen Christ.” I agree that it has to be our own existential encounter with the risen Christ that draws us to the community of faith and that that experience is unverifiable to anyone else, but what if it is unverifiable to myself as well? Now, I’m a 4th generation pentecostal preacher’s kid with my own degrees in theology and currently work in full time ministry. But, to be honest there is no actual experience I have to reflect on; I have no encounter that is even somewhat self-verifiable. I believe that I encounter the risen Christ around the table each Sunday; I believe that I encounter Him in community with those I worship with. But despite the fact that I confess those encounters I cannot verify them within my own self. I have no real reason to believe that those claims are true. I keep confessing those things, however, because I am going to take up some narrative whether I like it or not. I am going to believe something, so i might as well believe the story that makes the world make the most sense to me. I stay Christian because like Lewis said, “I believe in Christianity as I
    believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because
    by it I see everything else.” Except that I don’t even necessarily see it itself.

    Do you think that is acceptable? What critiques of my thought process might you have?

  • http://brianzahnd.com Brian Zahnd

    I absolutely think it’s acceptable! In fact, while writing this little piece I was aware that I might be giving the wrong impression that I think a “dramatic conversion” is necessary. A “dramatic conversion” is necessary only when something has gone dramatically wrong. Your comment adds some needed balance. The Gospel, the Jesus Story, the Christian meta-narrative is what enables you to make sense of your own existence and give your life an ultimate telos. You need no other justification than that — for yourself or anyone else. And what if a Muslim makes the same claims regarding Muhammad and Islam? Well, so be it. My response to differing religious claims — as my post says — is to simply tell the Jesus story and let Jesus fend for himself. I don’t need to get into a “my religion founder can beat up your religion founder” argument or try to convince someone that my religious experience is legit and theirs is not. I confess and witness to Christ. The rest is up to him.

    The panicked need to “prove” faith, gain certitude, and win a multi-faith smack-down seems to indicate that what is called “faith” is really “fear.” It’s easy to get those two mixed up. Behind triumphalism lurks the specter of doubt. Faith in Christ does not need to be propped up by empirical proofs and cultural dominance. I suspect that those that make the most noise along the lines that “Christianity is true and Islam is of the devil” are unconsciously letting us know how insecure they really are in their faith.

    Or something like that.

    BZ

  • Pingback: Why Do I Believe? Why do you? « This Christian Life

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Katie-Taylor/1830306142 Katie Taylor

    I loved this post and completely agree. However, I do have a question. Most of my friends are atheists. And not because they grew up in that kind of household or thought religion was silly, but because of the sheer hypocrisy they see in most Christians and/or bullying they received from leaders in a church. As someone who hangs around people who have been personally very offended by Christianity, but still love hanging around them (because they’re awesome), I get asked weird questions all of the time regarding what makes my religion “right.” Honestly, I don’t know how to answer them and usually change the subject. I’m not very open about my Christianity since it’s a sensitive subject to them and religion doesn’t get brought up a lot, but I don’t know how to respond to their questions regarding why I chose it. I know why I am, that’s for sure. But I have no way to respond to their questions since it’s such a personal thing and took a long time for me to grasp ahold of. Is there really any way to defend your faith to people who have heard the “you’re going to hell” talk throughout their lives?

  • http://brianzahnd.com Brian Zahnd

    Katie,

    Here is a letter I wrote to an atheist friend a few years ago.
    http://brianzahnd.com/2008/01/letter-to-an-atheist/?doing_wp_cron=1361884938.5193209648132324218750

  • http://twitter.com/austinmcnair Austin McNair

    Pastor Brian,

    I really appreciate and love your approach in answering this question.

    A Muslim friend of mine recently asked me what the criteria of deciding between multiple religions would look like to an objective observer (maybe an alien or something). I knew where he was going, and it was a conversation which appeared like it was about to dive deep into the weeds of apologetic and historical criticism. Moreover, my agnostic father, who figured that my conversion as a teenager would just be a phase, wants to challenge Christianity on every account now that he sees me still living it out of faith in Jesus passionately as a twenty-something.

    I think the temptation is to dive into the think tangled weeds of nuanced religious arguments. And while the teleological argument or evidence for the resurrection are not intrinsically negative either, they can become a distraction from pointing to mighty works Jesus. My response to my friend and to my dad has simply been, “I can have this conversation with you. But what I think you really want to see, is a Christian who really lives out what he says he believes.”

    In “Fear and Trembling,” Johannes De Silentio (Soren Kierkegaard) writes about what he would do if he saw a true Knight of Faith. He writes, “But if I knew where there was such a knight of faith, I would make a pilgrimage to him on foot, for this prodigy interests me absolutely. I would not let go of him for an instant, every moment I would watch to see how he managed to make the movements. I would regard myself secured for life, and would divide my time between looking at him and practicing the exercises for myself, and thus would spend all my time admiring him.”

    I believe our friends and family want to see our faith lived out. They want to hear testimony of God’s power. But then comes Storytelling Principle #1: Don’t tell your audience, show them. Instead of mastering our arguments, let’s go experience the power of Jesus ourselves, and live a lives worth imitating.

    Brian, your approach of turning to our experience of the risen Jesus allows us to communicate with real individuals, who have a story of their own. Yet, at the same time, we are being a witness of Jesus, testifying of the works of power we see the Spirit doing in, through, and around us.

    Cheers,

    Austin McNair
    @austinmcnair

  • http://brianzahnd.com Brian Zahnd

    Well done, Austin!

    (“Fear and Trembling” would be in my top 20 most influential books. I would be unable to think about faith as I do now without the assistance of the Great Dane.)

  • http://twitter.com/austinmcnair Austin McNair

    I took a Kierkegaard seminar in my undergrad. It slowly changed everything for me.

    Have you published a most of influential books list anywhere? I’d be very interested in checking it out.

  • http://brianzahnd.com Brian Zahnd

    Yeah, I do that from time to time. It’s always in flux. I can tell you the prominent authors are N.T. Wright, Walter Brueggemann, Søren Kierkegaard, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Renê Girard, Eugene Peterson, Frederick Buechner, Miroslav Volf, David Bentley Hart, C.S. Lewis, George MacDonald, Hans Urs von Balthasar, John Howard Yoder, Stanley Hauerwas.

  • Deborah Ermter

    “I have my own subjective experience with the risen Christ. But I cannot prove it.”
    There’s something so restful about that comment. Thanks for this article :)

  • Terry Glenn

    I just want to take a moment and thank Pastor Zahnd and everyone who has shared comments and experiences and thoughts and advice. This is church! This (while not as good as in person) is community. The comfort, the relief I feel as I read this, knowing how my family in the Christian faith struggle with these same thoughts, it has brought me to tears as I type. My father was a pastor my entire life. He died of cancer at age 57 with countless church members, family and friends surrounding him in prayer. I tend to feel like I’m some uniquely afflicted individual with this circumstance, but we all know it happens everywhere. My heart, mind and soul were ripped to shreds. In the last two years since he died, I have found my faith to be like a firefly floating around in the darkness. I catch a glimpse of it for a second and I run towards it. I reach out and just as my hand closes the light goes out and my hand is empty. Then I fumble around a bit, waiting for the next glow, or sometimes just sit on the ground with my head in my hands. I’ve been interested in christian apologetic study for years now, but since his death it seems like more of a desperation to find some solid ground, some peace. I find comfort, community and encouragement in these posts and I hope you all appreciate the importance of this medium. For someone like me who hasn’t been able to bring himself to attend a church regularly for years now, sometimes this is all the community I’m willing to delve into. I thank you all for it. God bless.

  • http://www.angiewashington.com/ Angie Washington

    And the simple fact that talking about a non-empirical religion sounds boarder-line heretical sends a blaring signal that we need to re-think the way we have been doing things. Thank you for leading with undying kindness and clearly expressed thoughts the way to a new way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/derek.g.shore Derek G Shore

    St. Dallas? (Willard) and maybe Alex Schmemann?

  • Adam

    You killed it. Awesome.

  • Pingback: Can we compare religions? Brian Zahnd

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.moss.1420 Robert Justice-Moss

    That was a wonderful response.

    I would also offer a worldly observation as evidence that Christianity is truth. Have you ever noticed that Christians are the one set of believers who are typically singled out for ridicule, and that ridicule is generally not challenged? We are pressured to be silent about our God and our Savior, while most every other groups seem to get the national free pass. My personal opinion is this reinforces that we, Christians, are not of this world. The world fears our God because He is REAL. They have 2 choices. 1 – Admit that God/Christ exists, and therefore His Word, thereby acknowledging sin, salvation and absolutes. 2. Force us into silence by any means whatsoever, even violence if necessary. As the Church Age winds down, as I believe it is, we see the hate, condemnation and the increasing use of government force. Is Christianity correct? I say, just turn on any major news program for all the evidence you will need.

  • Pingback: Can we compare religions? Brian Zahnd | theinnerjourneys.com

  • Steve Baughman

    With all due respect, I find this to be little more than a dodge, one that replaces “Christianity” with “just know Jesus.” But this move only postpones the tough question, the one that Pastor Brian has shown he really cannot answer; Why believe what you do? Appeals to the “subjective experience with the risen Christ” may be poetic, but they really are just code for “sorry, I like my beliefs and don’t want to subject them to too much evaluation.” After all, subjective experience is the great equalizer, readily available to (and widely abused by) the adherents of all religions. Pastor Brian is in good company here. And if you find yourself feeling uncomfortable with his comments here, good for you. You have spotted the issue.

    I also find the pastor’s quick dismissal of hybrid religion to be overly rigid, and quite ignorant. Who is Pastor Brian to say what it means “to actually be a Buddhist….”? or a Hindu? Many religious practitioners find that different religions have much to offer their own. Many of us mix and match and find that it is spiritually nourishing. That this does not fit Pastor Brian’s idea of what means “to actually be” XYZ, does not make it “utter nonsense.” I would urge Pastor Brian to be a bit more charitable in his pronouncements about the spiritual practices of others, especially given his demonstrated inability to offer good reasons for embracing his own.

    Peace,
    Steve Baughman

  • Steve Baughman

    Colten, good for you for being honest with your doubts. I submit that your having “no account that is even somewhat self-verifiable” is due to the fact that you are not willing to be duped. You are not as quick as most Pentecostals to see Jesus behind every bush. I hope some day you will take your lack of verifiable experience to its proper conclusion; there is nothing there to verify.
    Good luck in your search.
    Steve Baughman

  • Steve Baughman

    With all due respect, I find this to be a dodge. By replacing “Christianity” with “just know Jesus” Pastor Brian has merely postponed the tough question, the one he clearly cannot answer; Why believe what you believe? Appeals to “subjective experience of the risen Christ,” while poetic, are really little more than code for “I like my beliefs and I do not want to subject them to too much evaluation.” Appeals to “subjective experience,” after all, are available to (and widely abused by) adherents of all religions. Pastor Brian is in good company here. If you find yourself feeling uncomfortable with his reasoning, good for you. You have spotted the dodge.

    I also think that his quick dismissal of hybrid religious practices is a bit presumptuous. Who is Pastor Brian to tell us what it means “to actually be a Buddhist…..?” or a Hindu? Many religious practitioners find their spiritual lives much enriched by mixing and matching. The fact that this does not fit Pastor Brian’s idea of what it means “to actually be XYZ” does not make it “utter nonsense.”

    I would respectfully urge Pastor Brian to be a bit more charitable in his view of the spiritual practices of others, especially given his demonstrated inability to offer decent reasons in support of his own.

    Peace,

    Steve Baughman

  • Steve baughman

    Robert, it could also be that Christians are the only major group, in the U.S. anyway, that claims it is the only right one and that tries to get all others to believe as you do. You compliment yourself too much by viewing ridicule as a mark of being right. It could also be a mark of just being ridiculous. Just a thought.