A Christian’s attempts to lay a background for discussion
Key question: which is the right religion?
Considerations:
For context, consider broadly what types of religions exist and what god various religions believe in. There are very many different religions, so we can best focus on the ones that have the most followers. There are usually many different branches of the different religions, so initially discussion may best focus on key features that distinguish them. A key concept is different beliefs in our origin, and indeed the origin of the universe. Religions, in explaining that may attempt to provide meaning to life. But fairy stories won’t help; religious faith must be supported by evidence to be worthy of belief.
Review:
Atheism says there is no God, but cannot disprove the existence of God. Atheists express just as much belief as religious people, they just place faith in so-called “science”, or “evolution” or basically in themselves. Note: it is not scientific to rely on evolution to independently result in complex things like ourselves; biologists accept the earth is not old enough to allow sufficient time for random events/mutations to achieve what we can now see. Moreover, evolution needs a living starting point, since science has not been able to produce life from anything inanimate. Some atheists prefer to believe (without any scientific credibility) that life started elsewhere in the universe and was transported to earth. Or (again without any scientific credibility) that we live in one of many different universes and ours happens to be the one in which the laws governing probability conveniently did not govern several necessary stages of evolution. Neither explain origins. For detailed discussion read e.g., John Lennox: God’s Undertaker, Kindle: https://amzn.to/4e4LOzu also Dawkins: The God Delusion, and its (paperback) rebuttal by McGrath: https://amzn.to/4golTo8 ); Ian Hutchinson: Can a Scientist Believe in Miracles? Kindle: https://amzn.to/4gkVxU5
Agnostics say they don’t know if there is a God or not. But like saying you don’t know riding a motorbike may get you killed, refusing to take defensive action is stupid! Ignorance is not an effective excuse. Agnostics still need to give careful thought to the possibility God does exist, and the downside if they ignore that, and the upside if they believe. The right religion should win on evidence, not carelessness. Just the evidence of design in the universe may make agnostic belief evidently unreliable. For further detailed discussion read, e.g., Behe, Dembski, Meyer: Science and Evidence of Design: Kindle: https://amzn.to/3zhdyC1
Putting aside the atheist and agnostic beliefs (which are almost religions to believers in those categories), we can think of the religion options as usually either one that is polytheistic (many gods) or monotheistic (one God), principally: Judaism, Christianity or Islam.
In polytheism no single god is all-sufficient, whereas in monotheism there is one God who is all-powerful, all-knowing and eternal. Buddhism has a plethora of divine beings, but acknowledges no supreme god. Hinduism is also polytheistic in some of its branches, although as a syncretic religion (combining beliefs) it attempts to include monotheists too. These two polytheistic religions have many common features, and their belief systems are both highly complex. They fit the culture and social system in which they thrive. They are religions whose highest objectives are ultimately dependent on works done by their adherents. Their gods are not essentially loving or merciful. Salvation cannot be assured. For further really detailed discussion read: Walter Martin: The Kingdom of the Cults: Kindle: https://amzn.to/4dcZJlQ This book is an ideal starter for anyone serious about comparing religions today. It deals comprehensively with our topics as well reviewing many cults in detail.
In monotheism, the major religions: Judaism, Islam, Christianity, each claim to be worshipping the same God (El, Allah, Theos/God). Islam, only appearing in the 7th century, AD, seems in some ways a corruption of Judaism, as it borrows historical aspects of the earlier Old Testament, re-writing some parts to exalt the line of Ishmael in place of Isaac. It accuses the Jews of failing to obey God’s rules. It imposes harsh requirements on all mankind to obey its teachings, with punishment for failure proportionally worse for Jews (who should have known better!). It endorses physical enforcement of its teachings, including holy war. Like Judaism, it sees Jesus as at best a prophet, but certainly not God in human form. It expects the real Jesus to reappear as a prophet in the end times, whereas Jews consider Jesus an imposter, and the real Messiah’s first appearance is still awaited.
Christianity sprang from Judaism, and sees Judaism as the only legitimate religion that preceded it. The essential difference is that Christians accept that Jesus is the promised Messiah AND is God, while still believing as Jews do, that there is only one God. Jews reject the Christian belief in God being one person expressed in the Trinity. There are also significant differences in beliefs about how sin can be dealt with. Jews believe repeated animal sacrifices are necessary under Moses’ law, but these cannot be made until the temple is rebuilt. Anyway, they still would not assure eternal life; salvation becomes reliant on one’s works, which will finally merit or deny a place in heaven.
Christians hold that Jesus is indeed God, and the substitutionary sacrifice of Himself as a man is the one sacrifice sufficient for God to accept as eternally cleansing the sinner, and belief in Him assures eternal life for the believer. Roman Catholics technically believe this, but impose a complicated burden of sacraments, sacrifices and works, in order to remain saved. The Bible describes being born again through faith in Christ as providing assurance of eternal salvation. It is best to work with that definition of Christianity as a religion to be considered, since without that belief Christianity would be of no benefit over Judaism.
Christianity stands up well at the philosophical level; it is very rational and true to life. That is not the primary reason to become a Christian, however. Really, the decision must stand or fall on who Christ is; is He God, or just a good person (but since He claimed to be God, and a good person who lies is not a good person, either His claim is true or it, and Christianity, should be absolutely rejected).
If God is the designer of the universe and creator of mankind, and if He created mankind with ability to communicate, it is reasonable to believe the Creator would have the ability to communicate too. Logically, that shared ability should then be witnessed. It would be expected that God would speak to mankind and He would be heard and understood. Since such an oral communication would pass with the death of the hearer, it is logical that if the Creator had messages for all subsequent humans, He would ensure His messages were committed to a lasting form of communication, e.g., in written form, as God’s inspired writings. Hence, we must satisfy ourselves that the Christian Bible serves that purpose. If so, we should expect to find within its messages a clear structure for the operation and purpose of Christianity. But that is the next part of the debate!
The above outlines only some preliminary thinking and does not attempt to represent all important aspects. As one interested person to another, this is offered with respect to those with different views, who will have their own right and ability to provide their viewpoints on their own medium.