Chris Rodgers

15 years ago, as a rabid atheist, I met a Greek Orthodox Christian at a function and we started to talk about religion (I have never met this person again). I told him that you had to be really stupid to hold any religious belief. I was a rational man, and couldn't come to believe in made up fairy tales. Religion was not falsifiable. It was all untestable claims about the universe with no value. To my surprise, he didn't argue, he didn't seem moved. He stated: "I agree". And upon gazing over my confused face for a second, he continued. "All religions are unfalsifiable, but one: Christianity" He then quoted the letter of St. Paul to the Romans, where St. Paul states that if Jesus didn't rise from the dead, we are worse than fools. And explained that the central claim of Christianity rests on a historical claim, not a metaphysical one. Amidst people over the centuries trying to distill Christianity to a moral set of teachings, a way of life, a philosophy, Christians keep insisting: well sure, you can do all of that. But we gather here because Christ rose from the dead. And if He didn't, we are worse than fools. I replied that I had to concede on his premise: this was a falsifiable claim. But it was also a false claim, obviously so. So we agreed on one more thing: they were all fools! Almost a decade later, I spent a long time - more than a year, looking deeply into the evidence for Christ's resurrection, I was convinced that by far, the hypothesis that best explained the totality of the facts was that The Word became flesh, and after his death by crucifixion, rose from the dead. It wasn't an easy psychological process because so much of my identity rested on being the smart rational guy that was above all the superstitious nonsense. And because it wasn't easy for me, I know it is not easy for most. Even for most of that year in which I looked at the evidence, it still all felt obviously false. The two things that flipped me the most were: 1) My realization that I was in a sense guilty of the circularity that I accused many religious people of: I *knew* a priori that the resurrection was impossible because well, it is impossible. By already assuming this explanation was out, every other was immediately better. But once I opened myself to the possibility that it could be true, however unlikely, it changed things completely for me 2) My realization that I had to look at the totality of evidence instead of expecting that each piece of evidence on its own would explain the whole thing. Funny enough I didn't apply this standard to anything else, but applied to the claim of the resurrection. It was a confusing time for me but I then decided that if that was true, I couldn't just sit idly and had to do something about it. This all happened around 6 years ago. And I am here to tell you that after 2,000 years, this crazy claim survives for a reason: it is true. And if it isn't, I am worse than a fool. Which you likely think I am, like I thought of that unnamed person whom I never met again. I don't talk about it often and as a rule of thumb don't argue about it woth anyone, because as I learned with my own experience going through it, the frame of mind matters. Something has to click (this is true for all big mental shifts, not just this one) Perhaps you are a recent follower of mine, and lost all respect for me now - as I would have done back then. But I pray to the Lord that at least for some of you, I can be the small crack that opens the dam of the truth for you. Know that Jesus Christ, God made flesh, loves you. And he offered himself in sacrifice for you.