Tim Maas Supporter Retired Quality Assurance Specialist with the U.S. Army

The first thing I would say is that, although other cultures may have accounts similar to the story of Christ, Christ (in my opinion) is unique among them because of His appearance and specific events of His life having been foretold in writings that existed hundreds or even thousands of years before He was born.

Second, the events surrounding the gospels do not have any trace of the mythological or legendary about them, especially to a student of world history. They occurred in the very "real world" political environment of the Roman Empire, and identified participants in their events by name who can be proven to have existed.

Third, the manner and the relatively short span of time in which Christianity grew from being a small sect in Palestine to the state religion of the Roman Empire in spite of opposition and persecution (including times in which there were still people living who could have refuted Christianity's basic beliefs if they were not based on true, factual events) speaks to the veracity of those beliefs.

Fourth, why could those similar accounts among other cultures and religions not be taken as a further sign of Christianity's truth? The existence of such accounts would to me be strong evidence of an original truth as their basis. Christian apologist C. S. Lewis said in his book Mere Christianity (which I would recommend to any Christian) that one of the ways in which God had revealed His existence to these other cultures was by giving them "good dreams" (that is, these similar accounts) as a means of pointing them toward the dreams' complete fulfillment in Christ.

In the end, a person's decision to accept or reject the accounts contained in the Old and New Testaments is a matter of the will. For a truly objective observer, there is more than sufficient evidence to support the uniqueness of Christ, and His identity as God incarnate.

December 21 2016 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report