Why Christianity is the correct religion

[krazkarla]

That last line was the finisher...
"Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became Man "

LET'S GO HOLY SPIRIT!
SPEAK TO AND THROUGH YOUR CHILDREN.
AMEN!

[WhaleManMan]

Damn he about to settle this in 3 minutes

[wraves]

"Many Men have tried to be God, but only one God became Man" PREACH 🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

[bestgam]

It's the moment when you can tell the video will be based without watching it

[johnmacleod]

You're coming at it from an entirely christian perspective

[nebuchadnezzar]

This argument is heavily flawed. You're basically creating the criteria for the correct religion so that it fits to Christianity.

[danielgeorge]

‘Many men have tried to become God, but only one God became man’ 🥶

[TheOmniverseYT]

Well yeah, if you start by saying that the principles of Christianity are the best, then obviously you'll come to the conclusion that Christianity has the best principles.

[rustyavacado]

Ex athiests here, most religions point to Jesus, "the messiah" has been predicted thousands of years and then a man exactly like the prophecy described comes along? Most other religions goals are to beleive Jesus was either a prophet or just lied about who he was..but they still include him, that's why I started beleiving...too many coincidences

Also! I'm personally agnostic now, I just do find it coincidental how many religions point to christ..just a little knowledge of mine

[pagaun]

Its like circular reasoning:
1. The correct religion is the one who gets man closest to god.
2. Christianity is the religion that bests get man closest to god.
Therefore,
3. Christianity is the correct religion.

The answer to point 2 is already in point 1.
¿What about evidence?. ¿Shouldnt the correct religion the one who has the best evidence for its claims?.

[NoobBot]

"Christianity is the only real one because I like how it sounds the most"💔

[brotkopf]

Video Summary: "A Christian describes the world in terms of the Christian worldview and wonders why only Christianity fits into this model"

The video begins with the arbitrary presuppositions that
1. There is a "correct religion";
2. There is a single "goal of religion";
3. Every religion attempts to answer the question of how to approach God;
4. God is "there" and we are "here";
etc.
Zero intellectual work has been done to settle on non-obvious concepts; only points from Christian theology are taken as a basis. One presuppositional error on top of another.

What does "infinite God" and "finite man" even mean? (0:35) Zero explanation. It's a set of random pretty words. Are you sure that's true of any religion? Are you even sure the word "God" means the same thing in any religion?

"...but man's sinfulness and evilness proves this" (0:55) And you're sure any religion has a concept of sin/evil?

From this point on, the rest of the video plays church music, and the author, by applying Christian categories, Christian metaphysics, and Christian problematics to all religions, "opens our eyes" to the fact that only the religion about Jesus Christ fits into such a system

"Jesus is the only solution to the problem of Evil" (2:41) Yes, because the problem of evil does not exist outside of Christianity. This is a trivial statement

In short, the video is entirely an attempt to project the Christian worldview onto all other religions. Any analytical philosopher will tell you that this video is no more intellectual than any graffiti on a wall.

It would be interesting to hear what a Christian would respond to the criticism of Christianity's life-denial, to the fact that Christian ethics led to the Enlightenment, which eventually led to atheism, etc.
But no. There are no interesting thoughts in this video. And no, I don't want to see answers to my questions in the comments: I've come to my conclusions, I've had enough

[TheRealMikeyP]

I left Christianity(Catholic) to seek answers from all other cultures/religions.
It took years.

Recently came back and have a home with Orthodox Christianity. Christian culture is simply the best for humanity.

[lavarball]

“Goals of religion” is so arbitrary. A Muslim could just say that God created us to submit our free will to Him and that’s why their religion is the correct one.

[gabrielsthoughts]

Glad I’m not the only one in the comments that see the flaw in his reasoning. He set up an outline for what religion is based on his own comprehension (leaving out atheism and including Buddhism?), but that very outline is predetermined to be filled by Christianity. It’s such a close-minded view. There was no discussion opportunity for determining what religion is before we could have even tackled the rest of the video to discover if what is presented is to be true. Bothersome.

[weirdlanguageguy]

0:30 this is false: the ability to connect humans to God is not the goal of all religions, and painting an idea of God unique to Christianity as THE idea of god so that you can introduce Christianity as the only way to logically experience Christianity’s version of god is begging the question.

[hieuphungminh]

It’s cheating when the question is formed based on the answer. I believe a religion is created when we try to answer “What am I? Why am I here? How am I came to be?”

[Sam_Hyde_Apologist]

"It's the correct one because I want it to be"

[lempereur]

The Central False Dilemma
The argument presents a false dichotomy between "all religions trying to reach up to God" versus Christianity's unique solution. This ignores:


Other religions with divine incarnation concepts (e.g., Krishna in Hinduism)
Different theological frameworks for divine-human relationships (e.g., Sufi mysticism)
Non-theistic approaches to transcendence (e.g., Buddhism)
Various religious concepts of divine mediation and intercession


Problematic Logical Structure
The argument follows this pattern:

CopyP1: We need a bridge between infinite God and finite humans
P2: This requires someone who is both God and human
P3: Jesus is both God and human
C: Therefore Christianity is the only true religion
This argument has several issues:

It assumes its own premises (begging the question)
The conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the premises
It presupposes specific theological concepts ("infinite God, " "human sinfulness")


Misrepresentation of Other Religions
The video makes broad generalizations about "all other religions" that are historically inaccurate:


Many religions don't focus on "earning" divine acceptance
Various traditions have concepts of divine grace
Multiple religions have stories of divine sacrifice
Several faiths include concepts of divine-human mediators


The "Uniqueness" Fallacy
The argument claims Christianity is unique because:


God dies for humans
Divine becomes human
Perfect mediator exists
Salvation through grace

However, these concepts appear in various forms across different religions:

Dying and rising gods (Osiris, Dionysus)
Divine incarnations (Avatars in Hinduism)
Divine mediators (Bodhisattvas in Buddhism)
Grace-based salvation (Pure Land Buddhism)


Logical Issues with the Mediator Argument
The argument about needing a mediator has internal consistency problems:

CopyIf God is infinite and humans finite, then:
- How can any being be both?
- If such a being can exist, why is only one instance possible?
- Why couldn't God create multiple mediators?
- Why couldn't God simply choose to relate directly to humans?

The Problem of Evil Response
The video's response to the problem of evil is circular:

CopyP1: We live in a fallen world because we deserve it
P2: Jesus offers forgiveness and future perfection
This doesn't actually address the philosophical problem of evil:

Why would an all-good God create beings who "deserve" evil?
How does future perfection justify present suffering?
Why is suffering necessary for redemption?


Epistemological Problems
The argument starts with "how do we know which religion is correct?" but then:


Assumes Christian theological premises to prove Christianity
Uses Christian concepts to evaluate other religions
Doesn't provide objective criteria for evaluation


Historical Context
The argument ignores the historical development of these ideas:


Early Christian debates about Jesus's nature
Influence of Greek philosophy on Christian theology
Development of incarnation theology
Evolution of salvation concepts


Anthropological Issues
The argument's analogy of relating to different beings (dogs, ants, rocks) oversimplifies:


Different cultures have different concepts of divine-human relationships
Various models of transcendence exist
Multiple frameworks for understanding divine-human interaction

Conclusion:
While the video presents an internally coherent Christian theological argument, it fails as a logical proof for Christianity's unique truth claims. It relies on circular reasoning, false dichotomies, and oversimplified representations of other religions. A more rigorous approach would need to:

Establish objective criteria for evaluating religious claims
Accurately represent other religious traditions
Address the philosophical problems in its own arguments
Acknowledge the complexity of religious experience and truth claims

[Cala_Hanc-bovt]

Q: Why Christianity is the correct religion?
A: Because my religion said so.