The Problem of Bad Christians

    A common argument against Christianity is the following:  I know this man, and he is a Christian.  He is also a liar and a cheat.  Should I become a Christian and become like him?  I don't think so.  He isn't the only bad Christian I've known.  And then there are all the Christians in the news who have to be thrown in jail because of their crimes.  I shouldn't emulate them, should I?  Finally, religious wars have caused all sorts of pain.  Wouldn't we be able to get along better if there was no religion?

    As it turns out, these questions appeal to our emotions, but they are based in a logical fallacy.  They assume that if one Christian is a bad person, that all Christians are bad people and that all Christians are inferior.  This is the same fallacy as saying that because one African is a murderer that all Africans are murderers and that all Africans are inferior.  This is clearly false.  The question should be the following.  When a person becomes a Christian, does the person become more moral?  Also, when a person ceases to be a Christian, does he or she become less moral?  More importantly, how will you change when you become a Christian?  If you submit to God the father, and strive to emulate Jesus, you will become a more moral person.  There is no way to emulate Jesus and become a worse person, because he is the best person that has ever walked on this Earth.  Those Christians who do not improve are not attempting to emulate Jesus with any degree of seriousness.  This means that they are missing one of the central tenets of Christianity and should not be taken seriously as Christians.

    There is something else that I must say.  When you compare the good atheist to the bad Christian, you make an implicit assumption.  You assume that the good atheist is perfectly all right and does not need to be improved.  This is only correct if Christianity is wrong.  If Christianity is true, then the good atheist does have a critical flaw.  He or she has rejected God.  This is ironic, considering that God gave the atheist a good temperament, like He gives some strength and some good looks.  In all actuality, having a naturally good temperament makes it harder to search for God.  The sinner will see the destructive power of sin in his or her life and will realize much sooner that he or she cannot make it without help.  The sinner will then reach out to God.  An atheist with a naturally good temperament will have a much harder time realizing his or her need because the atheist's sins are much more insidious.  This atheist will rely on his or her good temperament instead of on God.  The situation is similar with those who have other kinds of advantages, be it money, strength, intellect, or beauty.  This point depends upon whether or not Christianity is true or false, which I have not shown in this section.  I include it to motivate atheists and other non-Christians to learn more about Christianity, and to realize that the truth or falsehood of Christianity is a critically important question.

     In summary, we have shown that bad Christians only disprove Christianity when the argument is dependant on a logical fallacy.  To decide whether or not Christianity is true, we must look at my other arguments.

The arguments in this section borrow heavily from C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Chapter 10.