quote:
To those saying that you can have it too, you have to understand, some people's brains are so logical that we can't make that leap in believing something without direct and obvious evidence.

This isn't a matter of logic. Logic is about reasoning, not necessarily convincing others. There are all sorts of logical arguments that are consistent and sound yet don't convince others. What you're describing is a lack of persuasion on your part, not whether the Christian faith is rational.

quote:
Then there's the whole history of being lied to about things we know were not true now by lots of religions.

What claims, specifically? I'm not a proponent of religious pluralism. I believe the Christian faith that is predicated on the historical biblical narrative of Jesus Christ, the son of God, becoming a man, obeying the obligations of the moral law of God for mankind and dying an unjust death so that man can be reconciled to God. I don't believe all religious claims hold the same weight in the discussion. Several major religions boil down the personal opinions of revered "holy men" that weren't claiming any sort of divine inspiration from above. Why should an arbitrary opinion of man be on the same level as the claim of revelation from an omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent deity?

quote:
The claims that were made over the years that proved to be false or impossible.

Which claims are proven false and "impossible"?

quote:
I know that's not fair to just general deist that never made any specific claims but just believe in a higher power. To me, that's a more defensible claim and for me personally, a possibility.

The Deist has no justification for their specific personal beliefs. Their general belief in the existence and power of God is testified to by Paul in Romans chapter 1 in the Bible, but beyond that, the Deist is left with nothing but pure speculation as they don't get their specific theological understanding from any sort of revelational source.

quote:
I think for people like me, it's harder when people claim specific saviors as if there aren't thousands of other religions out there that could also be correct.

They all can't be correct in the same way and at the same time. The different religions make exclusive claims that contradict the claims and beliefs of other religions. It would be a violation of the law of non-contradiction to say they are all correct at the same time. They can all be wrong, or one may be right, but they all can't be right.

quote:
It seems like the height of arrogance to claim that your God or savior is the right God or savior and everybody else's throughout all of history is wrong.

Whose arrogance are you talking about? I'm a Christian. I believe that God has provided a testimony of His actions and descriptions of His character to humanity in an effort to commune with us. This testimony contradicts what all other world religions teach. If I am to believe the Bible, by default I have to reject all others. Why is that arrogance?

Arrogance would be if I chose the Bible as my personal favorite book in some arbitrary way and then proceeded to reject all others simply because they didn't appeal to my vanity. In that case, my personal preference would be the sole decider of right and wrong rather than the object of my preference. Arrogance is making it all about yourself. Christians are to make their faith about their Lord and do all things for His glory, not ours. The Bible teaches a salvation by God's grace and mercy, not by our own merits. That's the opposite of human arrogance.

quote:
It truly is a matter of faith.

Eta: y'all should feel lucky you're capable of such leaps. The solace that it brings must be extremely comforting.

Faith is required for salvation but it's not a leap of faith to mentally assent what the Bible teaches at all. It's entirely reasonable and only seems impossible or unreasonable in a worldview that rejects the underlying premise that precedes the claims, notably the existence of God.

This post was edited on 6/24/20 at 11:24 am