Let me dispose of the first presupposition quickly. Being a true Christian isn’t like being a carpenter, a dentist, or a ballerina. A person can quit a job, or become unable to perform the required duties, and it is correct to conclude that they are no longer a member of that vocation. Being a true Christian, however, is like becoming a child to parents. Once a person is born, they are a child whose parents have been permanently assigned. Once a child of two people, always a child of these people. Being a true Christian means being born-again into God’s family, as a child of His forevermore.
Now, I want to get to the more grievous error above. I’ve met many people in my life who say, “Well, I used to be a Christian, but not anymore.” I usually don’t argue the point because the person typically isn’t using their position to attack or disrespect mine. I write it off as semantics and move on to a more meaningful discussion about why they left the faith, do they really understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ, etc. However, there’s a group of self-proclaiming former Christians who use their so-called “experience” as Christians as a position of strength in their argument against Christianity, proper. These are the folks who need to be exposed.
Here’s a perfect example from a book I’m reading (see if you can spot the arrogance and the false presupposition):
“Michael Ruse, an atheist philosopher who specializes in evolution, forthrightly calls out the new scientism, particularly evolutionary scientism, for being a religious belief. ‘I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian,’ Ruse says. ‘But I must admit that in this one complaint…the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion.’”
— Saving Truth by Abdu Murray
Mr. Ruse claims that he is an “ex-Christian”, and that Christianity is on the same plane as every other alternative religion out there. I can say without hesitation that he was never a Christian, at least not a true one, by Biblical standards. I can say this because the Bible teaches us about the eternal security of a believer in Christ. This simply means that once a person is truly saved (not merely a professor of Christianity), that person is guaranteed to remain a child of God forever. In other words, if a person is truly saved, even if they somehow were able to denounce Christ the way some kids try their hand at emancipating themselves from their biological parents (this isn’t possible, by the way - see 1 John 4:1-4 below), they can’t escape being one of Jesus’ sheep. When God makes us a member of His family, it is permanent.
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. You are from God, little children, and have overcome them; because greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world.
— 1 John 4:1-4
I want you all to clearly understand that a person who denounces Christ cannot possibly be truly saved. So, to Mr. Ruse’s point about being an “ex-Christian”, we shouldn’t give him any more credence than we would any other unbeliever we run across. This means that when a person such as he uses their so-called “experience” with Christianity as a pillar of their argument against it (sort of like when a person says, “Yeah, I tasted chocolate ice cream and I don’t like it.”), we ought to dismiss their claim completely. Based on what I’ve read about Mr. Ruse, he was never a Christian the way I am today. I will concede that, apparently, he has “tasted the heavenly gift” (Hebrews 6:4), but as the Bible teaches us, this isn’t the same thing as being born-again into God’s family, as Jesus described to Nicodemus in John 3. I resent the fact that Mr. Ruse uses false presuppositions about his experience with God in order to rail against Christianity. The Bible says that he has no real knowledge of the One he has chosen to discredit.
For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame. For ground that drinks the rain which often falls upon it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.
— Hebrews 6:4-8
Bottom line, there’s no such thing as an “ex-Christian”. It’s a ploy that, if not dissected as above, catches a lot of unprepared Christians off guard, which is why Peter instructs us, “but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence” (1 Peter 3:15). I can respect another person’s right to choose for or against God. But I vehemently reject the idea that just because a person has attended church, spent time reading the Bible, or grew up in a Christian family that this makes them a brother or sister of mine in the faith. If their claim was true and they were somehow able to defect from the perfect, holy, omnipotent Savior, either God is too weak to hold them, or they were never saved in the first place! Which explanation do you think is most likely???
Love in Christ,
Ed Collins
