Richard Dawkins Laments The Decline Of Christianity In England, Calls Himself "Culturally Christian"

Questions are OK. I think it might be helpful to think about religions in terms of their components. There is what they teach about law (how we are to live). There is what they teach about knowledge (how we know what we know). There is what they teach about salvation (how are we made right or whole again), etc.

You remarked that many religions teach relatively the same thing about how we are to live. There is some truth to this if we are talking basic moral principles like don’t lie, don’t steal, and even the golden rule. I don't think there is 100% agreement between Christianity and the other religions, but there is some percentage of common ground between Christianity and other religions.

The question then becomes functionally what does believing the right things about the law (how we are to live) do for someone who diverges in other areas of theology, especially as it pertains to salvation?

"Sin is transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4).

"...Through the law comes knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:20).

What the law accomplishes is it imparts knowledge of sin. It is important to understand that one can come to a knowledge of the nature of the transgression they have committed against God without being a Christian. One can know they have committed sin without being a Christian.

So, a person who possesses knowledge of moral teachings now knows he/she does not live up to them. He/she is now bound to perfect obedience to those moral teachings. He/she can be summoned to the chamber of the Judge at any moment for failure to obey the law that they know even if they are not a Christian. A person might even be wrong about the consequences of disobedience before the law (this is one of Satan's devices), but they are still culpable for their actions if they know they are disobeying the law.

Christianity 101:

"The wages of sin is death..." (Romans 6:23)

So, when a Buddhist goes to judgment, having confidence in the principles he lived by, his Buddhist faith may have taught him a knowledge of sin. But what does knowledge of sin do? It simply makes one aware of their own condemnation before the perfect law they have failed to keep.

When a Muslim goes to judgment, being confident in the principles he lived by, his Muslim faith may have imparted to him a knowledge of sin as well. Functionally how does this knowledge of sin help him in his standing before the Judge who has a list of every instance where He has broken God’s holy law? His knowledge of sin does not change his status as guilty before the Judge. It makes him a conscious deliberate law breaker rather than an unknowing law breaker.

When an atheist or an agnostic goes to judgment, with confidence in the moral principles he lived by, his moral principles imparted to him knowledge of sin as well. Of what value or merit is this knowledge of sin when he stands trial before the Judge? The murderer who confesses he did good things in life, and he knew right from wrong could tell you of what value these are when you stand on trial for the things you've done. They don't erase the guilt of what you've done.

So, our status before the Judge is quite simple. We have broken the holy law of God, and we knew it and did it anyways. And the sentence for this law breaking has already been declared. "The wages of sin is death..."

God help us. What we need is a Savior. That is the bottom line. Hopefully this illustrates the desperate situation we are in. And hopefully it illustrates that only one religion can really solve our predicament. It is one that involves outside intervention by a Savior, by a sin bearer, the Lord Jesus Christ who took and received upon Himself the judgment that we deserve.

Other religions might remark, "I don't need to believe Jesus died for anyone's sins to be forgiven. God will just choose not to punish me", but we know "“…the Lord will by no means clear the guilty…” (Numbers 1:3). If the Judge simply acquitted a murderer he would be severely unjust.

It is our status before the court that is the issue. When you go before the court for a crime you can’t simply argue…”Well look at all of the other good stuff I did.” That would not fly in a murder trial, and that does not work in eternity.

So, when you ask the question, "Will God understand that I chose the wrong religion..." you've missed the substance of the primary issue. The issue is all of us stand trial before God for our sin, and God is not unjust so as to acquit a guilty man. So, we need Jesus, the God man, to be our sin bearer and our savior, so we can be justified and declared righteous.

The situation then can be compared to a man locked away in prison under chains. There are lots of keys that exist in the world, and a man locked away in chains might get quite excited about many of them. What he really needs is the one key that fits the lock, so that he can be a free man. Jesus, the God man, the sin bearer, who died for the sins of the world, is that key. Without Him there is no salvation for any man.