Converted Pagans

I find it odd that secularists can so easily ignore the weight of Christianity's theological heritage. In my reading of church history, it seems that nearly all of Christianity's most noted theologicians started out their intellectual careers in cults, the swampland of agnosticism, the cold dark of atheism, or the lukewarm waters of moderated religion. From the Apostle Paul to Augustine to Batolome de las Casas to John Newton to William Wilberforce to Dwight L. Moody to G.K. Chesterton to C.S. Lewis to Philip Yancey* to Francis Collins, the most esteemed ranks of the faiths defenders has been populated by old enemies. How is it then that when history tells us of a miracle and both insanity and natural causes can be dismissed, the critics conclude that it is a lie? How can it be that the Gospels, which are literally thousands of times more reliable than any other ancient texts, are the subjects of greater and more paranoid skepticism than any other ancient texts? How is it that the firmness of Christians in their doctrine is looked upon with suspicion when those same Christians were once Pagans who lost their grip (often very reluctantly) on their anti-Christian doctrines?



* I realize that Philip Yancey was never a secularist or pagan of any kind but he did grow up in a Southern, fundamentalist church that led him to a skepticism of Christianity and the Church and put him on the verge of apostacy.