Questions for Christians

Great Debates
1

[Note 1 : If this is inappropriate, I sincerely apologise and mods feel free to delete, and would appreciate if you can send me a URL for where I could ask someone questions.

Note 2 : This is not meant to be an attack on anybody, or their beliefs as such. This is not meant to be about Christian bashing. Occasionally I use very emotive language and talk negatively about Christians, but that was only because they’re very important questions to me.]

I’ve been brought up in a Christian household for the last 16 years, but well, having access to the Internet and visiting great sites (such as this one) has really opened my mind. I’m finding that I have great objections to my faith, and I really don’t want that. I would so much prefer to be a honest Christian, but I just can’t … worshipping God almost makes me sick sometimes.

I think I’ve managed to distil my problems into 4 points, and I’m putting these out here and other anonymous places as a last ditch attempt to try and get answers. The problem is I really have nowhere where I can ask difficult questions.

Anyway… I’d really, really appreciate if anyone could explain to me one of the following. I should note that I’m naturally very sceptical, and although I promise to be grateful for the attempt, I can’t say the same about agreeing with you.

Thanks.

Here are my primary objections with Christianity :

(As an aside, these are all of a more philosophical nature - while I am far from convinced of the academic evidence for the reliability of the Bible I think that such discussion is very vast, very subjective, and which cannot be proved without outside sources either way)

(1) The lack of timelessness

If Xity (for short, not mean as an insult) does come from an omnipotent (and all the rest of it) God, then I would expect it to be radical and the Bible not to be of its times. But it is - the Old and New Testament unashamedly update their morals to keep with current trends. They go to the edge of what is ‘thinkable’, but never beyond that. I cannot understand why a God would not condemn slavery, or be homophobic. These are obvious watermarks of the bias of the authors.

(2) Prayers and Praise

Really two separate subjects, but I will combine them as they are both quite short. Firstly on the subject of prayer - specifically on the subject of asking for things. What is the point? It seems incredibly hypocritical to thank him for whatever goes right, but not to blame him for what goes wrong. He is either responsible, or he is not.

As for praise - I do not see much particularly to praise God for. If he is perfect and all powerful and all knowing and so forth, then it is instinctive to him to help people. It is a matter as light as air. Many Christians have answered the problem of evil and suffering by claiming that humanity could only truly love with free will - where it had to actually struggle, or in simple vocabulary, try. Why is God not judged by the same standards? Who do you praise more, the clever kid who gets another ‘A’ or the problem child who normally fails and this time gets a ‘B’? Or the kid who finds maths getting sums right compared to a calculator? I just don’t see why we don’t praise struggling mortals more than we praise an omnipotent being.

As for the specific matter of the Crucifixion, I’d like to point out two things about it - first, y’know, it was God who decided to go through this whole pantomime in the first place. If he was omnipotent, he could have just snapped his fingers and had the same effect as the barbaric ritual (another minor problem - what kind of ethical being resorts to sacrifice.)

Secondly, I find it quite amusing the way Xity tries to have it both ways. Much of the impact of Jesus’ death is lost by the fact that he knew he was going to be resurrected again - this death has none of the impact to meof the mass sacrifice of the Great War.

In summary, the Crucifiction wasn’t as great as Xians make it out to be; neither is anything else God has supposedly done. I see much more to praise in the work of mortals.

(3) Judgement

I find it disturbing that I actually have ‘higher’ morals than God himself.

I hate judgement or justice or revenge or whatever you want to call it; I find the whole idea hypocritical and terrible. What we should be preaching is grace and forgiveness.

Ah, says the Christian, you’ve missed the whole point - that’s the whole point of Xity. I would say that’s fair enough on a terrestrial level, but all this is destroyed by the concept of heaven/hell (or, in other words, by God himself). Suddenly we find that all the selfless acts were only for personal benefit later on, sucking up to get into heaven. Doesn’t anyone else see the blatant paradox in “first will be last and the last first”?

Not even going into the ridiculousness of eternal punishment for finite acts, or the repulsiveness of the judgement, the whole idea of heaven is really quite childish. The concept of a ‘perfect’ place is a very simple answer to complicated problem, and again can not really be conceived in practise. It is also a watermark of the times - it gives people what they want. It is for those who have not yet got into their heads that death is not a terrible thing unless you make it one.

(4) Evil
The classic.
And the still unanswered.
If God is really all knowing, all powerful, all loving, he would find a better way.

2

MrThompson wrote:

There’s already a thread about this subject, going on in this forum as we speak:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=124306

I sometimes refer to this conundrum by saying, “Jesus was mildly inconvenienced for your sins.” :wink:

3

MrThompson, congrats on a well-written post. I was a hardcore baptist Christian throughout high school and my first year of college. Then I started having many of the same thoughts (though you came up with quite a few I hadn’t thought of).

Furthermore, I found that there’s as much good, AND as much proof in mostly any major world religion. One of my huge beefs with Christianity is in (I THINK this is right) John 14, when Jesus said “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. NO ONE GETS TO THE FATHER EXCEPT THROUGH ME.” Many Christians take this (as did I) to mean that all other religions MUST be wrong.

I found myself quite arrogant to believe everyone else HAD to be wrong in order for me to be right. That was the breaking point. I’ll admit, for a while I felt guilty. I was told by friends that I only disagreed with Christianity cause I wanted to do “sinful” things. Eventually, I got over it. If they really believe that, then they’re too far into their faith to see the light of day.

I now respectfully disagree with all organized religion. No one’s gotten it right yet. I don’t plan to get it right either; I only intend to live as I feel one should. However, I’m happy for those who’ve found something they believe in - even those who believed as I did. Religion, IMHO, isn’t about figuring out the universe, but about finding a peace and happiness in one’s life.

I’m sorry that I didn’t answer any of your questions. Hopefully, something I said helped a little?

4

Hi MrThompson

You say you’ve been raised in a Christian household for the last 16 years, and I’m guessing from that that you’re 16 years old.

I don’t mean this to sound at all patronising, but the Christianity that you find inadequate and that you describe in your post is a fairly childish Christianity. It might have satisfied you at the age of 6, or at the age of 11, but plainly it’s not satisfying you now at the age of 16, and it’s not going to satisfy you at any older age. So you’re quite right to question and criticise what you have accepted as a child. It is inevitable that you will find your childhood religion inadequate now, just like your childhood books and your childhood games and your childhood classes don’t appeal to you now. It doesn’t necessarily follow that you should end up rejecting Christianity as a whole.

It may have been appropriate for your family and church to offer you this version of Christianity as a child, but as an adult you’re going to need something deeper and broader. And, as an adult, you have to take some responsibility for finding it for yourself; nobody will hand it to you on a plate.

The reason I say this is that lots of adults are satisfied with a fairly childish Christianity. For example, your dissatisfaction with the bible stems from an expectation that it should be a simple, and complete, statement of truth. Many adults are happy to believe that it is and will urge you to believe the same, but plainly that belief is never going to satisfy you. But it doesn’t follow that the bible is worthless to you; it may contain much that is true, and much that is instructive, and much that is divinely-inspired, and it would be a mistake to dismiss it because it didn’t match up to your childhood expectations of it, or other people’s adult but perhaps childish expectations of it. Similarly the nature of Christ’s redemption of humanity, and the problem of evil, and the nature and consequences of free will, and the nature of salvation, are issues that deserve a lot more reflection than you have been able to, or have been encouraged to, give them up to now.

This is where I really don’t want to sound patronising. You are a different person from the person you were when you were 11, but you are still only sixteen. Both your inner life and the way you relate to other people are changing dramatically, and this will go on for some years to come. How you think, and what you think about things, has changed but has still to change a lot more. By all means take a questioning and critical approach to religious belief, but if you think that the questions which Christianity seeks to address are important questions I would encourage you to keep an open mind, and to reflect on, test and modify beliefs and attitudes rather than rejecting them outright if they appear unsatisfactory at first. Undoubtedly you’ll end up in a position as regards belief and faith which is a long way from where you are now. It may or may not be a rejection of Christianity but, even if it is a rejection, it’s a rejection you’ll be a lot happier with than if you simply abondon your childhood beliefs without ever exploring adult beliefs.

5

Mr Thompson, good questions, but if i may, I’d rather ask you one first. You say you’d rather be an honest christian. Would you consider being an honest person first, and worry about which religion that person follows second? :wink:

The point of honesty is interesting, as I often wonder what would make religious folks behave themselves without some fear or love of a higher power, and why respecting fellow humans would not be enough.

OK, so your questions.

1, Timelessness. Good question. The god of the OT is far from the loving god and forgiving character depicted by Jesus in the NT. The OT god is vengeful, incites race hatred, inspires men to wage war, and murder pregnant women. Then in the NT, we have a forgiving, loving god. Then we have the various modern apologies and reworkings of the meanings so not to offend contemporary sensibilities. It is changed because if it did not, it would be discarded, and it is in the interest of the status quo to keep it going. It’s not done for your benefit, it is self serving.

2, Prayers and Praise. If god truy knows your heart mind, he knows you are grateful. Why would we have to say it? Saying it out loud is about convoincing your neighbour that you are pious, not about letting god know. Prayer, therefore, is about building community. Folks should be good neighbours without fear of god.

3, Judgement. Yep. Now imagine you lived and died in a remote place that xtianity never reached. There are people on the planet we have only made contact with recently, who never heard the word of Jesus for nearly 2000 years! Is it fair that god would judge them the same as someone who had heard the word? IS it fair that Jesus only appeared in the East, and did not show Europeans miracles to seal their faith? Why are we to be judged the same as those who were shown? Is it fair that someone who has committed one more sin would be cast into hell, while someone only slightly better gets to go to heaven? Is it al to simplistic?

4, Evil, Ah, why did god create the devil if he was omnipotent, as surely he would know it would unleash evil on the world? This is the first biblical apology. Also, why does an all powerful deity allow it to continue? IS god willing but not able to do something about it, or able but not willing? Evil is used as some cop out for ‘free will’, god gives us the ability to be evil so he can judge us, … hmm, fair?

Anyway, good luck resolving your thoughts.

6

MrThompson, welcome to the Evil Atheist Conspiracy. Bwahahahah. Seriously, though, I think that once you begin demanding proof and thinking rationally about religion, you must either become either a Jesuit, JThunder, or an atheist.

7

Thanks to everyone who replied.

That’s what I’m trying to do, and to start with I need to find answers to these questions - I have done a lot more thanking than this, but I wanted to keep it simple. For example, I’ve read through many, many solutions to the problem of suffering, and I’ve never read one that satisfies me (most of them make the idea of heaven a nonsense, as well). I recognise that this is perhaps not the most neutral place, and so I’ll probably try and ask at Christian forums too, but it’s very hard to find one that allows open questions.

I’m trying… but my life would be so much easier being a Christian. Anyway, I agree with everything you added.

Oh, and sorry for doubling up on the prayer thing, but I had written this before and nothing in that thread particularly convinced me so I decided to leave it in. I’ll go over there now.

Thanks again.

8

Out of curiosity, how much reading have you done on your own? I agree with UDS’s opinion that your main problem is that you’re growing up and looking for deeper answers. Good for you. Now go out and do some serious looking. Go to different services. Ask people–pastors, priests, people in general whose lives and opinions you respect. Grill them if you must, but be respectful and open and nice or you won’t get much out of it. Read whatever you can get your hands on–I recommend most of C.S. Lewis’ books to start with.* And, pray a lot for light and understanding. Before you read scripture or another book, pray that you’ll get the best out of it and understand. And so on. (The whole point here is to have a personal relationship with God, right? And to do that you should probably be doing the praying thing. 'Cause most of your answers are going to come from there, or you won’t be satisfied. )

By all means, go ahead and do this with other faiths, too–but you’ve got a head start on your home turf, so to speak, and you might as well learn about your own neighborhood before heading halfway around the world.

I’m not going to tell you I have all the answers–I’m a long, long way from that, but the questions you pose, while good ones, don’t bother me a whole lot anymore. However, you have to put in the work to get the benefit. Have fun with all your exploring!

*I also like Madeline L’Engle. But as an LDS type, I don’t know of a lot more of the general Christian authors except St. Augustine, and I don’t like him. Now, if you want to do heavy research into Mormon writings (and yes, we’re Christian too), I can help you! :cool:

9

Mr. Thompson,

I commend you on both the fact that you are questioning what does not seem to make sense to you, and on the fact that you are prepared to give the matter serious consideration rather than simply rejecting Christianity as a kind of knee-jerk reaction. I agree with what UDS wrote, though I would add that it is possible (and as I see it, should be quite common) to be in a state of uncertainty about issues such as the ones you mention while at the same time being an “honest” Christian. If you haven’t already, I suggest you read the works of C.S. Lewis (particularly The Great Divorce, Mere Christianity and The Screwtape Letters come to mind).

My own initial responses to your questions:

  1. If I understand your question correctly, I would respond that I don’t think that the fact that taking parts of the Bible literally leads to wrong results shows that the Bible is not timeless. For example, take the parts in the NT that refer to the proper behavior of women in church. One could read those passages as implying that women ought not to talk in church or hold positions of authority over man, OR one could extrapolate from them the idea that one ought to behave in whatever one’s culture dictates is the proper way to show respect and reverence while in church. In the culture in which the Bible was written, the way for a woman to show respect and reverence was by keeping silent. In our culture, that is no longer the case. Therefore, one can reject the literal interpretation of those passages while still accepting the truth they contain.

  2. I don’t understand what you’re getting at about making requests in prayer; can you explain more? Regarding praise, it seems to me that the student who gets A’s easily is worthy of praise (for his intelligence, aptitude, whatever). I think what your example shows is simply that improvement and effort are also worthy of praise. By your reasoning, a person who works very hard and mangages to improve his artwork from rather bad stick-figures to good stick-figures is worthy of praise, but someone who just has a talent for art is not. I would say, however, that the former deserves praise for what he has done (tried hard, put in a lot of effort, etc.), and the latter for what he has done (made a beautiful painting). Likewise, I would say that it is appropriate to praise a human who has improved his character from dirty scoundrel to halfway decent for his effort and improvement, and to praise God for the simple magnificence of his being.

  3. Judgment: I don’t think the view of heaven and hell that you put forth is entailed by Christianity. I’m not saying that there aren’t Christians who hold that view; I am saying that you don’t have to look at it like that to be a Christian, and in my opinion that is not the right way to look at the issue. I don’t think of heaven as a sort of cosmic amusement park, or of hell as a sort of cosmic barbecue for the naughty people. Rather, heaven is a state of maximal closeness to God; those in this state are as happy as it is possible for them to be. Hell is distance from God, and I’m sure it’s not much fun for those who are there. However, the key thing to note is that heaven wouldn’t be any fun for those people either; spending eternity in a state of closeness to a being one had rejected and turned away from wouldn’t be enjoyable.

My take on the problem of those who never hear of Christianity is this: it is true that the only way to be saved is through Christ. However, it is not true that the only way to be saved through Christ is to be a Christian. I think that being a genuine Christian is sufficient, but I don’t know that it is necessary; I don’t know under what circumstances one can be held responsible for not being a Christian. I am convinced that whatever the standards are, they are exactly what someone with perfect knowledge and a perfect idea of right and wrong would expect of a just, fair being who is trying to give us every chance he can. Since none of us have either perfect knowledge or a perfect sense of right and wrong, we will not be able to give a definitive answer to this question. My own speculation is that someone who freely and knowingly rejects Christianity would be held responsible for that choice, but that it is possible to reject Christianity either unknowingly (you reject something that you think is Christianity but really isn’t) or unfreely (say, you been sexually abused by a priest and consequently are psychologically unable to be a Christian). Furthermore, someone in the inner depths of the African jungle has never had the choice; it doesn’t seem fair that he would be punished for not choosing something he never had the chance to choose.

  1. Evil. Read ch. 9 of The Nature of Necessity by Alvin Plantinga. I think Lewis talks about the problem of evil somewhere too. I don’t have the time to explain their views here, but if you can’t find any of their books I will try to do so later.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter.

10

I would also like to reccomend the writings of Fr. Andrew Greeley (Catholic, ultra-liberal like moi), and John Shelby Spong, former Episcopal bishop and Christian radical.

I’d also like to suggest that you do a search for the user named Polycarp.

I’m a lapsed Catholic. I call myself a Catholic because there’s a lot of the church that I like-the social justice movements, especially liberation theology. But my beliefs would probably be closest to a Unitarian-Universalist sect.

11

—I’m trying… but my life would be so much easier being a Christian.—

If you don’t want to make you life harder, then don’t worry about it. I would suggest you read some of the works of Spong: he a Christian who rejects many of the more fundamentalist tenets of Christianity, but retains what he considers to be the most worthwhile core of insight into what he believes to be the divine. It’s not for everyone, but it might be for you.

The question is largely one of belief: if you believe in god, regardless of what specific arguments for a specific religion you think are valid, then it’s likely that you will continue to believe. Argument, pro or con, are not going to change the fact that, at bottom, you believe in a god.

But if you are finding that do not have such an overidding belief, and that you now find that you lack a reason to believe that there is a god, then it is not likely that you will find a convincing reason to conclude that there is one.

Personally, I would be wary of both Lewis and Plantinga alone: their arguments have seriously criticisms aimed at them which are discussed in a large body of literature: and you shouldn’t JUST read their works in regards to the particular answers they give. They are works of advocacy, not surveys of the field.

Personally, I like Plantinga, because he raises some important philosophical issues and seems to respect keeping an open mind towards them. But I have very little respect for Lewis. He is a wildly intelligent man, and yet he makes claims in his books that he almost certainly must have known were misleading and exploit rhetorical tricks rather than logic. The vibe I always got from him was: “anything to sell the ideology, ANYTHING.” We can discuss some of his specific arguments if there is any interest, but many of them are variations on old saws like the argument from design, the moral argument that Plato refuted, and an exceedingly insulting portrayal of atheists.

Of course, you shouldn’t trust me: you should read them for yourself and decide.

12

Spong is a great guy to turn to if you are looking to understand how diverse and creative Christian viewpoints can be, avoiding stereotypes. So is Paul Tillich.
If you are interested in being a Christian, it would definately behoove to to explore all the different takes on it there have been over the years, instead of getting hung up on one particular set of claims that you disagree with.

13

I’d just add to what I said before that another avenue you might explore is to look at the aspects of Christianity which do appeal to you, and explore those further. I’m not suggesting you should ignore your doubts and problems, but this shouldn’t be a completely negative exercise. Exploring what does attract you may help to give you answers to your questions which appeal to you, rather than the answers currently offered which don’t.

14

Not to beat a dead horse, but you should also consider atheism. I won’t witness for it in this thread: I’m outnumbered lots to one, and there are many eloquent atheists on da net. Apos got it: if ya wanna believe, try to reaffirm your faith. If not. . .

15

Further congratulations on choosing to think about difficult things. In addition to the suggestions already up above (seconding especially strongly the worthwhileness of doing a search for religion threads Polycarp has been in), I’d recommend getting into a comparative religion course or two. If you haven’t hit college yet, there’ll be a little wait before that’s feasible, but I wouldn’t view this as a race.

Atheism is a fine choice. You may find something other than Christianity entirely fits you, as well. There’s some elements of kabbalah (a general term for various Jewish mystical traditions and some stuff that’s spun off of that source) that shook this particular once-atheist to the core, for instance. Also:

I noticed that bit because it’s something I’ve been simmering on mental burners for awhile. Christianity has a “Problem” of suffering. Buddhism has a “Truth” of suffering. The difference is subtle, but, it seems to me, goes very deep; deep enough that I doubt Christianity’s formulations of the whys and wherefores of suffering will ever be quite satisfactory for many thinking folks (and vice versa, for fairness’ sake).

16

—Not to beat a dead horse, but you should also consider atheism.—

I wouldn’t suggest that at all, actually, despite being an atheist. There is nothing to recommend atheism, because it isn’t a particular view to consider. It’s not really even of the same class of things as the various theist beliefs that are out there.

It is simply what you’d end up being classified as if you don’t believe. There are at base no arguments for atheism: there are only arguments for theism. And if you don’t find any theist arguments that convince you, that’s atheism.

17

Actually, Apos, I think there’s quite a lot to be said for atheism or generalized deism…as a lifestyle. You can be a good, moral person, lightning isn’t any more likely to strike you than anyone else, and you get to sleep in Sunday mornings. :slight_smile:

MrThompson, wherever your doubts take you, if you are indeed 16, keep in mind that you are legally able to take charge of your own life in less than two years. For now, keep your head down…but when you turn 18 (if you’re not already in college), get a job and move out or maybe join the Air Force. Anything for your freedom.

I moved out of my parents’ home (They were rural charismatic fundamentalists–Holy Rollers is the impolite term.) three days after my 18th birthday…and have never regretted it. :slight_smile:

18

Further reading list suggestions for MrThompson:

The God We Never Knew by Marcus Borg.
Living Buddha, Living Christ and Going Home: Jesus and Buddha as Brothers by Thich Nhat Hanh

Do not be idolatrous about or bound to any doctrine, theory, or ideology, even Buddhist ones. All systems of thought are guiding means; they are not absolute truth. --Thich Nhat Hanh

19

Make that "Lots to Two.

My advice: Give up that force-feed, fairy-tale nonsense and start to think for yourself (sounds like you are already). You control your own life and destiny by the power of your intellect. Start using it! If your a good person now, chances are you will remain one in the absence of a religion that threatens eternal punisment and other equally ludicrous ideas.

Rock on, Dude!

Jesus was in a coma.

20

Of course, thinking for yourself would mean you had to question the motivations of people who would be so disrespectful as to describe the deeply-held religious beliefs of others as “force-fed, fairy-tale nonsense.”

Please do think for yourself. If you do so, you won’t fall for the laughable implication that only atheists have the ability to do so.