What question could Christianity never answer for you?

[Riven]

25 minutes ago, disillusioned said:

The biggest one for me has always been "how do we know the will of God?". Christianity is premised on the notion that we are not doing what God wants. But that, in itself, is a tacit claim to know God's will. Where is the justification for this? This is the question that led me down the rabbit hole, and it's a question that no Christian has even been able to answer to my satisfaction.

 

Christianity itself, once accepted, is relatively self-reinforcing. My question basically amounts to "why should I accept this?". It took me a long time to actually ask that question honestly, but once I did, everything else fell away very quickly.

 

Oh boy.... so this is actually something I thought a lot about as a believer. I'll give you the standard answers I heard, but I I'll also tell you that I came to the identical conclusion you did in the end. How I ever believed any of this is baffling now.

 

• Answer #1: Augustine, from his famous "love" sermon, stated, "Love and do as you will." This was later modified to, "Love god, and do as you will." The idea being that if you came from a place of love, you would not do anything against god's will. Okaaaaaay.
• Answer #2: God has revealed his will in his word. Do the revealed will of god (meaning, follow his rules in the bible), and he will make the unrevealed known to you.

The second answer is far more problematic that the first. You could almost feel free, going off of #1. Except then, why do we need church? Why all the rules in the bible? But with #2, this is literally something that sounds made up to sound good. Because really, we all know that god is not going to reveal his will to you about what college you should go to, or what parking spot you should park in, or who you should marry, or date, or, or, or...... In fact, many lives have been quite literally shattered by trying to discern god's will this way.

 

I really do need to read The God Delusion. It's on my list. Because frankly, even as a believer, I never believed people half the time they said, "God told me...." In fact, towards the end, I just did what I wanted to do, and wrapped it in a god package. If I told someone I prayed about it, and felt god leading me in a certain direction, it was never questioned! Seriously messed up.

[Riven]

23 minutes ago, yunea said:

One category of things I couldn't brush off as either was, why god allowed so many weird things in his own holy buildings?

 

Yes, THIS ^^^^ exactly. Why was god so "hands on" for so long, and then suddenly, "hands off" pretty much ever since? Of course there's all the unproveable "signs and wonders" that are attributed to god, but what about the big GIANT interventions when his people had gone astray? Does he not care anymore?

 

He ordered the killing of Babylonians (women and children too) for retribution, buried people alive, killed firstborns, sent pestilence, sanctioned mass murder, killed unbelievers, and oh, killed the entire world except one family because he was pissed about sin. And yet, children getting molested by priests is just too much bother I guess.

 

Whenever I asked this question, I was told, "God last spoke through his son, Jesus Christ," but that's just a get out of jail free card as far as I'm concerned. It's an easy answer to tough questions.

[disillusioned]

1 hour ago, Riven said:

 

Oh boy.... so this is actually something I thought a lot about as a believer. I'll give you the standard answers I heard, but I I'll also tell you that I came to the identical conclusion you did in the end. How I ever believed any of this is baffling now.

 

• Answer #1: Augustine, from his famous "love" sermon, stated, "Love and do as you will." This was later modified to, "Love god, and do as you will." The idea being that if you came from a place of love, you would not do anything against god's will. Okaaaaaay.

 

What is love? What is God? These are non-trivial questions. But even setting these aside, the idea of knowing God's will is still implicit in this answer. If I come from a place of love, I won't do anything against God's will? How on earth do you know that? This isn't an answer, just a dodge.

 

1 hour ago, Riven said:

• Answer #2: God has revealed his will in his word. Do the revealed will of god (meaning, follow his rules in the bible), and he will make the unrevealed known to you.

The second answer is far more problematic that the first. You could almost feel free, going off of #1. Except then, why do we need church? Why all the rules in the bible? But with #2, this is literally something that sounds made up to sound good. Because really, we all know that god is not going to reveal his will to you about what college you should go to, or what parking spot you should park in, or who you should marry, or date, or, or, or...... In fact, many lives have been quite literally shattered by trying to discern god's will this way.

 

This is a standard answer. But it just removes the problem by one step. The Bible was written by humans. How do we know that the authors really knew the will of God? Perhaps they were deceived. Moreover, the Bible is clearly neither inerrant, nor literal. Therefore, it requires interpretation. Well, who is qualified to interpret it? How can we know that these people should be trusted?

 

I have much more to say about this. If you're interested, PM me.

 

1 hour ago, Riven said:

I really do need to read The God Delusion. It's on my list. Because frankly, even as a believer, I never believed people half the time they said, "God told me...." In fact, towards the end, I just did what I wanted to do, and wrapped it in a god package. If I told someone I prayed about it, and felt god leading me in a certain direction, it was never questioned! Seriously messed up.

 

You should read The God Delusion at some point, but I don't think you will find it particularly helpful here. I first read it when I was still a Christian, and I actually stand by my critique of it to this day. Philosophically, it's fairly sophomoric. Dawkins is a very good biologist. He's not a great philosopher. The God Delusion is far from his best work, and is also far from the best critique of Christianity/religion.

 

[Riven]

Thank you, @disillusioned for your reply! I agree wholeheartedly. I have found that so-called "answers" are either at best a dodge (as you put it), or at worst, designed to be a double-bind that shames. Either way, honest introspection of both the written and unwritten rules of Christianity are rarely given a forum in Christian circles. I can't speak for all, but my experience has been exactly that. I was shut down, and in no uncertain terms, it was communicated to me that such topics were not up for examination, much less discussion.

 

I just got, "Ten Tough Problems in Christian Thought and Belief: A Minister-Turned-Atheist Shows Why You Should Ditch the Faith" by David Madison. It looked interesting, and more importantly, understandable by a lay person (me). I would love any beginner book recommendations, as I'm just finding books referenced in posts here, and saving them to my Amazon Wish List.

 

2 hours ago, disillusioned said:

This is a standard answer. But it just removes the problem by one step. The Bible was written by humans. How do we know that the authors really knew the will of God? Perhaps they were deceived. Moreover, the Bible is clearly neither inerrant, nor literal. Therefore, it requires interpretation. Well, who is qualified to interpret it? How can we know that these people should be trusted?

 

I have much more to say about this. If you're interested, PM me.

 

 

I am very interested in your take on these questions. Any wisdom you want to throw my way would be awesome. The "who is qualified to interpret" is a pretty major sticking point for me, even now. I ask these question in reverse (now) regarding the idea of there being no god. Are the books I'm choosing to read coming from an agenda, or are they attempting to be impartial and fact-based? What credentials should I be looking for? Is there a way for me to study enough on my own to understand if what I'm reading is actually based on proper scholarship? Or, should scholarly credentials even be a consideration? (Because there are people like me, untrained, but really honestly looking to get answers to historical biblical criticism topics, so maybe there's a book out there by someone like me, only much further along in their study.) I hope that make sense. I vacillate between spending inordinate amounts of time trying to find answers, to turning it all off because I'm exhausted from trying to get answers. The only books I've read thus far that seem to be really neutral are:

• Inspiration & Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament by Peter Enns (I realize he's still a Christian, and I read it when I still was too, but he seemed to be very fair, and it was helpful at the time.)
• How Jesus Became God, by Bart Ehrman
• Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why - also by Bart Ehrman

That's my sum total library at this point, other than the David Madison book I already mentioned, which I began reading today.

[sdelsolray]

18 minutes ago, Riven said:

...

I would love any beginner book recommendations, as I'm just finding books referenced in posts here, and saving them to my Amazon Wish List.

...

 

I suggest a slightly different approach.  Instead of studying Christian scripture, Christian apologetics and skeptical anti-apologetics, consider studying rational thinking, informal logical fallacies, formal logic, cognitive biases and similar secular intellectual areas first.  After you have a good grasp of these tools, then spend your time with Christian scripture, Christian apologetics and skeptical anti-apologetics.  This will be more efficient and more likely to provide you with clearer and definitive results.

[Eowynesque]

@Riven I can relate. It's quite overwhelming to have so much to learn and wondering where to start and who to trust. Books can be very cheap on eBay btw

[ag_NO_stic]

14 hours ago, Riven said:

 

Yes, THIS ^^^^ exactly. Why was god so "hands on" for so long, and then suddenly, "hands off" pretty much ever since? Of course there's all the unproveable "signs and wonders" that are attributed to god, but what about the big GIANT interventions when his people had gone astray? Does he not care anymore?

 

He ordered the killing of Babylonians (women and children too) for retribution, buried people alive, killed firstborns, sent pestilence, sanctioned mass murder, killed unbelievers, and oh, killed the entire world except one family because he was pissed about sin. And yet, children getting molested by priests is just too much bother I guess.

 

Whenever I asked this question, I was told, "God last spoke through his son, Jesus Christ," but that's just a get out of jail free card as far as I'm concerned. It's an easy answer to tough questions.

 

I always got the "That's what the living Holy Spirit is now. They always tell me this in a really condescending way too.

 

11 hours ago, Riven said:

 

I just got, "Ten Tough Problems in Christian Thought and Belief: A Minister-Turned-Atheist Shows Why You Should Ditch the Faith" by David Madison. It looked interesting, and more importantly, understandable by a lay person (me). I would love any beginner book recommendations, as I'm just finding books referenced in posts here, and saving them to my Amazon Wish List.

 

 

Anything Ehrman, I really enjoy Dan Barker too, Matt Dillahunty on Youtube is pretty good....Sam Harris is someone I would consider worshiping for the record. There is a youtube video that is basically 2 hours of one liners that give you chills and make you wonder what you ever saw in christianity lol. I have found that I, personally, tend to prefer those who have a history in christianity and have rejected it, as opposed to those raised relatively outside of religion. There is an understanding that I relate to.

 

If you want a laugh, you should watch Mr. Deity on youtube, I have nearly cried laughing at their take on things. Another thing just to take the edge off, I resorted to jokes a lot when I was having a hard day, is to look up the tweets about god creating animals. OMG I cried laughing at some of them, I really did. 

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/gracespelman/tweets-about-god-creating-stuff?utm_term=.hnD6VGwmJ0#.blnrXQBAbM

[Riven]

16 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

I suggest a slightly different approach.  Instead of studying Christian scripture, Christian apologetics and skeptical anti-apologetics, consider studying rational thinking, informal logical fallacies, formal logic, cognitive biases and similar secular intellectual areas first.  After you have a good grasp of these tools, then spend your time with Christian scripture, Christian apologetics and skeptical anti-apologetics.  This will be more efficient and more likely to provide you with clearer and definitive results.

 

@sdelsolray thank you for that great suggestion!  Part of my deconversion story involves learning critical thinking skills through teaching them to my child as a homeschooler. I wanted him to have the advantage of learning how to think (not what to think) early on, and low and behold, guess who got better at it too? Yup. Mom.  I still have much to learn, so I need to continue, but it was that beginning critical thinking book that started me noticing and recognizing the double-binds, fallacies (like straw man and red herring) and other psudo-logic that was deployed by Christians whenever questions were asked. 

 

5 hours ago, ag_NO_stic said:

 

I always got the "That's what the living Holy Spirit is now. They always tell me this in a really condescending way too.

 

Anything Ehrman, I really enjoy Dan Barker too, Matt Dillahunty on Youtube is pretty good....Sam Harris is someone I would consider worshiping for the record. There is a youtube video that is basically 2 hours of one liners that give you chills and make you wonder what you ever saw in christianity lol. I have found that I, personally, tend to prefer those who have a history in christianity and have rejected it, as opposed to those raised relatively outside of religion. There is an understanding that I relate to.

 

If you want a laugh, you should watch Mr. Deity on youtube, I have nearly cried laughing at their take on things. Another thing just to take the edge off, I resorted to jokes a lot when I was having a hard day, is to look up the tweets about god creating animals. OMG I cried laughing at some of them, I really did. 

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/gracespelman/tweets-about-god-creating-stuff?utm_term=.hnD6VGwmJ0#.blnrXQBAbM

 

Yes, me too. God's last "statement" for mankind was Jesus dying on the cross. 

 

Thank you for the additional author names, and the Youtube channels!  One thing started doing when I was still a Christian, was watch atheist videos, because I was curious. I was already at the point where I thought, "let me see what this is all about." I'm going to go subscribe to Mr. Deity now!

[L.B.]

Mine has always been a very painful question:

 

Why are there people who claim to be empowered by an invisible, omnipotent spirit of god who fail to be able to even notice that they don't even reach out to me on the odd occasion, let alone act with SUPERNATURAL love and concern?

 

Why is it that people can get "messages" or "leadings" or "a peace" (i.e. 'I felt a peace about it') when it comes to SO many other things, from their marriages to their finances, but never get "messages" or whatever about a fellow TrueBeliever™ who is seriously, dangerously depressed and lonely?

 

Why is it that when I ask my TrueBeliever™ spouse these questions, she always says that when things go right, it's 'god working', but when people are oblivious assholes, it's because 'the debbil', it's because 'people sin and don't follow god', or it's that I, personally, don't do enough to maintain relationships with these people.

 

Seems like an awful lot of the shit we used to credit to an almighty deity is actually just the variable, fickle reality of human interactions.

 

I'd have a hell of a lot less of an issue with people not wanting to care for me if they would have never claimed to have a magic power to do so.

[Riven]

59 minutes ago, L.B. said:

Mine has always been a very painful question:

 

Why are there people who claim to be empowered by an invisible, omnipotent spirit of god who fail to be able to even notice that they don't even reach out to me on the odd occasion, let alone act with SUPERNATURAL love and concern?

 

Why is it that people can get "messages" or "leadings" or "a peace" (i.e. 'I felt a peace about it') when it comes to SO many other things, from their marriages to their finances, but never get "messages" or whatever about a fellow TrueBeliever™ who is seriously, dangerously depressed and lonely?

 

Why is it that when I ask my TrueBeliever™ spouse these questions, she always says that when things go right, it's 'god working', but when people are oblivious assholes, it's because 'the debbil', it's because 'people sin and don't follow god', or it's that I, personally, don't do enough to maintain relationships with these people.

 

Seems like an awful lot of the shit we used to credit to an almighty deity is actually just the variable, fickle reality of human interactions.

 

I'd have a hell of a lot less of an issue with people not wanting to care for me if they would have never claimed to have a magic power to do so.

 

This is very painful for me too, @L.B.. I was the one that was always there for anyone in need, but when my time came, it was radio silence. You want to know who the church wants to deal with less than a hurting Christian? An angry one, who's been hurt by their church.

 

The most egregious thing about a Christian's response to this (as you detailed in your post) is that you get blamed for your pain or loneliness. It's clearly your fault for not trusting god enough, or for "depending on man" too much. So, when people fail you, and you have real human feelings about that, then it's actually that you don't trust god enough, or you are relying on others more than you should. It's the sickest, most nasty thing about other believer's responses to their very own people being in pain. Christianity shoots their wounded. Period. God is never wrong, and guess what, neither are people who hurt you! You are to forgive, and that's the end of it.

 

 

[disillusioned]

19 hours ago, Riven said:

Thank you, @disillusioned for your reply! I agree wholeheartedly. I have found that so-called "answers" are either at best a dodge (as you put it), or at worst, designed to be a double-bind that shames. Either way, honest introspection of both the written and unwritten rules of Christianity are rarely given a forum in Christian circles. I can't speak for all, but my experience has been exactly that. I was shut down, and in no uncertain terms, it was communicated to me that such topics were not up for examination, much less discussion.

 

I just got, "Ten Tough Problems in Christian Thought and Belief: A Minister-Turned-Atheist Shows Why You Should Ditch the Faith" by David Madison. It looked interesting, and more importantly, understandable by a lay person (me). I would love any beginner book recommendations, as I'm just finding books referenced in posts here, and saving them to my Amazon Wish List.

 

I am very interested in your take on these questions. Any wisdom you want to throw my way would be awesome. The "who is qualified to interpret" is a pretty major sticking point for me, even now. I ask these question in reverse (now) regarding the idea of there being no god. Are the books I'm choosing to read coming from an agenda, or are they attempting to be impartial and fact-based? What credentials should I be looking for? Is there a way for me to study enough on my own to understand if what I'm reading is actually based on proper scholarship? Or, should scholarly credentials even be a consideration? (Because there are people like me, untrained, but really honestly looking to get answers to historical biblical criticism topics, so maybe there's a book out there by someone like me, only much further along in their study.) I hope that make sense. I vacillate between spending inordinate amounts of time trying to find answers, to turning it all off because I'm exhausted from trying to get answers. The only books I've read thus far that seem to be really neutral are:

• Inspiration & Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament by Peter Enns (I realize he's still a Christian, and I read it when I still was too, but he seemed to be very fair, and it was helpful at the time.)
• How Jesus Became God, by Bart Ehrman
• Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why - also by Bart Ehrman

That's my sum total library at this point, other than the David Madison book I already mentioned, which I began reading today.

 

Where I'm concerned, you may find that "wisdom" is in poor supply. I'm happy to share my opinion though.

 

I agree with @sdelsolray regarding studying logic, reason, and philosophy in general. I'd also add science to that list. If Dawkins is of interest to you, he has written some very good things on evolution. The Greatest Show on Earth is quite a nice book.

 

Books about religion that I consider superior to The God Delusion include Sam Harris' Letter to a Christian Nation (a quick read), Dennett's Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon (although I would recommend that you read up on evolution first if you are not versed on this topic... Dennett doesn't so much negate religion as explain its emergence from an evolutionary perspective), Hitchens' god is not Great, and Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus (which you've already read) and Jesus, Interrupted. These will all be better understood if you spend some time exploring reason in general first though.

 

With respect to the question of "who is qualified to interpret", I was referring specifically to the Christian claim to be able to correctly interpret the word of God. This is a claim to special knowledge. On secular reason, there is no special knowledge. Claims stand or fall on their own merits. Credentials don't really count for much if what you are saying doesn't hold water.

 

Practically, of course, there are many times when we must rely on the expertise of others. It just isn't practical to personally study every area to an extent which allows one to fully evaluate claims made about that area. But we should still be careful to check for biases, vested interests, and fallacies. If you claim "A", you should be able to persuade me of "A", and your persuasion should not amount to a claim of special knowledge which is, in principle, denied to me. This is the crux of the major problem that I have with those who claim to be able to correctly interpret God's word.

[GreySkiesGreenEyes]

Some of my questions are a little....less serious? But they were serious in my 10 year old mind lol.

 

one question that has stuck in my head was when I was 10 years old (roughly) and we learnt about Noah's ark (again). 

I kept thinking "why the hell did god kill all the worlds animals (apart from the ones on the ark of course) if he is meant to be a loving god who quote loves all of creation unquote." 

 

I actually asked my Sunday school teacher. He said something along the lines of "animals don't have souls, and the people who died were sinners, therefore god was 'just'. " 

 

i then replied " but animals still feel pain. How is god putting animals in pain considered "just" . " 

 

.... he didn't have an answer to that. 

 

The second question I had I'm pretty sure a lot of people have asked: God says to love everyone, but then we are taught that being gay is a sin, and we are influenced/taught to treat them differently and in worst cases badly. How is that "christs love"? 

 

This question came up to me when I was in my teens and I had a best friend who had two dads. Unfortunately that friendship didn't end well due to my parents not allowing me to visit her house as they were scared her dads gayness would influence me.... yes... they actually said that. 

 

Of course I no longer believe in anything from the bible. But those were the main two questions that brought me where I am today. 

[Riven]

On 6/1/2018 at 2:31 PM, disillusioned said:

Books about religion that I consider superior to The God Delusion include Sam Harris' Letter to a Christian Nation (a quick read), Dennett's Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon (although I would recommend that you read up on evolution first if you are not versed on this topic... Dennett doesn't so much negate religion as explain its emergence from an evolutionary perspective), Hitchens' god is not Great, and Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus (which you've already read) and Jesus, Interrupted. These will all be better understood if you spend some time exploring reason in general first though. 

 

Thank you for the additional input and titles! I spent my second Saturday this morning reading my book outside on my deck. I was wonderful to spend time in nature, and think critically about my existence. One that does not include a god I am beholden to.

[Riven]

On 6/1/2018 at 6:13 PM, GreySkiesGreenEyes said:

Some of my questions are a little....less serious? But they were serious in my 10 year old mind lol.

 

one question that has stuck in my head was when I was 10 years old (roughly) and we learnt about Noah's ark (again). 

I kept thinking "why the hell did god kill all the worlds animals (apart from the ones on the ark of course) if he is meant to be a loving god who quote loves all of creation unquote." 

 

I actually asked my Sunday school teacher. He said something along the lines of "animals don't have souls, and the people who died were sinners, therefore god was 'just'. " 

 

i then replied " but animals still feel pain. How is god putting animals in pain considered "just" . " 

 

.... he didn't have an answer to that. 

 

 

Glad you brought up Noah and his ark! Imagine me, a young adult, being confronted with this narrative. I wasn't that little kid that just accepted the story because it was being told to me by an adult as "true." My first thought was, "how did they get all the animals on that arc? You know, the ones that existed on other continents. How did they get there?" Followed by, "Why didn't the lion make a meal out of some of his natural prey?"

 

I kid you not, the answer was that, "God can do anything he wants. They could have been relieved of their earthly, carnal nature for a period of time, to accomplish his will." At the time, I thought, "Well, OK. I have nothing to refute this with, so I'll shut up now."

 

I rest my case. Christianity is nuts.

[Bhim]

Lots of interesting discussion here! I'm surprised we don't have more threads like this. Interestingly @Riven, the question you asked was answered for me by various Bible studies and through theologians I read. The answer was essentially that everyone goes to hell by default, and anyone who avoids this fate does so purely by the grace of Jesus. Which only comes by hearing the Gospel. So long story short: if you don't hear about Jesus you are definitely going to hell, which is what you deserve anyway.

 

For me it was a more nuanced, but nonetheless very important issue that Christianity could never answer to my satisfaction. It was: how could Jesus possibly be the Messiah when he so obviously does not fulfill many of the messianic requirements indicated in the Old Testament? Every issue I raised had detailed and lengthy answers from theologians ancient and modern, Internet commentators, etc., but none of them were particularly convincing to me. Here are some issues I have off the top of my head. I promise I haven't Googled any of this:

• Jesus is descended from King Jeconiah, whom the prophet Jeremiah explicitly said was cut off from the line of David for his disobedience towards God, such that none of his descendants would sit on the throne.
• The business with Isaiah 7:14 and the virgin birth. The Hebrew word almah is used to refer to a "young woman," when the separate word betulah, which actually means "virgin" was available in the lexicon if Isaiah really wanted to call the woman in question a virgin. The translation into the Greek parthenos (virgin) is very obviously an error on the part of the translators of the Septuagint.
• Separately on the topic of Isaiah 7:14, ignoring the translation issues and focusing on the Biblical exegesis, I have other objections. Anyone who simply reads an additional chapter or so will find that the sign Isaiah is offering the king is the birth of Maher-shalal-hashbaz. Christians' only answer to this is that prophecies have a short term, partial fulfillment and a longer term fulfillment in Jesus.  Even the fullness of God couldn't contain the mental gymnastics necessary to achieve such a ludicrous conclusion.
• The book of Numbers says that God is not a man, despite that as Christians will insist, Jesus claimed to be God. Lest their be any doubt, Numbers follows up this statement by stating that nor is God a son of man. It's ironic that Jesus chose the descriptor "Son of Man." While drawing from the imagery of the book of Daniel, he also takes in the baggage from Numbers.
• The New Testament often quotes the Old Testament, but some of the quotes are incorrect and most of them are taken from the Greek Septuagint rather than being translated from the Hebrew. This makes it clear that the first Christians were heavily Hellenized Jews, assuming they were Jews at all. Adding to your religion's scriptures when you can't read the existing scriptures in their original language will very obviously cause theological misunderstanding of existing canon.
• More generally, I have a problem with the fact that the New Testament was written in Koine (i.e. vulgar) Greek. Not only that, but the Gospel of Mark was written in objectively bad Greek. If the Jewish Christians really intended for their new faith to be a continuation of the original, it should be written in Hebrew, or at the very least Aramaic (a few parts of Daniel were written in Aramaic). By writing in Greek, they made it difficult to make meaningful theological comparisons between the messianic prophecies and their fulfillment. They added a layer of obfuscation, which seems necessary in order to believe that Jesus is the Messiah without running up against these Hebraic contradictions. Christians claim the New Testament was written in Greek because it was the common language of the day and made it easy for the faith to spread. OK sure, but it also shields you from legitimate criticism of Jesus' Messiahship.
• Jesus didn't restore the Davidic throne, and the New Testament itself addresses this point by stating that Jesus' kingdom is a spiritual one. A few years ago when the owner of Family Radio sent people around the country proclaiming that the rapture was nigh, he excused the fact that it didn't happen on the appointed day by stating that the rapture was spiritual in nature. We recognize such impotent explanations from everyone else, but excuse them when they come from Jesus or his apostles.

If ever I were tempted to return to Christianity, the failure of the excuses for Jesus' Messiahship would keep me away. Again, these are things I remember off-hand without any research. Were I to open the Bible, the failed prophecies I or any other knowledgeable reader could find would be legion.

[LostinParis]

1. Where is my free will to choose to believe, if my only alternative is eternal suffering? 

 

2. God loves me and gave me free will but if I don’t completely submit to his will and follow his (confusing and inconsistent) rules then he will send me to hell to suffer for eternity because he loves me so much.

[LostinParis]

On 6/1/2018 at 4:51 AM, Lydie said:

religion elevates a non-thinking position as the desired state to be in. It then shames you for asking logical questions.

 

 

THIS

Exactly this.

We were told that it is virtuous to be satisfied with not understanding.

My question was always: Will I be punished for not believing in things I can’t understand?

[Riven]

@Bhim -  I had some fun Googling a number of your bullet points this weekend! I was unaware of most of these inconsistencies. As per usual, most of the top Google results were various Christian sites, with their extreme mental gymnastics, trying to explain why none of these things were problems. I soon found myself down the rabbit hole, reading things that seemed to make sense. That felt familiar. (sarcasm intended!) I think this is why I'm so interested in reading books by people who have a) studied the bible and b) will be more intellectually honest about the problems. Right now I'm reading Valerie Tarico's book, Trusting Doubt. It's fabulous, and exactly what I need right now!

 

@LostinParis - WOW.

On 6/9/2018 at 5:20 PM, LostinParis said:

1. Where is my free will to choose to believe, if my only alternative is eternal suffering? 

 

 

If this doesn't just completely encapsulate the total disconnect between our freedom to (supposedly) choose, and eternal death if we don't choose god, then I don't know what does!! I've never seen it put so simply, and yet so succinctly.  THANK YOU!

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Riven said:

Right now I'm reading Valerie Tarico's book, Trusting Doubt. It's fabulous, and exactly what I need right now!

 

Excellent book, it sums up deconversion, and what it involves, so well. And I also found it to be an excellent critique of Evangelicalism and Christianity.

[1989]

I've always wondered why there's all the drama.  In the End Days all sorts of bad things happen, then we have a winner (God).  Why doesn't God just show up and say, "Boo!  I win." and then everyone is happy and peace reigns across the world.  No, there has to be signs and prophecies and fire (lots of fire), Jesus with a sword in his mouth, famine and death, you name it.  Then Satan, who's thrown in a bottomless pit or something, turns into a dragon and fights an unwinnable war before being locked away forever.  Again.  Why?  Who knows?  It's all already been won, but we have to sit through a predictable sequel, possibly after more fire and death.  Probably after fire and death.  It's just not a thing without fire and death.  Seriously, what gives?

[1989]

Also, where are the bodies of the baby boys Herod supposedly had executed trying to avert his fate?  You'd imagine that there's be at least one mass grave devoted to them.

[1989]

Me again.

 

What about the five cities in Egypt that were supposedly to be given to the Jews to own and worship?  It seems a little late for that now, being the "End Days" and all.  Funny how no one seems to mention that.

[Riven]

On 6/12/2018 at 1:40 PM, 1989 said:

I've always wondered why there's all the drama.  In the End Days all sorts of bad things happen, then we have a winner (God).  Why doesn't God just show up and say, "Boo!  I win." and then everyone is happy and peace reigns across the world.  No, there has to be signs and prophecies and fire (lots of fire), Jesus with a sword in his mouth, famine and death, you name it.  Then Satan, who's thrown in a bottomless pit or something, turns into a dragon and fights an unwinnable war before being locked away forever.  Again.  Why?  Who knows?  It's all already been won, but we have to sit through a predictable sequel, possibly after more fire and death.  Probably after fire and death.  It's just not a thing without fire and death.  Seriously, what gives?

 

Because.....fire!

 

Something always needs to be on fire. Whether it's our hearts, our souls, or "this generation." (lol!) Something always needs to be on fire.  (Sorry... ex worship leader song humor!)

 

What is it with these Christians?

[Margee]

Riven, here's mine all wrapped up in one letter I wrote to 'god' a few years ago.

 

 

[Riven]

@Margee thank you for sharing that. It was beautiful and heart-breaking. Your letter echoes so many of my feelings. I tried so hard. I felt it so deeply. The relationship was there for so long. It was real. It was heart-felt. I was part of me.

 

This is the reason that I have a blinding fury for the "easy peasy" brush off from current believers of, "If you walk away, you were never really a believer." Who are they to judge what my "walk" was?

 

It's a logic error that I get so sick of. On the one hand, "Only god can know the heart" is trotted out and used when needed, but at the same time the believer says, "I'm qualified to judge you, and say that you never believed." I'm not sure they see the flaw there. Or, they don't care. I guess it's much more frightening (to them) to think that you could be "all in," and yet walk away. It's much easier to dismiss you. That dismissal is gut wrenching to those like me, who tried their hearts out for years.