For all Christians out there, what are the hardest questions that you struggle with

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Burning in hell forever. If God actually burns us alive in hell forever wouldn’t that make him the worst serial killer of them all. It’s disgusting how much evil that would take.

Whenever I hear about someone being killed my first thought is I hope they didn’t suffer. But if hell is real then it’s designed for us to suffer in the worst possible way forever.

Also there's the question of why you would want to be in heaven forever if someone you loved dearly did not make it with you but was sent to hell or limbo.

When you go to heaven, you are not the same "you". Your relationships with other people aren't the same. That's what I was told.

I have also recently learned that "hell" is not some burning firey pit, but a place that has the absence of the presence of God, like Limbo in Dante's Inferno.

I thought one of the attractions of heaven is that you get to see your loved ones again. You’re saying in essence we forget those loved ones, it’s all about God.

Because seriously would you want to be in eternity without your child if he didn’t get to be there? That sounds like hell.

[Anonymous]

How people who claim to not believe in a transcendent creator God can assume that human rights are a thing and should be agreed upon by everyone. A person who does not believe in a transcendent creator God is a materialist by default, believing the only things that exist are matter and energy, from which no grounding for objective morality can spring forth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread, a relatively narrow version of Christianity (American evangelical) is mostly what’s being represented. Probably because so many of the questions don’t apply to most mainline or progressive Christian theology and Biblical interpretation. Also because non-evangelicals tend to be less concerned with having a single correct answer.

And so much of evangelical Biblical interpretation involves twisting oneself into knot to justify really awful things (“Yes, God said to kill all of those women and children in the Old Testament and here’s why it was right and holy for him to do it”) because it’s built on a house of cards. I was often told, “if one verse isn’t true, then none of it’s true.” So you’re operating from a place of seeming certainty that’s masking existential fear that if you consider literary or historical context, or just a different understanding, your entire faith will crumble.

The #exvangelical tag on Twitter is an interesting read and includes former evangelicals who are now part of other branches of Christianity or who are now atheist or agnostic.

The Bible for Normal People podcast is a has a varied sampling of non-American fundamentalist biblical interpretation. They often have Jewish scholars on, which has really broadened my understanding of the Hebrew Bible and how differest schools of thought in Judaism have dealt with many of these questions for millennia. (Christians often forget that we share the majority of our scripture with a rigorous intellectual faith tradition from which we could learn a great deal.)

(-former conservative evangelical, now Episcopalian)

You are correct and I am guilty of propagating the narrow view of Christianity on this board. I grew up in it and it’s hard to shake...especially as evangelicals have made some significant political wins and are contributing to some objectively bad outcomes.

I appreciate the recommendations as I love a podcast and am interested more about the Bible in a more historical perspective. I often wonder if the Bible/Christianity’s popularity is because of the message, or because it was a tool. I think it’s a bit of both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread, a relatively narrow version of Christianity (American evangelical) is mostly what’s being represented. Probably because so many of the questions don’t apply to most mainline or progressive Christian theology and Biblical interpretation. Also because non-evangelicals tend to be less concerned with having a single correct answer.

And so much of evangelical Biblical interpretation involves twisting oneself into knot to justify really awful things (“Yes, God said to kill all of those women and children in the Old Testament and here’s why it was right and holy for him to do it”) because it’s built on a house of cards. I was often told, “if one verse isn’t true, then none of it’s true.” So you’re operating from a place of seeming certainty that’s masking existential fear that if you consider literary or historical context, or just a different understanding, your entire faith will crumble.

The #exvangelical tag on Twitter is an interesting read and includes former evangelicals who are now part of other branches of Christianity or who are now atheist or agnostic.

The Bible for Normal People podcast is a has a varied sampling of non-American fundamentalist biblical interpretation. They often have Jewish scholars on, which has really broadened my understanding of the Hebrew Bible and how differest schools of thought in Judaism have dealt with many of these questions for millennia. (Christians often forget that we share the majority of our scripture with a rigorous intellectual faith tradition from which we could learn a great deal.)

(-former conservative evangelical, now Episcopalian)

You are correct and I am guilty of propagating the narrow view of Christianity on this board. I grew up in it and it’s hard to shake...especially as evangelicals have made some significant political wins and are contributing to some objectively bad outcomes.

I appreciate the recommendations as I love a podcast and am interested more about the Bible in a more historical perspective. I often wonder if the Bible/Christianity’s popularity is because of the message, or because it was a tool. I think it’s a bit of both.

So my viewpoint is undoubtedly biased (I am a cultural Jew whose spiritual beliefs are closest to Buddhism/Hinduism than anything Western), but my thought has always been that Jesus's message of love and tolerance has been substantially overtaken by the Church's (historically the Catholic Church's) exploitation of his legacy as a tool for political control.

I went to a Jesuit college and learned from the Jesuit priests some of the historical context for major Christian ideas, and that only solidified my viewpoint. I learned that Jesus didn't discuss original sin at all -- an idea that I think is darkly perfect as a tool for control. It forces people into a cycle of dependence on the church, wherein we are constantly asking priests for forgiveness, only to inevitably sin again, because we are inherently sinful people, for whom full redemption is pretty elusive. It forces people into a subservient position. When you combine that with the idea of an infallible Pope, you really have something akin to a dictatorship.

Now this is specific to the Catholic Church -- I can't speak for Protestant churches. But to answer your question (from my viewpoint), the success of Catholicism has been largely because of Church's ingenious use of Jesus's message and story as a tool for political control. To some extent, all major religions have attempted to exert political control in some form, but to my mind, the Catholic Church has done it to an unprecedented extent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there’s a God, how do you explain:

Kids suffering and dying of cancer

The tsunami that killed 200k people in Thailand and Indonesia

Does he just not care?

Oy. This question has been answered many times by theologians. Do your fvcking homework...

No it hasn’t.

No one can provide a satisfactory answer to this. This is why so many Jews left religion after surviving the Holocaust death camps.

Do your f*cking homework.

There is no definitive answer as to why some people suffer and others do not. That’s why it’s called faith.

I am a Christian and I agree with this. It's the honest thing sometimes to say we don't know.

Perhaps the honest thing to say is that suffering is random and has nothing to do with faith. People suffer with and without faith

Yeah but the thing people wonder is, if God is all knowing and all powerful, why did he let the Holocaust happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there’s a God, how do you explain:

Kids suffering and dying of cancer

The tsunami that killed 200k people in Thailand and Indonesia

Does he just not care?

Oy. This question has been answered many times by theologians. Do your fvcking homework...

No it hasn’t.

No one can provide a satisfactory answer to this. This is why so many Jews left religion after surviving the Holocaust death camps.

Do your f*cking homework.

There is no definitive answer as to why some people suffer and others do not. That’s why it’s called faith.

I am a Christian and I agree with this. It's the honest thing sometimes to say we don't know.

Perhaps the honest thing to say is that suffering is random and has nothing to do with faith. People suffer with and without faith

Yeah but the thing people wonder is, if God is all knowing and all powerful, why did he let the Holocaust happen?

Rather than trying to reconcile the obvious huge logical holes in the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent God, why not consider an alternative? Billions of people in Asia have embraced other ways of looking at the world for thousands of years (way before Christianity emerged).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
When you go to heaven, you are not the same "you". Your relationships with other people aren't the same. That's what I was told.

Think about that... seriously.

[Anonymous]

All of these complex, seemingly irreconcilable questions are easily explained with one simple answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^and if you believe in an all-powerful God, then I believe he can preserve his Word throughout history. So I don’t worry too much about translational errors, I trust in God’s handling. It’s pretty much a faith thing and I know a lot of people have a problem with that, but that’s the best answer I got

Faith provides a good fall-back response when logic doesn't work.

Things in Christianity deal with the supernatural: God, The Flood, Eden, The Ressurection, etc. That which is supernatural cannot be explained by natural laws or logic. That’s why it’s supernstural.

Things in science are natural. The laws of physics and logic apply to them. But not to the supernatural

Because God is supernatural, the natural laws of logic aren’t sufficient to explain things about Him.

Logic and faith are two different categories depending on the subject you are talking about

Logic and God just don't mix, except when using logic to try to explain how god works. Then it's really bad logic,as per above, so better to just keep logic out of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Burning in hell forever. If God actually burns us alive in hell forever wouldn’t that make him the worst serial killer of them all. It’s disgusting how much evil that would take.

Whenever I hear about someone being killed my first thought is I hope they didn’t suffer. But if hell is real then it’s designed for us to suffer in the worst possible way forever.

Also there's the question of why you would want to be in heaven forever if someone you loved dearly did not make it with you but was sent to hell or limbo.

When you go to heaven, you are not the same "you". Your relationships with other people aren't the same. That's what I was told.

I have also recently learned that "hell" is not some burning firey pit, but a place that has the absence of the presence of God, like Limbo in Dante's Inferno.

Sounds like you're willing to believe some nice stuff someone told you, instead of adhering to the Bible and traditional church teachings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread, a relatively narrow version of Christianity (American evangelical) is mostly what’s being represented. Probably because so many of the questions don’t apply to most mainline or progressive Christian theology and Biblical interpretation. Also because non-evangelicals tend to be less concerned with having a single correct answer.

And so much of evangelical Biblical interpretation involves twisting oneself into knot to justify really awful things (“Yes, God said to kill all of those women and children in the Old Testament and here’s why it was right and holy for him to do it”) because it’s built on a house of cards. I was often told, “if one verse isn’t true, then none of it’s true.” So you’re operating from a place of seeming certainty that’s masking existential fear that if you consider literary or historical context, or just a different understanding, your entire faith will crumble.

The #exvangelical tag on Twitter is an interesting read and includes former evangelicals who are now part of other branches of Christianity or who are now atheist or agnostic.

The Bible for Normal People podcast is a has a varied sampling of non-American fundamentalist biblical interpretation. They often have Jewish scholars on, which has really broadened my understanding of the Hebrew Bible and how differest schools of thought in Judaism have dealt with many of these questions for millennia. (Christians often forget that we share the majority of our scripture with a rigorous intellectual faith tradition from which we could learn a great deal.)

(-former conservative evangelical, now Episcopalian)

Sounds like you decided not to believe the conservative view of Christianity and latched on to the less punishing liberal view. But how can you know what God wants? assuming you believe in God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How people who claim to not believe in a transcendent creator God can assume that human rights are a thing and should be agreed upon by everyone. A person who does not believe in a transcendent creator God is a materialist by default, believing the only things that exist are matter and energy, from which no grounding for objective morality can spring forth.

only in your mid or the mind of the person who told you that. Even gorillas have a sense of morality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The mother of all questions:

If God is omniscience why did he create Satan if he knew Satan was going to fall, and then make man fall from grace? Then from there everything just goes down hill.

I mean... we could've avoided all this if He just didn't create Satan. So... why?

No one knows why God let the Fall happen. It’s something we won’t know until we get to heaven

I know.. that's why this is the mother of all questions. If one knows the answer to this question, one could answer all the above questions.

fee will

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^and if you believe in an all-powerful God, then I believe he can preserve his Word throughout history. So I don’t worry too much about translational errors, I trust in God’s handling. It’s pretty much a faith thing and I know a lot of people have a problem with that, but that’s the best answer I got

Faith provides a good fall-back response when logic doesn't work.

Things in Christianity deal with the supernatural: God, The Flood, Eden, The Ressurection, etc. That which is supernatural cannot be explained by natural laws or logic. That’s why it’s supernstural.

Things in science are natural. The laws of physics and logic apply to them. But not to the supernatural

Because God is supernatural, the natural laws of logic aren’t sufficient to explain things about Him.

Logic and faith are two different categories depending on the subject you are talking about

Logic and God just don't mix, except when using logic to try to explain how god works. Then it's really bad logic,as per above, so better to just keep logic out of it.

Eh as a scientific analytical person I see evidence of God all around the logical world. There is an aspect of faith with any religion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^and if you believe in an all-powerful God, then I believe he can preserve his Word throughout history. So I don’t worry too much about translational errors, I trust in God’s handling. It’s pretty much a faith thing and I know a lot of people have a problem with that, but that’s the best answer I got

Faith provides a good fall-back response when logic doesn't work.

Things in Christianity deal with the supernatural: God, The Flood, Eden, The Ressurection, etc. That which is supernatural cannot be explained by natural laws or logic. That’s why it’s supernstural.

Things in science are natural. The laws of physics and logic apply to them. But not to the supernatural

Because God is supernatural, the natural laws of logic aren’t sufficient to explain things about Him.

Logic and faith are two different categories depending on the subject you are talking about

Logic and God just don't mix, except when using logic to try to explain how god works. Then it's really bad logic,as per above, so better to just keep logic out of it.

Eh as a scientific analytical person I see evidence of God all around the logical world. There is an aspect of faith with any religion

Can you give some examples?