My biggest issues with Christianity (vol 1)
I’ve had an idea rolling around in my head for a while now, and I’ve decided to make it happen. A while ago, I realized that I was getting tired of the same old arguments, from both sides. The problem is that atheists and theists (to somewhat over simplify the two sides) go back and forth with the same old reasoning and never get anywhere. And the problem, I think, is that out here on the internet, there’s no authority. So when some anonymous theist says something like, “Christians believe that Jesus rode dinosaurs to get around,” and I point out the stupidity there, another may just come up and say “No we don’t. Here’s what we really believe.” And the cycle continues.
We all know the basics of Christianity, but there are so many controversial points with a countless number of arguments that we just get lost in semantics most of the time. This is literal, that is not. This is part of my core belief, that is not. This part of the bible is dubious, that part is the word of god. It’s enough to make your head spin. With the accessability of the internet growing every day, the number of Christian “denominations” is growing to meet the number of people who have an opinion.
So I got tired of it. In the interest of information gathering and sharing, I am setting out on a project. I’ve done my research, compiled a list of the most hotly debated topics that we deal with, and I’m going to find out what the authorities think. I’m requesting that local church leaders find an hour or so to sit down with me and discuss these things, not because I want to try to argue them into submission, but because it’s important to know what they actually teach. I don’t care what the crackpot on the street says about the rapture coming in 17 days. Christian denominations have assemblies of large numbers of theologians that determine exactly what their church teaches. I want to know what that really is. What are these people hearing in the sermons every week?
Let me stress again that this is not a confrontational “interview”. I’m a sucker for a good debate, so I will probably bring up some of my personal questions regarding some of these issues, but in no way do I intend to make it combatative. It is simply that I know very well what kinds of questions a lot of people already have, and I want to discuss them with someone who is well versed in the official teachings of his/her church.
In this light, I’d like anyone who would like to leave a comment regarding any issue you want me to bring up. I have already hit the big obvious ones, so you don’t need to worry about those. But if there is something that you’ve never gotten an adequate answer on, let me know. I will do the research as much as I can, and then raise it to the church leaders.
Stay posted for updates. I think this will be a very interesting and enlightening project.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Sounds like an interesting project, similar to what another author did. I have an author friend who was working on a book regarding the history of a section of east Dallas. She interviewed eighteen local ministers of many denominations. But the second interview, she realized they all were telling her the exact same thing regarding their ministry and the position of their church in the community. She found they all had three common points:
1) They all felt their church was THE spiritual lighthouse in the community. No matter that there may be two other churches next door, THEIR church was THE lighthouse to share God with that community.
2) Every pastor had an agenda. And they called that “God’s will” for their church/neighborhood. It was clear that the pastor came to that church with the agenda already known/planned. When he presented it to his church, it was presented as “God’s will” to that congregation, no matter whose idea it was!
3) Each pastor had boundries, each pastor refused to do various things, hospital visits, funerals, etc. It varied between pastors, but each had a list of things they refused to do!
It will be interesting to see your list of questions and to see how the various ministers answer you, or even how they respond to your desire for a visit. My friend had two pastors who refused to meet with her, although she had lived within a few blocks of their churches, in that neighborhood for fifty years! Keep us informed on your progress.
I certainly will keep updates on my progress. And I think that really the stuff that I’m not expecting will make the most interesting material, like you’ve mentioned. I think I could pretty easily ask about their opinions on other local churches. It may take a little more tact to breach 2 and 3 without causing them to close up completely.
I’m glad it interests other people too. We’ll see where it leads!
Here’s one that I’ve never been given a good answer for. If god is all powerful, all-knowing, and omnibenevolent, then why does he sit back and watch awful things happen to good people, especially children. For example if a child gets raped and murdered, god knows it was going to happen, watches it happen step by step, has the ability to stop it and does nothing. Now if a human said that they watched a child get raped and murdered and could have done something to stop it but didn’t then they would be as degenerate as the individual committing the act, but god gets a free pass in this situation. So it ties into your science argument, the religious idea is discordant with real world observations and yet it’s still held as being true. I’ve heard some arguments about free will etc etc, but the person suffering certainly didn’t choose to suffer in most cases.
I definitely want to bring this up. Essentially it’s the Epicurean Paradox:
If God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able to
Then He is not omnipotent.
If He is able, but not willing
Then He is malevolent.
If He is both able and willing
Then whence cometh evil?
If He is neither able nor willing
Then why call Him God?
Exactly. Check-mate.
I would love to help with this project. I’m kind of a “sucker” for nonconfrontational, abstract discussions. My own area of expertise is Catholicism.
It sounds like you have mostly been engaging with Evangelical Protestants. You have identified the problem with evangelicals: they have no authority to define their doctrines, and each pastor and congregation—indeed, each individual congregant—has his own set of specific beliefs, which likely differ in some detail from those of any other given pastor. They claim to have literal belief in a document (the Bible) that is full of metaphors and symbols, arising from ancient foreign cultures. No wonder there are often contradictions, even within any one person’s beliefs.
The mainline Protestant denominations are a little more centralized in their beliefs and creeds, but they make decisions about the “truth” based on majority opinion (most recently with the ELCA’s vote about practicing gay pastors). I don’t know how anyone could respect the authority of an organization that teaches about the fundamental truths of the universe as determined by a popular vote.
The Catholic Church faces many criticisms, but at least you can say this: It has a centralized authority (the Pope), its beliefs are written down clearly and accessibly (the Catechism of the Catholic Church), and popular opinion does not dictate its teachings. So at least it’s a little easier to engage in discussion with Catholics. (There are some finer points of theology that are still being developed, but these are not likely to come up in a debate about the nature of reality, such as whether or not a higher power exists, and if so, whether it cares about us, and exactly how powerful it actually is).
I’m not a “church leader.” But I am a religion writer and a catechist (religion teacher) as well as a hopeless intellectual. (That’s not a boast of intelligence—that’s up for debate—just a statement about how I work.) I am also very science-literate (I’m also a science writer). And I understand evolution—no, really, I do. I hate “intelligent design” because it is not science, and don’t get me started on literal creationism. I think that will give us some common ground! (Common Catholic belief on this is all over the map, because Catholic teaching does not address the scientific aspects of creation at all, only its spiritual meaning.)
You can reach me by e-mail, or via my website (linked above), which I call “a Catholic magazine of science and reason.” I Twitter and FB, too.
That’s wonderful. There’s no viewpoint that I don’t want to capture, so I’ll definitely be in touch. I had 12 years of Catholic school, and I still feel like I will learn a lot from that side of things. You are absolutely correct about the authority of its teachings too. I’ve thought several times how the discussion with Catholics will be very different from most of the others, simply because there is an authoritative teaching, rather than a multitude of personal interpretations.
Perhaps you can answer something that I’m curious about. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, how much detail is given about the basis behind teachings? Does it explain what biblical interpretations are behind it, or what other Catholic teaching supports it?
Anyway, I’m glad to have your interest and help. I will be in contact soon.
if while alive (the first time around) jesus said we’re forgiven and god loves us, why was [self] sacrifice *required* of him? couldnt humankind have said “thanks for telling us that, j-man!” and let him go about preaching? otherwise it seems that they killed a guy that had a lot of good ideas. but if it was *required* and proof of god’s love, why do people sob over the crucifixion? why not say “yay, they killed him”? i have a kid. i love him unconditionally. i dont require him to pick his favorite friend and nail him to something so that i’ll think his remaining friends are good people. i certainly wouldnt like anyone who would nail my own kid to something. i dont want to believe that god (or who/whatever is out/up there) isnt capable of just being fair. ya know?
I think it’s a very good question. In my experience, the standard answer is something along these lines: God makes the law, and you can’t break the law without punishment. Back when Adam and Eve broke the law, he banished them, but said that he would send a sinless sacrifice to take that punishment for everyone. The only way to have a sinless sacrifice would be Jesus. Basically, the point being that God’s law really isn’t a law unless you get punished for not following it – otherwise it’s just a suggestion.
I’m not sure how much I agree with that explanation, but that’s what I’ve run into. Then you get into all kinds of weirdness about how Jesus and God are one, and “son” is more of a term for our benefit rather than the unknowable mystery of the trinity. Or asking if it was really that much of a sacrifice, since he didn’t really lose his son forever, like you would, but actually got him right back when he died. And so on. But I’ll make sure to raise this point with the people I talk to. It’s worth looking into, for sure.
In the same vein, I’d like to know if Genesis isn’t the literal truth (which is, IMHO, obvious), then what’s up with Original Sin? If Eve didn’t really sin, then why kill Jesus? And I’d like to know why Jesus asks “why hast thou forsaken me?” If he’s god, too, shouldn’t he know?
For that matter, if Genesis were true, then why did god set us up to fail? He makes two people, a Tree-of-No-Touchy, and a snake. He tells them they’ll die if they eat the No-Touchy fruit. Because he’s omniscient, he knows the snake is going to tell them they won’t really die from it. And then he leaves, knowing full well that they don’t know the difference between right and wrong. They eat the fruit. Just like the snake said, they don’t die from it. And here comes god all “where are you?!” Doesn’t he know? When he finds out what happened (which he should have already known) he gets mad about it. Now they really are going to die, because he punishes them by withholding the Live-Forever fruit. He totally set us up, like the mother cat who told her kittens to wear mittens while they ate their pie, and then got mad because they got their mittens dirty. And he’s supposed to be the good guy in this story?
Also, about that “free will” business… how is it free will if it’s Under Threat of Punishment? “Get in the car, or I’ll shoot you. It’s your choice. You’ve got free will.” Um… “Worship me and do what I say or I’ll throw you into a lake of eternal fire. It’s your choice.” Um…
There are a multitude of questions about Genesis, literal or not.
If it was the Tree-of-the-Knowledge-of-Good-and-Evil, then Adam and Eve had no knowledge of evil before eating from it. So they couldn’t know it was evil to disobey god. And yet, once they did it, they were punished.
What does free will really mean with an omnipotent being as our creator? Does he already know if you’re going to hell? How cruel to create you, knowing that you will suffer for eternity.
If he could reveal himself to me, enough to convince me, and leave the decision to follow him still in my hands, my free will would be satisfied and I could be saved. But he doesn’t do that, so I must go to hell forever. Yet they say he loves me more than I can imagine.
I had no bearing on Adam’s and Eve’s decision to eat the fruit, but I’m still subject to the punishment for disobeying him.
Hell is an infinite punishment for a finite crime. How is that justified?
And so on…
This is why I don’t even get past Genesis without being irritated at the god. Don’t get me started on the Egyptian firstborns or “Rain Falls Everybody Dies.” Honestly, I don’t think I’d care to worship the Christian god even if he were real.
My question is “how do Christian fundamentalists reconcile their views with the teachings of Christ when they appear to be so incompatible?”
I agree with the sentiment, but do you have some specific teachings in mind? I like to go into that kind of discussion with specifics, otherwise it can be brushed off just as easily.
[...] quiet for a few days on this site, mostly because I’m preparing for interviews. I wrote a post a little while back about wanting to meet with Christians of all types and discuss with them their [...]