"Ask a Christian!"

[Tank]

I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.

That would be interesting indeed Tank. But the problem here is that I know very little of Christianity and Cforcerunner doesn't know much about Islam.
It would end up in exchanging information.

And what could possibly be wrong with that?!

[Tank]

@isok

Thanks for the reply, it sounds like a great discussion and I'm sure I have more questions to ask and will look into those threads you've referred to when I have a good hour to sit down and read through. But I think it would be better to take this discussion on another thread or through private messaging

I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.

Agreed tank, but I really intended this particular "Ask a Christian" thread to have fairly clean cut FAQ structure with intentional avoidance on tangents. I know Whitney did a great job splitting one of my other threads. So if the same thing could be done here, I'd be more than happy to continue the discussion on another public thread.

Totally agree, start another thread!

[Tristan Jay]

Ok, I've held off from approaching this, and I want to try to be fair about my questions to those Christians who I am impressed with, despite myself, for putting their necks out here in a place that rejects God.

I've read some of the back and forth stuff on this thread, but both sides of the argument really lose me when they get into finely tuning the details of their evidence.  Pretend I'm a little bit dumb, or highly distractible.  Brevity and clarity is good.

What I am struggling with is the version of God as he is depicted in the Bible in general, and how he comes across through Christian interpretation, explanation, ect.  When I throw away those preconceived notions, I can let go of my expectations of God, and consequently my loathing of him.

The promise of a personal relationship concerns and troubles me.  I've been in a human-to-human relationships, and have been called out on some things that are personally difficult for me (because of my personality type and/or certain problems).  A couple of things are trust and consistency, off the top of my head, as I'm typing this out.

Trust: We give out a certain amount of trust, in the hope that it will be affirmed as wisely-placed trust.  I had trust withdrawn from me because I didn't measure up to that trust, and in some ways I didn't fully understand that trust that was invested in me.  An active, personally committed God should have an understanding of each individual human's ability to trust (since he knows everything about us, as established Christian perspective).  My trust has been withdrawn, because he hasn't measured up to my trust.  Let me just state before I go further, I've heard in the past the concept that "Sometime God answers by not answering." 

This is also part of why trust has been withdrawn, I'm not good with relationships because I sometimes don't answer, and it's been made clear to me that it's not ok!  This leads into another question: if it's not ok for me, why is it ok for God?  Creating the universe and making it "good" is not an acceptable answer; any reasonable human with a conscience would feel responsible for something they created and probably feel guilt for when there are problems with that creation that causes harm to others.  If we feel guilt, and God doesn't because he is confident in his own perfect, what does that say about his ability to reflect on his behavior, and the work that he does (or fails to do)?  And what does that say about his ability to really appreciate a situation, if we experience guilt but he doesn't (keeping in mind that he is capable of everything, according to the paradigm I'm using to understand him).

I was going to go into consistency, but I'm running out of steam at this point, I will keep it simple and just say that he comes across as nothing less than supremely inconsistent.  Genocide is okay for him to order, sanction, and implement; but we're monsters if we engage in such behavior.  I'm not allowed to be shy in this world he's allowed to develop, which demands that you must be outgoing to be successful; but he never talks to us, or shows up to have his picture taken, and that's ok because he's God!

Why is he better than us, when we can accept and love people who are guilty of "sin" (and some of the sins such as homosexuality do not seem harmful to others, and he does not clarify for us).

Why isn't he clear?  He can do anything, and he sacrificed his son/himself to himself, for the sake of our souls.  That's supposed to be important, so why didn't he choose a better time to do all that stuff?  The whole planet is wired for surveillance right now, why be subtle when clarity is so important (remember, it's our immortal souls!).

Why did he create Hell, and the the god damned Devil?  Let me make this clear: I would not create hell and the Devil.  All the stuff before this is confusing enough, before you add Hell and the Devil.  I hate to say it, but I believe there are plenty of other humans, including myself, who can think of a better form of justice than him; that is more fair, merciful, reasonable, and able to be understood and clear and consistent.  Given that, wouldn't he be doing himself a huge favor by streamlining and reorganizing a lot of stuff?!

I'm really angry, in case you can't tell.  I've been trying to swallow my anger, and communicate with him, asking him for reciprocation in communication.  Well, now I want a damned burning piece of shrubbery talking to me while I'm sober, and say to me, "Ok, I get why you're confused, let me show you some pieces of the puzzle to help you sort through it, let me know if that helps make things more clear," because that is what a kindly, friendly human being would do for someone they cared about!!   

Post script: Eh, sorry about the length of my post, BTW, I know I asked for brevity and simplicity, then I went ahead and did this.  There are a lot of things I'm steamed about, though.

[Medusa]

Was there a question in there?

[Tristan Jay]

Was there a question in there?

Ah! Excellent, I thought I had lost my way.  I appreciate the prompt. 

I guess one of my questions is, if God is supposed to only test us within the limits of what we are able to handle, then why did he test me to the point that I hate him?  Shouldn't he have realized that I've been tapping out?  Who would like a jerk that keeps someone in a painful headlock after you've been tapping out for ages!  Not very sporting.

Why is there a double standard between him and us?  I'll go with an example of lying.  He tells us do not lie.  We hold ourselves to a standard that goes as far as saying withholding the truth is also lying.  Yet it sure seems like he is withholding stuff from us.  And what about all the other stuff I mentioned, when asking why is it ok for him, but not for us.  What's up with the double standard?  I mean, are we actually beating him at his own stupid game, doing a better job than he is?  The Bible seems to present a lot of evidence.

Another question is, why can't he clarify himself?  As I alluded to earlier at one point, why couldn't he have picked a better time to more blatantly have himself documented.  Wouldn't that have helped with a lot of questions that should be obvious, but are not?  And wouldn't that be worth the effort, to save more people on behalf of his son's/himself's sacrifice to himself?  Shouldn't he be doing everything in his power to maximize the effectiveness of that sacrifice, to make sure that every last possible person can be save (he is supposed to be capable of everything)?

My final question for now is: why won't he answer my questions?  I mean, at this point I think he consistently acts like a jerk and I hate him, but I would be comforted by him answering.  If he continues to fail to answer (and I feel reasonably open minded if he chooses to answer very effectively through the medium of a follower, which has not happened so far) then it will reinforce my distaste for the way he acts.

[Medusa]

I have to step in here for a second. I think it's unfair to ask any other person (Christian or not) to explain why you have an issue with what you believe to be God. I think not only will you not find answers. I think you are asking the wrong questions. I could hypothesize to some of your answers. Because boy oh boy have I been there. But I am not a Christian so I can't answer it here. Though privately I may be able to. The point? These aren't questions for a Christian. They are questions for you. And even more so, probably not the real questions that would help to be answered. I can only give you two pieces of info I have learned the very hard way.

1) Christians do not own God
2) Trying to understand what you believe to be an infinite being with our finite reasoning will get you no where.

You can pm me if you'd like to and we can discuss it free of prying eyes. 

[Tristan Jay]

I appreciate your response Medusa, I feel like I've moved closer to turning a corner toward something better than where I am at right now.  I totally agree with you that it's not really fair questioning, especially for very well meaning people who have put themselves in a vulnerable place on here (a very cordial and courteous environment.  My question really is not necessarily directed at them, the only reason I posted in here is because I thought I would place my feelings and deep concerns out in the open, for the consideration of multiple perspectives; and I am interested and curious about their thoughts and reactions.  I can get carried away, I admit, mainly I'm just interested in different, personal introspections; and I don't want anyone to feel like they have to perform for or be accountable on the behalf of something or someone else that is not themselves.

[Medusa]

I appreciate your response Medusa, I feel like I've moved closer to turning a corner toward something better than where I am at right now.  I totally agree with you that it's not really fair questioning, especially for very well meaning people who have put themselves in a vulnerable place on here (a very cordial and courteous environment.  My question really is not necessarily directed at them, the only reason I posted in here is because I thought I would place my feelings and deep concerns out in the open, for the consideration of multiple perspectives; and I am interested and curious about their thoughts and reactions.  I can get carried away, I admit, mainly I'm just interested in different, personal introspections; and I don't want anyone to feel like they have to perform for or be accountable on the behalf of something or someone else that is not themselves.

Yeah. I totally get it. But no one can tell you why God does what it does. My opinion is that if you are a believer and in that world...well it's a place that will never be able to question or truly understand the motives of an infinite being. And it may not necessarily be anything that can be placed in their part of the blame. At some point we must realize our own finite limits of understanding. We can't blame God for our lack of 'getting it'.


Of course as a non believer I don't really live in that world. But when I did briefly this was my understanding of why I always didn't understand everything about God. And once again it wasn't a Christian God I was looking towards. That's a very big problem for most poeple, especially Westerners. We just all assume God is an American I guess...and Christian.

[Stevil]

Hello Tristan Jay

I think that Christians derive all their knowledge from a few simple assertions
1. god exists
2. god created everything
3. god is all powerful
4. god is good
5. god is perfect
6. you are special, made in god's image.
7. god loves you
8. god wants you to love him
9. god is your personal friend and guide
10. you must believe or else you will be punished for all eternity

So if you run any event in your life, or story from the bible through these assertions you can then interprete correctly.
e.g. God set a couple of She bears to maul 42 children for teasing a man about his bald head.
Q: How can this god be good, when Super Nanny would have suggested a warning and then if offense is repeated would have put the child into naughty corner (1 minute for each year of its life), She would have explained why they were put in naughty corner, got them to say sorry, give them a big bear hug and then forgive them and show much love.
A: Those children were evil and deserved death, god could see this and dished out a just punishment, or after killing them god took them to heaven, apologised for killing them, explaining that it would make an interesting talking point about his book, the Bible. They would be immortalised when millions of people got to read about their plight and they would become famous in heaven and hence it would make it easy for them to get laid.

[Too Few Lions]

e.g. God set a couple of She bears to maul 42 children for teasing a man about his bald head.

Like most of the Bible, I'd read that story allegorically. There are two she-bears in the night sky (Ursa Major and Ursa Minor). They were two of the most important constellations in ancient cosmology / religion as they're very distinctive and bright constellations and they're also circumpolar. It's pure speculation on my part, but they might be the basis for that part of the myth. Given that the story is about Elijah's ascent to heaven, it might just be that the two she-bears were supposed to represent the two celestial she-bears. If I had to speculate further, maybe the 42 children might have been the 42 Greek constellations as listed by Aratos in 270 BCE? Pure speculation mind!

[xSilverPhinx]

Tristan Jay, why don't you start a thread on the topic of misotheism? Maybe a mod can merge these last few posts? I think it's an interesting topic, and at least since I've been posting here, there hasn't been such an outspoken misotheist such as yourself.

Well...for me the answer is simple. God doesn't exist, or at least if he does, then it's not of the type that interferes with the workings of the world and the living things capable of asking the question (is/are there a god or gods?) in it. To me it looks like you're trying to look for meaning in an indifferent universe, which will always be inconsistent with the gods as put forth by theistic religions, which have their fair share of expectations projected onto the universe such as god has to be good, protective, etc and etc.

About the part where you mentioned that sometimes god answers by not answering...in what context did you mean that? As in god always answers either yes or no as well? I ask because that looks like a psychological trap. That way, something called god will always answer and so reinforce your beliefs about the thing that you think is answering you. Looks a lot like the same way that Pascal's Wager works, that is, they're mechanisms that reinforce your already held beliefs, and people who already believe rarely question what they believe in.  

[AnimatedDirt]

I guess one of my questions is, if God is supposed to only test us within the limits of what we are able to handle, then why did he test me to the point that I hate him?  Shouldn't he have realized that I've been tapping out?  Who would like a jerk that keeps someone in a painful headlock after you've been tapping out for ages!  Not very sporting.

An answer from a Christian that will no doubt be a non-answer for you.

If life was a test, we all have failed as from the God/Christian perspective all have sinned and are thus destined for hell from the time of Adam and Eve taking of something they were told not to take up to now...and beyond.

The point we all, Atheist and Christian, agree on is that we all will die.  No one person is immortal.  The Christian (and other religions) simply hopes for something more and trusts in something that has shown a certain degree of foreknowledge.  The "myth" is that God has done all that is necessary for life after death and all one needs to do is believe.  That's it.  One doesn't HAVE TO DO anything.  The whole point is that if one loves something/someone, nothing is done from the standpoint of "must" but rather from love for...

You are still alive and so are not necessarily "done".  You're "done" the moment you take your last breath.  So technically, you've not tapped out yet...and so are simply at a point that many biblical characters have been at some point in their life and yet turned to God in the end or didn't.  Not that you will, but simply to say you're not "out" yet.

I know this is futile telling you, though.  There is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve.  It gives everyone full choice and every person is 100% in charge of their own stance.  Do you stand on your own or do you stand in need of a savior?  That is the question and the answer you give simply etches your place in the universe at death.

[Davin]

The "myth" is that God has done all that is necessary for life after death and all one needs to do is believe.  That's it.  One doesn't HAVE TO DO anything.  The whole point is that if one loves something/someone, nothing is done from the standpoint of "must" but rather from love for...

This looks very contradictory: One must believe to be saved along with not having to do anything. Only one can be true: either we don't have to do anything or we have to believe (believing being at least one thing). Would you mind clearing this up? As it stands: the god wants us to do something from the standpoint of "must" (one must believe), rather from love.

There is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve.

I don't think this is true at all, if there were enough reason to believe in a god, I would. There is enough reason to accept many things, but I see no reason to believe in something that is supposed to be doing so many things that has so little evidence for it. Also, these two problems present more than enough reason to not believe in your flavor of god.

-Edit: Bad spelling.

[Tristan Jay]

I've been keeping tabs on this in silence, because I got to the point where I said what I felt I needed to say up to that point.  Medusa said some things that helped prompt me to take a step back and take stock of my internal processing.  I have also been wanting to see if a Christian would venture to respond to my questions.

Animated Dirt, I appreciate you taking the time to respond to what I've thrown out on the table.  I wish you all the best in your life and endeavors (as I often wish well of Christians in general, but with perspective in their minds to go with it).  If you wouldn't mind, though, please don't make the assumption that an answer from yourself and a fellow Christian is going to be a non-answer, or sharing your perspective with me is a futile effort.  I'm still in flux, you see.  I'm trying to explore what the universe around me is going to offer as a response to my concerns, and I am refining my beliefs as I go. 

Like all humans, I am full of contradictions.  One minute I make a frustrated declaration in my own mind that all works of humanity as a guide toward the divine are crippled by each individual human's flaws; and the next moment I'm turning around and getting a text on Buddhism.  Over the course of the last couple of days, despite my frustration with human constructs and organizations to bring spirituality to humanity, I still at one point I still looked toward the Bible for an answer (and was dismayed at what I read) and similarly approached Buddhist literature for answers (and found something partially compelling).  While I bought the Buddhist text, and found what I had read there to be of interest, I still recognized a moment where I questioned some of those teachings as well, and my mind reflected that maybe there's still a lot that can be gleaned from this and other spiritual viewpoints, but I'm attuned to being wary of potential human error and personal prejudices riding alongside the genuinely constructive suggested mentality and approaches to life and spirituality.

I was very gravely disappointed when I referenced a psalm mentioned in a sticky of this part of the forum; I had read it and subsequently my eyes were drawn to a psalm above it (The Bible I have helpfully gives titles, or clarifies the subject of each psalm).  I eagerly locked in on it as something that I hoped would help.  Yet, at some point, the psalm starting talking about "enemies" and I shut down.  My jaded and disappointed mind wandered along a path, which brought a reminder that David was a king; and I wondered about his position as a religious but also political leader.  I was probably overreacting, but my mind seemed convinced that I had come across plenty of references to "enemies" as a general thing, and mentality and approach to "enemies" in the Bible.  I was not happy with my ponderings; in my own personal life, I reached a significant turning point in maturing when I set aside the word "enemies" as something to apply to people in actual life and thoughts.  As much as I loved (and still like to a certain extent) stories with clear black and white divisions in a conflict, at some point I realized that these stories presented a view of conflict that was too polarized, too simplified, and detrimental as a guide for dealing with humans in the real world.  I was revolted at the thought of flipping through the Bible any further, and coming across anything like "the enemies of God" and "the enemies of Jesus" and so forth.  Just to clarify, I'm mainly referring "enemies" on a personal, person-to-person level, warfare is a different animal that I'm hesitant to expand on, as this post is already getting to be a bit larger than I intended.

There is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve.

I can't impress upon you enough how relieved I am that you are trying to recognize that here we have one very serious problem (with still others waiting in the wings) that myself and (it seems to me) Atheists are stopping and saying "wait a minute, this isn't working."  Although Davin's response drew my attention to the fact that you've worded this very carefully.  Still, I feel generous and charitable (genuinely, without any derision or condescension), and receptive to carrying this further.  My concern is akin to what Davin said, and despite much of the hostility I feel directed toward God as he is characterized in Christianity and the Bible, I don't want to feel that; and I would want to see more from God that makes sense.  There is this notion that he knows what is in the hearts and minds of all of us, and it seems like there is a lot more that he could do (in subtle ways...if he must) that speaks to each individual in the way that they absolutely need, to dispel each individual's doubt.  Anything less doesn't reflect effectively on how important Jesus efforts and sacrifice are supposed to be, if you follow my line of reasoning (feel free to offer an alternative perspective, that's why I'm asking in the "Ask a Christian" topic, I am not taking this lightly).

Regarding the Tapping Out thing, I wasn't necessarily approaching it from a view of being released at the end of our lives, I'm more thinking of a non-terminal situation in life where someone can still be begging and praying to God desperately, "Please, make it stop, make it stop, it's unbearable, make it stop!"  You can use your imagination to fill in the blank for what they're praying to be saved from.  From the perspective I was approaching this example, if a Sensei didn't follow his own rules and release a person who is tapping out, then the Sensei might find his students are starting to leave the Dojo.  Life isn't over, and an enthusiasm for martial arts isn't necessarily at an end either.

Viewing the Tapping Out scenario in the direction of a more terminal situation just directs my thoughts toward people who commit suicide.  Another very serious problem.  We never know what is in the heart and mind of a person who has reached the point of suicide.  But I have to wonder if there are some who genuinely feel like they cannot go on in this world; it really is too much, and they really have been tested beyond what they are capable of handling.  I've been very dismayed to hear how Christians have responded to the issue a few times in the past; and have longed for more careful, thoughtful, honest, and introspective reflection than I've seen in the past.  Very troubling.

As a housekeeping matter, right now I loath God as defined by the infrastructure, constructs and conventions of Christianity (and the other Abrahamic approaches as well).  I don't want to waste my time, energy and mental wellbeing channeling hatred, though.  As for the God I don't know, as not defined or limited by any religion, I don't want to be preoccupied with him in equal measure to how he doesn't seem to want to be to preoccupied with human affairs.  I don't know if I could ever really like him, because my personality is hard wired to be extremely wary of authority figures as a general thing.  So, ostensibly I suppose I am sort of still a misotheist, to a certain extent.  I latched onto that label when I tried searching for others online who have felt the same way as I have in the distant past and most recent present (I knew I didn't fit the bill of Atheist), and a book called Hating God had some interesting perspectives on offer to help me sift through my feelings.  Another member on this forum said something that gave me the impression that misotheism has tended to be (or is commonly regarded as) a kind of pupal-stage for people who eventually transition into something else.  I think that's become true for me, but I'm still exploring, trying to find my way.  I imagine someone could pin a label on me, but just like Abrahamic religions do to God, trying to pin a person down by definition, it only provides a simplified explanation for people trying to understand a phenomenon (but within the phenomenon itself, things are much more complicated).

Wow, that's a lot!  But I don't think anything less will do the trick.

[AnimatedDirt]

This looks very contradictory: One must believe to be saved along with not having to do anything. Only one can be true: either we don't have to do anything or we have to believe (believing being at least one thing). Would you mind clearing this up? As it stands: the god wants us to do something from the standpoint of "must" (one must believe), rather from love.

Certainly.  The answer is the difference between a physical action (good works) and a passive action (belief).  In that sense is what I mean to say there is nothing that needs be done.  It is often referred to as a gift.  One (in a sense) must accept a gift to therefore use it...reach out and take it.  There's nothing that one does to gain or deserve the gift...as it is a gift.  But you do have to actively take it.  Slightly contradictory as an analogy, but I think it conveys the point.

I don't think this is true at all, if there were enough reason to believe in a god, I would. There is enough reason to accept many things, but I see no reason to believe in something that is supposed to be doing so many things that has so little evidence for it. Also, these two problems present more than enough reason to not believe in your flavor of god

Apparently there is enough reason to believe, otherwise there would be NO believers.  You may require more evidence or better evidence or even proof, but that doesn't make the available evidence unsatisfactory as there are plenty of believers.  It's just not enough for "you".