What is the purpose of apologetics?

Clip art image of people having a debate. Image source.

I recently published my review of the book "The Case for a Creator". Here's the follow-up post, which asks, what is the purpose of apologetics?

First of all, let's be real here, apologetics isn't about defending Christianity in general- it's about the debate between Christianity and naturalistic atheism. I don't think I've seen any apologetics books specifically dedicated to answering claims from other religions, something along the lines of "okay suppose we assume God exists- here's why it's the Christian God instead of the Muslim God." The assumption is, if you're not a Christian, then you're an atheist.

That's a bit, uh, odd, but let's just accept this framing, and consider the effect of apologetics on people at various points along the "how confident are you about your belief in Christianity and/or atheism" spectrum:

Atheists who get into debates with Christians

The atheists who know what's what and are out there actually participating in these kinds of debates, they are quite unimpressed with apologetics. They say apologetics arguments are really weak and pretty much amount to nothing.

That's interesting, because the way apologetics sells itself, one of the main purposes is to be used in these kinds of debates. So here we see that there's a mismatch between what apologetics claims to be, and what it actually is. It sells itself as "here are some answers you can use to tell those strong outspoken atheists why they're wrong" but it very much does not work on that group.

Non-religious people who are "seeking"/ open to religion

There may be people who aren't religious, but are open to believing in a religion, and are curious and want to see what's out there. Yeah, I think apologetics can be convincing for this group. Author Lee Strobel himself seems to have been in this group (maybe he would disagree with my classifying him that way though?)- his story is that he was an atheist trying to disprove Christianity, but as he investigated and learned more, he actually became convinced that Christianity was true. 

So yes, I would say this makes sense, as a valid use of apologetics. There is evidence for Christianity- it's nowhere near as airtight as apologetics claims, but still... So it makes sense that telling people about this, if they are people who already think maybe they are interested in believing in some kind of religion, might convince them. I think this can be a good thing.

However, I think it kind of misses the point, when apologetics advocates talk about it this way. For the vast majority of people who convert to Christianity, it's not because of apologetics. Nobody is like "I became a Christian because Josephus's writings corroborate what the bible says." Nope, nobody.

Ex-Christians

Apologetics is very much NOT going to be of any use for this group. They already were Christian, they already went through the whole big struggle of doubting their faith, they likely already thought through the supposed "answers" and found them unconvincing, and eventually came to the decision to abandon the whole thing. 

And then the ex-Christian tells a Christian authority figure (parents, pastor, etc) that they no longer believe, and the Christian tries to convince them with apologetics arguments. Uh, don't do this. It's like, instead of actually listening to them, the Christian treats the ex-Christian's feelings and experiences as just annoying doubts to be argued away as fast as possible. The Christian acts like the ex-Christian needs their permission to no longer believe. The Christian buys an apologetics book and gives it to the ex-Christian. Like they're not allowed to say they're not Christian unless they read the whole book and put together a response and present it to the Christian authority figure.

Sometimes the ex-Christian then buys an atheist book and gives it to the Christian, so they can both understand each other. Then the ex-Christian reads their book and the Christian does not read theirs, but still acts like the ex-Christian has not given good enough reasons for leaving their faith.

Anyway, yeah, don't do this. This use of apologetics- as a way to try to make rules about what ex-Christians are allowed to believe or not believe, rather than listening to them- is unloving and it doesn't even "work." Don't do this.

I know that, in this kind of situation, the Christian is genuinely motivated by compassion and concern for their ex-Christian friend. They fear that if they can't convince the ex-Christian to become Christian again, the ex-Christian will go to hell. This mix of love for their friend, and fear of what their God is going to do to their friend... and how it plays out in ways that are really heartless in reality... I mean, I know that very well. I used to be evangelical.

Christians who are doubting

If you're a Christian who is having doubts about your faith, maybe you decide to read some apologetics.

In some cases, this can be reassuring. If your doubts are along the lines of "where did the bible even come from, is it just totally made up or is there some kind of evidence about its history?" Along the lines of, you fear that maybe somebody just made this stuff up for no reason, and nobody ever spent any time caring about whether it was actually true or made sense. If that's what you're concerned about, then yes, it will help you to read about the history behind various Christian beliefs. Yeah, don't worry, it's not like "nobody knows where these beliefs came from, but people at church told me they're true, so I guess they are." People have thought about these things!

But in other cases, apologetics resources act like they have good answers, but they really don't. Things like, the problem of evil- ie, why does God allow evil and suffering in the world? Or, the problem of hell- Christians teach that everyone deserves to go to hell, and the only way you can get out of it is by believing in Jesus the correct way, but doesn't that seem unfair? Yeah, if your misgivings about Christianity are about something that Christians are promoting, or that God is doing, which seems extremely unethical- apologetics resources aren't going to be any help. These resources will try to reassure you that whatever you are concerned about doesn't really matter. And that kind of reassurance will be fine for Christians who are just playing games in debates with atheists, but if you are seriously thinking about these things, taking them so seriously that it's threatening the whole foundation of your faith, well, the apologetics answers aren't going to do you any good.

For Christians who go to apologetics to try to get rid of their doubts, I think there's a lot of fear. The idea that we might be wrong about everything is just too scary- we hope that we're right and Christianity is true- we want to convince ourselves that it is. Following truth wherever it goes is very scary, if you're coming from this kind of Christian background.

For me, I don't really feel scared about that any more. I'm not so incredibly dependent on this needing to be true. If it turns out Christianity is not true, I don't think I would regret anything... "Love your neighbor as yourself" would still be the principle by which we should live our lives. Maybe the other details are more about the way the human mind sets up a narrative to make sense of the world. 

But yeah, one's feelings and one's level of fear are very much dependent on what variety of religion you follow. If you follow a religion that pushes you to do weird things that only make sense if the religion's claims are true (ya know like me when I was evangelical), well, then you'll have a lot more at stake in needing them to be true.

Christians who are confident and not doubting

Honestly, these Christians are the biggest market for apologetics books. Yeah, apologetics is talked about like its purpose is to convince people who are non-Christians or who are on the fence, but I would say it rarely "works" for those groups. The people who actually buy these books are mainly people who are already sure about their Christian beliefs. 

(At this point, my brain was like, hey I'm a Christian and not doubting and I bought "The Case for a Creator." I feel personally attacked.)

Why does this group of people buy apologetics books? Well, when I was evangelical, I read a lot of apologetics stuff because I'm just that kind of nerd. Curious about everything, wanting to know the reasons behind everything. But now I no longer think that apologetics is about that kind of honest curiosity. I *don't* think apologetics is motivated by a desire to follow truth wherever it takes us. It's more about, here are the beliefs that Christians are required to hold, let's try to come up with some arguments to convince ourselves that they're intellectually reasonable.

To a large extent, apologetics is about "we're winning, we're right and those atheists are wrong." It's about making yourself feel better about your beliefs- not about actually seeking to believe things that are true. And a lot of it is about learning some clever arguments that you can use when you meet non-Christians. Get yourself prepared, so you'll know what to say and you might be able to convince them. (I would say this also does not really "work.")

---

So what does this all add up to?

I have a really negative view of apologetics now. A lot of it feels very dishonest to me. Arguments about how God did something bad, but you have to kill your conscience and convince yourself it's not actually bad. Arguments that atheists have given good responses to, long ago, but the same talking points get endlessly repeated in churches because nobody is allowed to actually listen to atheists. Arguments that completely misrepresent science/ quotes from famous evolutionary biologists/ the beliefs of people who disagree with us/ etc.

There's always that fear, that people are going to hell if we can't convince them, so whenever you talk about your faith, it has to be a sales pitch, rather than being honest.

So I want to be like "ugh this is all bad" but I can't do that, because I actually believe a bunch of these arguments. If you asked me what evidence there is for this or that Christian belief that I hold, I would probably give an answer that you could also find in an apologetics book. Because I really do think in those terms.

I think, if you believe in God, there is value in learning about the arguments that people have used, historically, to support that belief. I'm not saying they're all good arguments, lol, they are not, but it's good to at least think through them. I *have* benefitted from reading apologetics and learning about stuff like that.

You know what I really want? If we could separate these 2 ideas:

1. How are one's views on big topics about God/ morality/ science/ etc informed by one's beliefs or lack thereof
2. Trying to convince people that we're right and they're wrong

Yeah, what I want is to read something written by a Christian who has thought about how their Christian beliefs interact with other ideas or scientific facts or whatever- someone who has thought about it a lot and has developed a view that makes sense of it. And the purpose is not to convince anyone to change their religion- the purpose is just to give an example of what a consistent, thoughtful belief system might look like. 

Hey, I don't just want to read a Christian take on that. Let me read the atheist take too. Or any religion. There's a lot of value in listening to other people and learning about how people think. I don't want it to be about debating who's right and who's wrong.

If someone asked me "why are you a Christian"... sure, there are a lot of apologetics arguments that come to mind, but if you want my real honest answer, it's because I just really believe in Jesus. That's not an argument that's meant to convince anyone. It's just a fact about myself. That is the real reason though, if anyone wants to know.

---

What is apologetics for? Who is apologetics for? It claims to be about "defending the faith," about giving evidence to convince people of the truth of Christianity, about debating atheists. I don't think it actually does those things effectively- and yet I can't be entirely negative on it, because I actually do agree with some of the ideas. I just hate how they're framed in this dishonest us-vs-them fashion. What I want instead is thoughtful reflection on what our faith has to say on these topics, just for the sake of thinking through one's beliefs and putting them into words. Not for the sake of persuading anyone to become Christian.

---

Related:

Just reading an apologetics book and asking "why are we doing this?" 

Sure Of What We Hope For

Modifying My Faith Because of Doubt

A house of cards falling down. Image source.

Back when I was a "good Christian", on fire for God, I was really into apologetics. Apologetics means arguing about why Christianity is true. I read lots of apologetics books which presented questions like "are there contradictions in the bible?" and "how can a loving God send people to hell?" and "what if Jesus didn't actually die on the cross, he was just pretending to be dead?" These apologetics books presented arguments for why the Christian answer to these questions was the right answer.

Initially I just read the Christian side of it, but eventually I started reading the atheist side too. (The apologetics resources don't really pay attention to any other religions- it's just Christianity vs atheism.) Instead of just reading a Christian book that said "here's what atheists say, and here's why they're wrong" I would also go to the atheist resources directly and see what I thought about their arguments. (Christians are warned against doing this, because you may be "led astray" if you directly hear what the atheists are saying, without a Christian authority figure there to immediately tell you why it's wrong. ... Yeah honestly very shady that they don't want you to listen to anyone else except approved authorities...)

And sometimes the atheist side raised some good points! The problem of evil, for example. Why doesn't God intervene in the world to stop evil and suffering? Is it because They can't? Then God is not all-powerful. Is it because They don't want to? Then God is not all-loving. Either way, this God doesn't sound that good. 

Of course, Christians have all sorts of answers to it, like God valuing free will and wanting people to have a choice to do right or wrong- but I feel like most of these arguments aren't that great.

So I recognized that there were some points where the Christian apologetics side didn't really have a good answer- but I viewed it as very all-or-nothing. I thought, I have all these other reasons to believe in Jesus, so I will continue to believe even though there are a few weak points.

Yes, very all-or-nothing. I felt my options were:

1. Christianity- specifically evangelical Christianity- and the whole package of beliefs that came with it: you have to have a personal relationship with God; you have to spend time reading the bible and praying every day- if you don't, it means you don't love God enough and you should feel bad about that; the bible is inerrant; the bible doesn't have contradictions; God created the world; all the miracles in the bible really happened; literal virgin birth; literal resurrection; evolution is not true; Jesus was fully God and fully man; every sin is an infinite offense against a holy God; everyone deserves to go to hell because we are all sinners; Jesus died as part of God's plan to pay for our sin and get us into heaven; God sees you as totally worthless and ugly because of your sin, but when you get covered by Jesus, God is able to accept you; only people who believe in Jesus get into heaven; if you are a good person but you're not a Christian then you go to hell; if you do terrible things like murder people and then repent on your deathbed, you go to heaven; also everyone secretly knows that God exists and the gospel is true but they deny it because they love to sin; everyone has a "God-shaped hole" in their heart; everyone worships something; God wants women to dress modesty; the husband has to be the "spiritual leader" in marriage; premarital sex is a sin; everyone who has sex before marriage regrets it; God is extremely interested in what everyone is doing with their genitals; masturbation is a sin; and the ideal is you shouldn't even have any physical contact at all with your spouse before marriage- that's the ideal because it's the most pure, though realistically it's not likely to actually happen; God answers prayer; if we have more faith and pray for things that are in "God's will" then God will answer those prayers; you have to sit quietly and listen to God because God really does plant thoughts in people's heads about what they're supposed to do, or you could even open the bible and point to a random verse and perhaps that will be a message from God for you; also, be ready for the possibility that God will "call" you, meaning you have to give up your whole lifestyle and your plans and change to what God tells you to do, like moving to a foreign country as a missionary; the bible is God's love letter to you; we need to always "put God first"- if you like something, that could be bad because what if you love it more than God; we need to put others' needs before our own, always sacrificing in order to help other people; it's good to "submit" instead of standing up for our own rights; suffering can be a good thing because it helps you get closer to God; God has a plan for your life; if something bad happens to you, it's fine because it's part of God's plan; God will never give you more than you can handle; God has picked 1 specific opposite-sex partner that you are supposed to marry; we need to do evangelism to get people saved; all the other religions are about people trying to earn their way to heaven, but Christianity is different because Jesus already did the work and we just have to believe; it's really not possible to have morality if you don't believe in God; the most loving thing we can do is warn people about hell; and also we need to warn gay people about their sin; being trans isn't a real thing; hate the sin, love the sinner; the reason for most of society's problems is the breakdown of the family- casual sex, divorce, acceptance of queer people, abortion, etc; everyone who gets an abortion regrets it; life begins at conception, and abortion is murder; and so Christians all need to vote Republican; if you're obeying God and other people don't like it (perhaps because you are telling them about their sin), that's a sign that you're doing the right thing, because Jesus said the world will hate us, hey it could even be "spiritual warfare" which means the devil is attacking you; Christians are persecuted in the US; the US was founded as a Christian nation and it's terrible that it's becoming more and more secular; there are lots of people who claim to be Christians but they're not real Christians, probably most Catholics are fake Christians; you have to go to church every week; people have all sorts of excuses for not going to church, but they are wrong, they should be going to church
2. Atheism

When I say "all-or-nothing", I mean that because overall, I believed the Christian side of the apologetics arguments, that meant I had to believe this whole package of quirky beliefs. That's what Christianity is, right? Perhaps I had heard of some Christians who didn't believe a few of these things, but surely they were fake Christians and we didn't need to listen to them. We know that the bible is true [citation needed], and the bible says all of these things [citation needed] and so they were all true.

It was because of Rachel Held Evans, that I learned it doesn't have to be all-or-nothing.

The things she wrote on her blog were unlike anything I had ever read. She knew how to speak evangelical, and yet, she frequently said things that good evangelicals weren't allowed to say. I was so confused; I couldn't figure out if she was a Christian or not. (Yes, she was.) She knew all the apologetics answers, but said those answers weren't good enough. She knew all the logical reasons why, for example, God needs to send all non-Christians to hell, but she also knew that her God-given conscience said that's terrible, no matter what kind of logic you can find to prop it up.

She had all the evangelical cred- she loved God, loved the bible, knew the bible so well, she was doing her best to follow Jesus. And she did NOT believe in some of those things that I thought all Christians had to believe- God sending people to hell, women not being allowed to be leaders, things like that. And yet she was still a real Christian.

That's how I learned it didn't have to be all-or-nothing.

For my whole life, I had been on the Christian side, in opposition to the atheist side. It was binary- I'm either a Christian or an atheist- and since I'm a Christian, I need to listen to the Christian leaders and find out the correct Christian view on all of these topics, and I need to believe that.

So, for example, why should I pray and ask God to do something, if God has already decided what They're going to do? Well, I couldn't answer that, but I believed in Jesus for a bunch of other reasons, so I could ignore this bit of confusion and keep believing it anyway. And keep praying to ask God for things anyway. The alternative would be to give up on Christianity entirely, right?

The other thing that happened was, in 2012 I had some health problems that totally derailed my life, for about 1 year. Before that, I had a very strong belief in the concept of "trusting God"- no matter what happens, it must be good, because it's God's plan! Even if it seems bad, you can trust that somehow it's actually good! But... my gall bladder just decided to try and ruin my life one day, for no reason- if that can happen, then what does it even mean to "trust God"? I can't trust God to not let some random health problem totally screw up my life. If I can't trust Them for that, then the whole concept of "trusting God" is pretty meaningless. (At the time, I blogged about it here and here.)

So I started to view my Christianity like this: If there's some belief I have that doesn't logically make sense, then I modify my beliefs to no longer include that bit of nonsense. Here's an example: Because of the problem of evil, I don't believe God intervenes in our lives, and I don't pray to ask God to do things. Because no, it doesn't make sense that there's a God who is always working in the little personal details of my life, and also allows suffering to happen on a large scale in this world. It doesn't make sense to attribute my success to God, when part of it was because of white privilege, and people with black-sounding names get called for job interviews less- maybe God should be working on that problem, instead of helping me. It doesn't make sense to believe I can pray and God will respond by helping me, when there are many people in this world in worse situations than me, and God hasn't stopped them from getting into those situations. It doesn't even make sense to postulate that the reason bad things happen to other people is that they don't pray- what a horrific God that would be, choosing to let bad things happen to people who don't have the correct beliefs and/or don't pray correctly.

So whereas before, my perspective was "I don't have a good answer for the problem of evil, but I do have other reasons for believing in Christianity, so just plow ahead and try to ignore the problem of evil," now I see it as "I don't have a good answer for the problem of evil, so I let that inform my Christianity, and I discard common Christian beliefs which are inconsistent with an honest awareness of the problem of evil."

I don't really believe in "I believe, help my unbelief"- the idea that faith and doubt kinda coexist in a person, and the overall belief system is totally true, so you *should* have 100% faith and 0% doubt, but we are flawed human beings and have doubts anyway, and that's okay, we don't have to be perfect, we just do our best to keep pushing ahead in the "faith" part and try to ignore the "doubt" part. No, I don't see it that way. Maybe you have some beliefs that are not actually true, and doubt is a useful indicator that you should examine them and maybe change them.

Doubt is not something to fight against. If you have "doubt", ie, you realize you believe something that doesn't really make sense, then you can consider what would happen to your overall belief system if you changed that one specific belief to something more logical. It doesn't have to be all-or-nothing. (Or, maybe you have some beliefs that you don't really have a good reason for, but you're okay with that. I do... That's fine, but you have to know you're not going to win any arguments with those.)

And some Christians will disagree with me, saying that this path basically leads to atheism. Someone starts out evangelical, and then they change it, one little belief at a time, and then eventually they become an atheist. Uh, okay, this argument is kinda lost on me, because I don't think there's anything wrong with being an atheist. But if that's your concern, then let me tell you, the house-of-cards religion where one weird little belief is overturned, and then the ENTIRE THING falls- that kind of ideology makes more atheists than what I'm advocating here.

Believe in something that you can actually believe. Not something that people say you need to believe, as part of a whole ideology. Doubt is not an attack; doubt is an indication that you should think about the reasons for your beliefs, and maybe change to something that makes more sense.

---

The Slacktivist has a very good post on this: Hold on to the good 

Siggy has a post which makes some similar points: Christian Doubt

Related:

She was the first (Thank you, Rachel) 

On believing that "prayer works" 

Gotta Love That Full-Blown Atheism 

Taking My Kid To Church: "The Belief That Baffled the Best of the Buddhists"

"To Glorify God"

Fire. Image source.

I wanna tell a little story about when I started this blog, back in 2012. Specifically, I made a deliberate decision that I was *not* blogging "to glorify God."

Yeah... so... back then, I was very evangelical, and so of course everything I did was supposed to be "to glorify God." What does that mean, exactly? The best I could tell was, it means people see something that I do, and they think, "Wow, God is even more awesome than I thought!" Whatever I do should serve the purpose of showing how amazing God is. Or, to interpret it a bit more loosely, I have to do my best to make sure that everything I do is what God would want me to do.

I used to post a lot of Christian things on Facebook, back then. Writing long Facebook posts where I shared my testimony, having arguments about why I believed it's a sin to "act on" one's feelings of same-sex attraction, whatever random thoughts I had about my obedience to God, etc etc etc. And whenever I wrote some big long thing on Facebook, I very carefully prayed over it. I checked over every single part of my writing, because I really really wanted to make sure that every single sentence was what God wanted me to say. 

If I wasn't sure if some little phrase "glorified God", I deleted it. I remember one Facebook post I wrote, which in an early draft included the phrase "if we can't figure this out, we're screwed" or something like that. During the editing process I stopped there and wondered if it was really okay to use "screwed" like that. Isn't that kind of a bad word? I felt that emotionally, "screwed" conveyed what I was trying to say, and no other word could quite capture the same feeling, but still I wasn't sure if God was really okay with me saying that. And since I wasn't sure, I eventually decided I couldn't in good conscience publish the Facebook post with that phrase in it. Everything I wrote needed to glorify God. Everything needed to be what God would want me to write. I finally changed the word "screwed" to something else, and published that post.

That's what I mean. Whenever I wrote some long post about God, I made sure to think through everything very carefully, to pray about it, until I was sure that it was really what God wanted me to write.

When I started this blog, I asked myself, "Am I blogging to glorify God?" And I decided, no. I remember that it was an actual question I had to think about, and an actual decision I made. This blog would be different from all my previous writing on Christianity. This blog would be about saying what I needed to say. Asking the questions I needed to ask. Even if I wasn't sure if God was okay with me asking.

I decided I wasn't going to get stuck, asking myself "does God really want me to say this?" before I hit "publish" every time. You can't get anywhere, if you do that. The conversation can never even start, if I have to make sure I'm really really confident that it's a conversation that's going to make God look good, before I even say anything.

I decided the purpose of my blog was not "to glorify God."

The 5th post I published was God kills Uzzah (2 Samuel 6). (If you don't know this story from the bible- it's about when God killed Uzzah for touching the ark of the covenant, because it was falling off a cart and Uzzah tried to catch it.) And yes, there are things in that post that I would not have said, if I had wanted to make sure that every single thing I said "glorified God."

I love God and I trust God and I'm gonna call it like I see it: God is being really unreasonable here.
...
People always say "God loves everybody" but I don't know if it's true.  Did God love Uzzah?
...
In conclusion, I don't like it and it's not fair.  But God can do whatever he wants so... whatever.  I guess.  I'm still not okay with this.  Anyone have any insights to add?

I read that and I'm like, damn, shots fired. Look at what little Perfect Number comes up with when she says what she really thinks, rather than limiting herself to what "glorifies God." This is a great start. (Also, it's normal to cringe when you come across something you wrote 10 years ago, right? That happens to everyone, right?)

I believed that there was a way to ask questions and express doubts and still "glorify God." But, it was tricky. I would have to come to a conclusion first, and then based on that, I would decide how to frame the story. For example, one acceptable "doubt" narrative in evangelicalism might be "I had doubts about [whatever] and I thought God was not being fair. But then I realized the bible says this because [some reason] and I was not able to see it because [some sin or weakness that I have]. So now I see that yes, this belief about God is right."

At our bible study groups in college, I felt like I could ask any question at all about the bible and how certain parts of it seemed wrong. But, we couldn't just leave it there- we couldn't conclude the bible study still believing "this seems wrong." We had to come up with some explanation to convince ourselves that it made sense- or at least to convince ourselves that even if we don't understand the reason, obviously God is always right, so we can trust that it does, somehow, make sense.

When I stated this blog, I didn't have a "conclusion." I just had my questions. And without the conclusion, how do I know if me posting these questions is going to make God look bad? 

So I deliberately made that decision, and this blog has never been about glorifying God.

Instead, I blog because I have a "fire in my bones" like the prophet Jeremiah:

But if I say, “I will not mention his word
    or speak anymore in his name,”
his word is in my heart like a fire,
    a fire shut up in my bones.
I am weary of holding it in;
    indeed, I cannot.

I have things to say, and I just need to say them, so here we are. That's what this has always been about, for the past 10 years.

At the beginning I wondered if, in a roundabout way, I would end up "glorifying God." I don't really care about that anymore, though. God doesn't need me to do PR for Them. If They didn't want people to talk about, say, the problem of evil, maybe They shouldn't have made a world that has evil. I just call it like I see it.

So... I used to be very very careful about making sure everything related to Christianity that I posted publicly was approved by God. Spent a lot of time praying, so I would be confident that it was really what God wanted me to say. When I started this blog in 2012, I decided it would NOT be like that. I wouldn't blog "to glorify God"- I would blog because I had things I needed to say, and some of those things didn't have a neat, tidy conclusion about why God/the bible is always right. I blog because I have a "fire in my bones." I still do.

---

Related:

They Prayed About It (a post about the #NashvilleStatement) 

Accepting Myself (or, I'm Great, and It Doesn't Matter What God Thinks) 

Katy Perry's God-Given Freedom

After the Healing

Image source.

"While he was saying this, a synagogue leader came and knelt before him and said, 'My daughter has just died. But come and put your hand on her, and she will live.'" Matthew 9:18

-------------------------------

Well, it's been almost 10 years.

At the beginning, it was really great. You know, Jesus had healed me. My parents say I had actually died- but I don't remember it. I just remember feeling so weak and sick, and then suddenly being woken up and Jesus was there and I didn't feel sick anymore. Seriously, that feeling is the greatest thing I have every experienced.

The whole town was excited. I had tons of relatives (and random people I didn't know) visiting me, saying how happy they were/ how amazing it was that I was alive. Many of them talked about how they had prayed for me, and their prayers were answered.

So that was my five minutes of fame. But, life goes on. Jesus isn't here anymore. My dad got really sick and people were praying for him, but in the end he died. I remember how he talked about faith- how when I was sick, he went to find Jesus and he had faith that Jesus could heal me. Later, Dad told us about how Jesus himself had died and come back to life, and now he would be with us always.

But why didn't he heal my dad? I know Jesus used to always talk about "faith" when he healed people- well Dad had faith.

I don't understand.

Is God with us, or not?

And there's no one I can talk to about this. My closest friends and family actually saw me die- any time I bring up my doubts, they remind me that I owe my life to Jesus, so how can I question him?

I am grateful. And sometimes I feel bad about asking why Jesus doesn't do more. But man, my dad said Jesus promised to always be with us. And he promised that faith can move mountains. Am I allowed to wonder why I don't see that happening?

Jesus did this one thing for me almost 10 years ago. But life goes on, and I have other problems now. Apparently I'm supposed to have some kind of lifelong devotion to Jesus, but ... I don't think he's relevant to my life anymore.

He's a good man, really. I remember when I met him, his eyes, his voice- I really believe he really cared about me and understood me.

But that was 10 years ago.

Being Wrong When You Pray

Image source.

At first, Psalm 103 seemed to have no connection to reality.

"Forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases," seriously? Everyone knows God doesn't do that. And aren't we all tired of cliches that say he does?

Then there's a bit about "The Lord works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed." Yeah! Now that part I can get behind. Because I believe in resurrection.

But then the rest is punctuated with terms like "for those who fear him." So, God's blessings are just for the followers of the "correct" religion. Yeah, I don't buy that either.

So I read this psalm like, eh, I can't relate to much any of this.

But wait, don't the psalms teach us that you can tell God exactly how you feel, you don't have to censor anything? Well that's what the psalmist did. This is what he honestly felt, this is what he believed. That doesn't mean it has God's stamp of approval. Because the psalmist is wrong about some things.

And that bit about "healing all your diseases"- well maybe the psalmist had just gotten better from some disease and he was feeling really happy about it. So it's just an exaggeration. It's not really true, but that's how he honestly felt.

So let's talk about being wrong when you pray.

That's why I don't pray much nowadays. Because, I have some beliefs about God, some of which are very strong, but I'm definitely not confident enough to start monologuing at God with the assumption that he agrees with me.

I remember back when I was a teenager and I read bullshit about how teh gays were totally trying to destroy America, and so I prayed that God would stop gay marriage. I don't want to pray for stuff like that again. Stuff that's "us vs them" and I pray as if OBVIOUSLY God agrees with me.

Far far far too much of my life has been spent believing anyone who said "this is God's way." They acted as if "God agrees with me." They took his name in vain.

I so don't want to do that. I don't want to be wrong when I pray- it will only reinforce those wrong beliefs by making me feel like they have God's approval.

There's so much danger in assuming "God agrees with me." But I wonder if there's also danger in not praying because I never want to get that wrong.

I'll only assume a few things when I talk to God: that he's always with us, that he loves us, that he feels our pain, and that he created this world good and he will restore it all someday.

Everything else, I don't know. I don't know if a person can "have a relationship with God." I don't know if it makes sense to pray for this or that to happen. I don't know if God has an opinion about decisions I make in my life. I don't know if there are more answers out there or if this is all the faith I'm ever gonna have.

All I can do when I pray is tell God this is how I feel or this is what I want. But I don't know what role, if any, God has in my getting what I want. I don't know what the point of praying is anyway.

Ai ya. ("Ai ya [哎呀]" is an incredibly versatile Chinese interjection, for those of you wondering.) I don't wanna act like I know God when I really don't. I don't want to talk to God and have her sitting there like "what the heck are you talking about? Man I don't even know what to do with this prayer."

Is it okay to be wrong when I pray? On one hand, I know God will accept me. God loves me. God wants me to talk to her, just honestly say what I feel.

But if- when- I'm wrong, I don't want to be able to just pray it like everyone's cool with it.

And I don't want to be the kind of person who's so certain God agrees with me.

-------------------

This post is part of a link-up on the topic of Psalm 103. To read other people's posts, click here: How can we bless God?

Is it okay if my praise is uncertain?

Image source.

Psalm 99 tells us to praise God, yay!

But, uh, I don't really do that much. Why? Well I've realized it's because I feel a little weird about telling God things like "you're great!" and "thank you for doing XYZ" and "I praise you because of this or that" when those things might not even be true.

Like, what if I'm praying and talking to God, and God's like, "What the heck are you talking about?"

Image source.

That's why I always felt a little weird about the purity-culture idea of "praying for your future husband." What if God knows you're never going to get married, and he has to listen to you pray all this stuff that has no relation at all to reality?

And what if I want to praise God for things that aren't actually true about him?

I mean, I believe they are true, but man, I'm not so confident in my own opinions that I want to start telling them to God, as if he obviously agrees with me.

What to do?

Just be honest. Just tell God how I feel. Tell God all of this. Tell him I'm not sure I can declare stuff to him with such certainty, but I do believe some pretty nice things about him. Maybe say, "God, I believe you're really good. And I really believe someday you'll come and change this world and make it better, and I think that's really great."

Yeah. That's all the advice I have about prayer. Just be honest.

-------------------

This post is part of a link-up on the topic of Psalm 99. To read other people's posts, click here: God is great, and yet...

Does God believe in Meta-God?

Image source.

How can God know whether he's omnipotent? Or omniscient?

What if there's another god, so powerful and sneaky that God doesn't even know that she exists? We'll call her Meta-God. And so far, she hasn't done anything to interfere with God or the physical world- she's just stayed up in her own meta-dimension, which not even God knows about.

So maybe, Christianity gives us a good representation of what God has done in the world, and who God is- but it's only as accurate as God's own beliefs about his power and his ability to do the things he has promised. What if suddenly, Meta-God intervenes and does something that NO ONE could have predicted?

Sure, God raised Jesus from the dead, and God loves people and totally plans to make a new heaven and new earth and there will be justice and all that- but what if Meta-God appears out of nowhere and screws up all God's future plans?

Who knows what kind of future Meta-God will give us?

We don't know anything about who she is at all. She's never even done anything to hint that she exists.

Maybe God believes himself to be all-knowing and all-powerful, but he's not. Actually Meta-God is, but there's no way God could know that.

Psalm 93:2 says, "Your throne was established long ago; you are from all eternity." And sure, maybe that's true, as far as we know, and as far as God knows.

But what if? Then us Christians are screwed. Actually everyone is screwed. We just gotta take our chances with Meta-God.

Image source.

So... what do we do? Is there a Meta-God or not? We can never know.

I don't know about you, but I'll just keep living my life normally, with no concern at all about Meta-God. Hey, we don't have any evidence about her. There's no real reason to think she exists. But also no way to disprove it. (Perhaps this is similar to how atheists feel?)

But for a Christian who believes she knows all the answers (yeah that was me a few years ago), the idea of a Meta-God is earth-shattering. Because no matter how many apologetics books you read, no matter how well you can recite the arguments for Christianity, no matter how much you research about history and evidence for the resurrection and all that, you can never prove that Christianity is true. And back then, I would have been 100% NOT OKAY with that.

(Defining what exactly it means to say "Christianity is true" is a whole 'nother discussion...)

Maybe it seems true, maybe God even believes it, but in the end, Meta-God will have her way. Maybe God would let you into heaven, but Meta-God would then kick you out.

There is no certainty. There can never be certainty.

It's faith. I'm a Christian, but there's no way I could ever know if Christianity is true or not. I have a lot of reasons for my beliefs, but no proof. Proof is literally impossible, because not even God can know if there is a Meta-God.

-------------------

This post is part of a link-up on the topic of Psalm 93. To read other people's posts, click here: a boulder in the ocean.

This time, I'll just go with it

So I read Psalm 86, and, as always, I have some issues with it. (Verse 7 says "because you answer me"- does God really answer? What does that mean? When "all the nations you have made will come and worship," so... what does that mean about hell and God accepting everyone, and are they converting to "the right religion" or just worshiping because God forced them to? Also the bit about "among the gods there is none like you"- I really think people back then believed all the gods were real, it was just a question of which one was stronger/ better to follow...)

But I'm not going to get into that now. I always get hung up on that stuff, and it's so tiring.

So right now, I'll just go with it, pick out a part of this psalm that I like, and pray that.

"Teach me your way, Lord,
    that I may rely on your faithfulness;
give me an undivided heart,
    that I may fear your name."

Yeah. That. That sounds good- I want that. Even though I don't know if it makes sense or not.

-------------------

This post is part of a link-up on the topic of Psalm 86. To read other people's posts, click here: Bringing our Whole Selves to Prayer.

"Never Will I Leave You; Never Will I Forsake You."

God is with me. "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you."

I don't want to pray because I'm having trouble understanding what the point is.

And God is with me. "He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come."

My view of God is so off. I fear that he can't understand me, can't understand why I'm a feminist, can't understand why I want to go to China. I'm stuck on this image of a white American god, as naive and prejudiced as the average person at my church. Why would I pray to that god? Why would I submit my life to that god?

And God is with me. "Where can I go from your spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast."

I know I should listen to God, but I don't know how anymore. What do I do, just pray and then sit and listen and do nothing and wait to see if God gives me some thought in response to my questions? I... I just can't. Can't sit still and listen.

And God is with me. "And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

When I was in college, I used to get up early every morning so I could read the bible and pray for about 45 minutes to an hour. I liked that. I felt God and I knew God was with me. And I prayed in my spare time. And I prayed whenever I had a problem. And now? I wish I could, but...

And God is with me. "He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus."

Some days I read the bible. Some days I can't concentrate enough to do it.

And God is with me. "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

I don't know what to pray. Sometimes I just listen to a song, and that's my prayer, because I have no words.

And God is with me. "We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans."

And God is with me.

And God is with me.

And God is with me.

As it turns out, I had previously not believed "God is always with me," but "God is with me when I'm keeping up with praying/bible every day."

Lies. 

Romans 8 says nothing can separate us from the love of God. Nothing. Not even my lack of faithfulness.

And don't misunderstand- I'm not saying it's totally fine for me to just not pray and keep on not praying. No. I want to pray like I should, but I'm not there yet. But I no longer believe that God leaves me on my own until I get my act together. I no longer believe it's all my responsibility to fix my life.

God is with me. "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you."

When God said "never," he meant never.

When God said "always," he meant always.

God is with me. "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you." 

The Bible Is Less Naive Than Me

If God is good, why is there suffering? If God, why evil? People have been asking that question pretty much forever. And I started asking it a few months ago.

I guess I used to think I was immune, like the bad things in the world only happen to other people, not me. I suppose part of my change in thinking is because feminism taught me about how things like injustice and racism and rape and abuse are a lot more widespread than I thought- they're real and they affect people I know, but they're often hidden. Also I got really sick last year and had to have surgery and was basically unable to do anything for several months... I didn't know that could happen to me, that something out of my control could just stop me from doing what I want and living my life.

So... sometimes I read the news, hear about violence, and I think I should just never go outside again. God didn't protect those other people, why would he protect me? The only thing protecting me is probability. The number of people who randomly get killed in crimes or accidents every day is ridiculously small compared to the number of people who go out in public every day. Probability has kept me safe my whole life. Not God.

Seriously, what's the point of God, what's the point of praying? If God actually does stuff, then people would get better when they prayed, and people wouldn't die if someone was praying for them. See, it all doesn't make sense, the existence of God and the existence of suffering... Christianity makes claims about God and the world, and we can only believe them if we don't think too hard about reality.

And then I happened to be reading the bible, the book of Hebrews, and realized I was looking at this wrong.

Here's what I read (Hebrews 10:32-35):

Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you endured in a great conflict full of suffering. Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. You suffered along with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.

Those early Christians who first read this were suffering persecution for their faith- they were being specifically targeted. Way different from my situation, where I'm afraid of random bad things that could happen to anyone.

And maybe they were wondering where God was, if suffering is real. And the writer of Hebrews talks about finding meaning in that suffering, and God rewarding them for their perseverance. In fact, Hebrews 11 lists characters from the Old Testament, one after another, and tells about how they remained faithful to God, even though they suffered for it, even though obedience didn't seem to make sense at the time, even though they received no reward during their lifetimes.

And wow, this was a big realization for me- I'm not the first Christian to wonder about why bad things happen and where God is. Even the writers of the bible talked about it (in many other passages besides Hebrews 10-11).

Well, gosh. Turns out Christianity is way different than I thought.

See I thought Christianity promised that bad things would always be overcome by good things. We may have problems and suffering, but God will always show up to fix it. And in this naive Christianity, there's no room to wonder what about when he doesn't? What about when people die and it seems like there is no reason?

And I thought no one would understand those questions. I thought the bible told a naive story about the world, where good always wins and those who do the right thing don't suffer too much. Where God makes every story a happy ending.

In Sunday School we learned about Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, saved by God from the fiery furnace when they refused to obey the wicked king. But we didn't learn about the prophets of God who were hunted down and killed by Queen Jezebel. We learned about the city of Nineveh turning from their evil ways when Jonah preached to them, but we didn't learn about the prophet Zechariah, who was killed when he confronted King Joash about his wickedness. We learned about the angel who rescued Peter from the prison, but quickly skipped past the execution of James, which actually set the stage for Peter's arrest in the first place. We learned about God forgiving David for his adultery (rape?) with Bathsheba and murder of Bathsheba's husband, but tried not to think too much about Bathsheba's baby, who died as a part of David's punishment (and, you know, the husband who was murdered).

I thought the bible presented a naive religion that couldn't handle anybody asking questions about God letting evil things happen. I thought it promised puppies and rainbows and had nothing to say about sickness and tragedy. But nothing could be further from the truth.

No, the bible presents the same reality I know today: God protects and heals some people, and doesn't protect and heal others. And I don't know if it gives an answer for why that is, but the important thing is it acknowledges that reality. And even talks about the question of suffering, a lot, though I seem to have missed that in church while growing up.

And perhaps the reason the bible records the accounts of huge miracles is because that WASN'T normal. Because it WAS so unusual, for God to show up and help those who were powerless and suffering.

It's the same world I live in. Sometimes the strong oppress the weak. Sometimes people rise up and fight for justice. Sometimes people die for seemingly no reason. Sometimes God intervenes.

Power and miracles, but also suffering and hopelessness. And I don't know how to make sense of it, believing God can do anything but it's not likely that he will... I want to say "I trust God," but... trust him to do what? I believe that he's always with me and he understands everything I'm going through... and I guess that's it, for now.

But I'm glad the heroes of the bible also struggled with this question. I'm glad the bible is less naive than me.

What was up with John the Baptist?

Remember John the Baptist? He preached that Jesus would come, and was kind of obsessed with fire. And here in Matthew 11:1-19, we meet him again, and I ask the question: "What was up with John the Baptist?" (Also, we have a rage comic this week! Go check it out.)

I still think this picture is hilarious.

First we have verses 1-6, where John's messengers come to ask, on John's behalf, whether Jesus is or is not the Messiah.

That seems a bit strange. Wasn't that the very thing John had been preaching, before Jesus' ministry started? Wasn't John the one who saw a dove come down from heaven and a voice saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased"? What happened to that?

Right, so if someone strongly believes something at one point, they're not allowed to ever question it? Come on.

A long time before this, John definitely believed Jesus was the Messiah. But stuff happened since then. For one thing, John got put in jail (and we'll get to the details on that in chapter 14). Also, Jesus got going with his whole preaching-and-healing-and-calling-disciples operation, and maybe it wasn't what John expected the Messiah to do.

So here's John, questioning. For totally valid reasons, as far as I can tell.

And what's Jesus' answer? Is it "I can't believe you're doing this, how could you question, after all this time you've been a Christian"?

Umm, no. Jesus points to what he's been doing: "The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me." In other words, he asks John to consider the things Jesus is doing, and judge for himself.

And I think this passage says something about questioning and doubt. Far too often in the church, those with questions or doubts are silenced and shamed- how dare they even THINK such things! Especially if they've been Christians for a long time. (Because it's understandable for new Christians to have questions and doubts, but not those who have gone to church their entire lives...?) But Jesus doesn't react that way. He invites John to look and decide for himself. (Obviously Jesus lists those examples as an argument in favor of him being the Christ- but still, he gives reasons instead of just "I can't believe you're questioning this.")

And after John's minions leave, it's Jesus' turn to ask, "What was up with John the Baptist?"

He asks the crowd, "What did you go out into the wilderness to see?" and goes on to describe John as "a prophet... and more than a prophet", as the messenger who would prepare the way for Jesus, as "the Elijah who was to come."

Okay, some background for that "Elijah" bit: Hundreds of years before this, there was this prophet named Elijah, who did a lot of things and was generally cool. Later there was a prophecy that Elijah would come back before the Messiah showed up. So Jesus is saying that John the Baptist is, in some sense, Elijah.

And then Jesus makes this bizarre statement: "Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." Umm... so... the lowest member of the kingdom of heaven wasn't "born of women"?  And what do "greater" and "least" mean?

So, this is just a weird thing to say. Anyway, it seems to me like Jesus is making a division between an old and new system. The old one was based on nature ("born of women") and the law and prophets, and the new one is the kingdom of heaven, which I define as God's people and God's work both on earth and in heaven. John the Baptist was the last prophet, and Jesus is starting up a new kingdom that works differently.

But I have no idea what to make of verse 12: "From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence [in some translations: the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing], and violent people have been raiding it." Ideas, anyone?

The last part of this passage (verses 16-19) is also a little weird:

"To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling out to others:

"'We played the pipe for you,
and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge,
and you did not mourn.'

"For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' But wisdom is proved right by her deeds."

Jesus is saying that these people will never be pleased with anything. They don't want to believe, and they just complain no matter what. (At least, that's what I think he's saying, but the whole section is just weird.)

So... why is Jesus talking about that? Seems like he's being all negative and over-generalizing. But, as always, if I understood everything Jesus did and said, and it went right along with what I already believe, that would be a bit suspicious.

So, to recap: John the Baptist asked for some clarification on whether Jesus is the Christ, and IT WAS FINE, no one gave him a hard time about not automatically knowing what he's supposed to believe. Then Jesus gave a little talk on John's role and why it's so important- John came to prepare the way for Jesus, who starts up a new kingdom completely different from the old one.

-------------------

This post is part of a series on the gospel of Matthew.

Previous post: Good News? (Matthew 11:1-6)

Next post: Woe. (Matthew 11:20-30)

Click here to go to the beginning of the series.

Greater Faith

God is evil, and I don't want anything to do with him.

Because how could he allow bad things to happen? How could he allow people to kill each other? How could he allow children to die of diarrhea every day around the world? And in my own life, why did I get sick last year? Why did I need surgery, and I'm not the same as I was before?

This is the line of thought I've been going along lately. How can God allow evil? If I can't trust him to protect me, then what's the point of him?

And why should I pray? How can I ask this God for mundane things in my life- finding a job, etc- when he's not helping other people with even bigger problems? How can I think that God will listen to me, when he's busy not saving people from dying in car accidents?

Wouldn't it be kind of EVIL for me to pray? For me to think that God should listen to me and help me, when he's ignoring so many other needs in the world. Isn't it immoral for me to even ASK for help from a God like that? As if I deserve better than every innocent person who is suffering or dying from some preventable cause.

Like, I'm a Christian, I still believe it all, it's just that... God seems evil...

Overwhelmed, paralyzed, thinking that I'm alone and God will not protect me- this is where I've been lately, and this is how I arrived at Urbana (huge Christian missions conference for college students).

--------------------

Over the past 1-2 years, my views on women in the church and marriage have changed completely. Now I believe that the same rules apply to both men and women. Virtues like love, gentleness, and courage do not belong to only one gender, and ALL Christians should use their talents to serve God. (Many thanks to Rachel Held Evans for making the case for egalitarianism.)

And I believe this because it MAKES SENSE. Arguments from the bible, historical and cultural context, the testimonies of women who are called to be pastors, and women who have been held back and mistreated by the asymmetry in the church's understanding of men and women.

But I've always felt a little uneasy about the fact that I changed my opinion from what didn't make any sense but the bible seemed to be saying- that God wants women to be limited- to something that made a lot more sense, but that I came to by thinking it through myself and being convinced by the arguments...

Like, is that legit? To reject what God seemed to be saying because seriously, it doesn't make any sense at all? We look at what the bible says, and then only obey it if we determine that it seems right?

I mean, that's really the only reasonable approach- to question and not accept the things that just seem really messed-up and inconsistent- otherwise church leaders could just make up stupid stuff and tell you it's in the bible and it's important to obey what God said even when it doesn't make sense. No, we have to question this stuff and reject whatever is inconsistent.

But it still bothered me. What about the value of trusting and obeying God even when his commands don't seem to make sense? Instead we just trust our own understanding?

Like, I really do believe the stuff about equality for women in the church. I really think that is God's intention for men and women, and it's a crucial part of the reconciliation that comes through the resurrection of Christ. But it kind of bothered me how I'd come to this conclusion by thinking through it myself, rather than trusting in some supposed "command of God" that I didn't understand.

What is the role of questioning and thinking logically, and what is the role of trusting and obeying when God says something that seems to not make sense?

----------------

And somehow, at Urbana, God gave me the answer. I guess it didn't really relate to the general theme of Urbana- it's a missions conference- but hey, God is there speaking to a lot of people.

On the one hand, I was discouraged and questioning and accusing God of evil. How can God allow so much violence in the world, and why should I even associate with a God who's like that? But on the other hand, I am a Christian, and I have seen and experienced enough of God to be confident in my belief. I'm not questioning Christianity- I believe in God, I believe in the bible, I believe in the resurrection, I believe in God's power working in the world.

I'm not questioning Christianity this time- I did all that a while ago, and I'm done. (Definitely something everyone needs to go through, by the way- how can you say you really believe what you believe if you've never questioned it?) I know I'm a Christian and I follow Jesus.

Nope, not questioning Christianity. I just think God's evil, that's all.

This is where I need to have faith. This is where I need to trust and obey even when it doesn't make sense. Because before anything else, I am loyal to Jesus.

Faith doesn't mean you don't question. Faith means after you question and object to everything, after you challenge every detail you read in the bible, after you call God all the names you can think of (and I don't mean the nice ones like "King of Kings"), you come back and say, "I still believe in the goodness of God."

Faith means I am looking for answers to all this, but in the mean time I'll just go with what I know. It means I won't stop praying, even though I don't get why God would answer some prayers and not others.

And I know, without a doubt, that this is a greater faith than what I had before I questioned. A greater faith than when I thought "God has put these limits on women, and we don't get why but we have to go with it." When I thought "well these Old Testament passages about killing the residents of other cities are kinda scary, but they're the bad guys so it's okay, just don't think too hard about it." When I thought the answer to why violence exists in the world would be some one-liner about sin and free will.

To "believe" because you never let yourself really think about it- that's a little bit of faith. A little bit of overly naive and unjustified faith, in my opinion. But to believe because you have faced every question, every uncomfortable detail, and you feel confused and discouraged... but all of it cannot outweigh what you already know about God, what you have seen and heard and felt- that is faith.

I question everything, and somehow it has led me to a greater faith.

I was wrong about being right

"All truth is God's truth." The writer of this excellent post, Without Fear: Books & Truth (posted August 20), says that though she has always claimed to believe this, she used to only read books written by Christian authors. She kept her reading list safe, censored, sanitized. But finally she realized that "All truth belongs to God. No truth, despite its origin, threatens God or diminishes His authority." Since then, she has taken every opportunity to read and learn from tons of different authors, even though she may not agree with them on everything. And it's been awesome.

I love this! It reminds me of how much of a n00b I was in the past...

I used to think that everything written by a Christian was true. Christian books, articles in Christian magazines, Christian music, anything said in a sermon- all of it was just wonderful and completely true. And that there was one right answer for "What do Christians believe about [fill in the blank]?"

I remember going to a seminar about creationism at a church many years ago. During Q&A time, a member of the audience expressed concern about the lack of "peer-reviewed research" or something. And I thought, "hey, whose side are you on?" Because CLEARLY this is what Christians believe. If you question it, that means you hate the bible. Or something.

I remember reading an apologetics book, with answers to a lot of common questions about Christianity. One of the questions was "If we say the universe is so complex that it requires a creator, doesn't that mean the creator is even more complex? Who created God?" And I thought, "wow, that's a good question." I read the answer given by the book, and I didn't understand it. But I thought, this is The Answer. I need to memorize this so I can recite it if anyone ever asks me this question. Something about God being eternal and not created.

I know, I was a n00b. This was back in middle school or high school, okay?

I thought becoming a Christian was about arguing. People would debate, and then if one of them ever didn't have an answer, they'd have to change religions. And the "answers" weren't things I'd decided after thinking through everything on my own- they were from books of apologetics, written by experts who were totally infallible.

It was a very "us vs them" mentality, about arguing and needing to always be right. Actually, I guess I subconsciously thought being right was more important than being honest.

Because under this "always right" mentality, let's suppose someone asks a hard question about Christianity. Here's what happens:

1. Someone asks "if God is good, why do bad things happen?"
2. I have a moment of fear- this is a hard question, and if I don't come up with an answer, then we'll all have to convert to atheism right now.
3. Oh my goodness, I remember reading about this question in a book! Here's what it said: I list a couple points, with all the emotion of a computer program checking a look-up table.
4. Good, crisis averted.

Soooo... that's incredibly insensitive. Yeah, as if people just need to have all their doubts and questions shot down by "oh, I've heard that argument before, and here's the answer." And then they'll become Christians.

Pictured: Helping people come to Jesus. Image source.

I don't believe that any more. I believe in actually wrestling with those questions. If God is good, why do bad things happen? Perfectnumber, take a minute to actually consider it, and understand why it's such a tough issue with so much emotion behind it. And maybe people don't need a bunch of words in the form of an argument- maybe they need my understanding and whatever compassion I can give.

And maybe it's okay for me to say I don't have an answer. Or, I have a couple thoughts but I understand if that doesn't answer it for you.

And all of this brings me back to the conclusion of the post I linked to above. Just like the writer of that post concluded that no truth threatens God, I conclude that no question threatens God. Now I believe everyone has something to say, and everyone is worth listening to. And I realize more and more that I was wrong about a lot of things- and that's okay, everyone is wrong about a lot of things- but I try not to be.

And "trying not to be" means actually thinking about these questions, not being afraid of doubt. It means listening to people. It means that compassion is more important than informing others about what "the right answer" is.