- Religion and Philosophy
Ten questions you must answer if you are Christians
Questions that demand answers
I found a couple of fascinating videos that argue against Christianity.
Questions put forward by the authors are very interesting. Of course, some of them are not much of significance to my judgment than he thinks, but I intend to answer them.
By no means will I defend Christianity with bias, which I means by developing nonsensical doctrines or sabotaging productive debates. All I want to do is to provide my honest opinions and assessment.
In so doing, I won't try to debase Christianity or irresponsibly advocate atheism.
Let us dive into the questions.
A fascinating video that questions God
As I examine the questions, well....
I think his first question is a bit childish.
Obviously prayers for divine intervention does not necessarily imply that we deserve anything indulgent on our part however our desires might be found reasonable or natural.
I don't think any sensible Christian expect such a God who grants any wish he or she has in prayer.
On the other hand, what's the use of praying if God doesn't do in our prayer? I think that's quite logical and sensible, and something Christianity can't answer.
But that makes also a preposition or assumption feasible that God we are talking about may not be a good one, but at the same time that's not necessarily to suggest that God's existential property is found false.
I wholeheartedly agree that it's not very convincing to say that God wants these children to suffer or die for some divine, mysterious reason.
I too am sick and tired of listening to that claim. So what really amounts to those millions suffering, especially after all Christ died for his people?
I think it's a time for God to issue responsible answers, more logical or more sensible than that, or God may not be as good as people would like to believe.
As for third question, I am more inclined to think that God's assessment on human life and value may be different from ours. But then again, that makes God a different kind of God from we know it.
I am also willing to think those innocent may not be so in God's eyes or in different perspectives. The more I live the less I sympathize humans.
Innocent? Yeah maybe, but who is really innocent?
Yet the punishment is over the top.
Perhaps God's property was just an invention of ruling tools in old days, rather than a divine person, and we keep rehashing something stink in the old jukebox in order to make it convincing to the listeners.
Historically ruling makes it inevitable to systematically root out dissents or outlaws in order to make the rest under subjugation. Power struggle is the most natural development in human society and became a seed of instability.
Yeah, take this. Without bloodshed we can't rule this species. That's why each time power changes, millions were butchered.
But even then, those punishments are outrageous. If ruling is inevitable, for whom the rules really needs to exist?
At the same time there is a problem when you apply our own cultural standards to others. There are always values in the sub-level and boundary conditions that change perspectives.
Subversion or undervalue in moral or legality is something we shouldn't overlook. Say, among the lot of serial killers, one who decided to steal rather than killing will be considered as a saint.
But spitting on Koran or Bible can never be a form of expression in freedom of speech if you live in a society where spitting on Koran deserves death penalty.
I do not condone and have no intention to look away from any atrocity, but we shouldn't ignore different values before criticizing.
Not so quite refreshing as I thought
Fourth question is very disappointing.
The author keeps saying intelligent education or science throughout the video, but I don't think he is really scientifically minded.
Those who are saying that what they saw and knew covers everything in the world are just arrogant idiots. You'd better not say it's nonsense because it's hard to believe.
Of course that's much better than just giving in to elaborate claims. You'd do better almost all the time when you are skeptical but be open-minded.
Just look around how many things in the world you actually know and understand. The more you learn the less you are convinced of anything.
Fifth question is again based on different values. I think sixth question is the most attractive. Why indeed? Why should good people suffer? But again, that also categorically falls into the same value question.
But again that does not put God in question in terms of existential property. Seventh question is also demonstrating the lack of the author's capacity in knowledge. There are tons of miracles or supernatural events or paranormal phenomena in the world that appear greater than miracles Christ did.
I know that does not give any advantage to Christianity. I consider rank stupid people who say there isn't miracle or something incredibly extraordinary. We don't have to, well, we shouldn't refer automatically to God or anything divine when we see something extraordinary or even try to extract divine ingredients out of it.
But there are too many things in life and in the world we simply don't know what they are and why about them. If you want to say it's impossible because that's impossible in your mind or understanding, well, just keep it to yourself. Don't babble about it. You will know by and by life is full of surprises.
Eighth question is also childish. I don't feel like bothering. Why should he? I don't get it. Why the appearance of Christ has to be a must in order to ratify Christianity or its faith after all?
Ninth question sounds like Catholic. That's why I don't like Catholic; sorry no offense to those subscribers. They can't tell difference between legal papers and poems.
Tenth question seems most sensible. The answer is simple. Religion has nothing to do with what you are. What they believe is one thing, what they do is another.
While I am typing, I found the video less and less enlightening. Most questions simply are echoing the author's limited interest, stunted and shallow. Nevertheless, I think it serves discussion and exchange of ideas.
Next time, let' talk about the video below. I think we will have more penetrating questions.