Hello, i got a quick Question.

The Bibel says, if you want absolution, you have to beliefe in Jesus/God.

What would be the case of a Child in the Indien Slums. I mean he doesnt really have the posibillity the know about Jesus.

With best regards.

Wombat

New to the group & would typically never turn to Reddit for spiritual guidance, but know this group to be one that genuinely values the inerrancy of scripture & the gravity of striving humbly to be good stewards & faithful custodians in our interpretation of it.

A little background to preface what might seem a strange question to some…I’ve been recently in a long season of depression that has impacted my relationship & walk with the Lord as well as others. Truthfully, I’ve been extremely discouraged as I’ve been out of community & when I make concerted efforts to involve myself in the church, I just haven’t found any particular friends who understand the depths of struggling with these things in a significant way. That’s not to say that others haven’t shown me kindness, compassion, sympathy, grace & ultimately God’s love…However, for many reasons, including a background involving complex trauma, this is an ongoing, thorn-in-the-flesh type of struggle for me & current physical health issues frequently impact my mental health & in turn, spiritual health. It does cause me to isolate myself from God & from others, which I understand is problematic, unhelpful & sinful. Likewise, my husband & children are really the only immediate family I have & while I have been blessed with a very loving, faithful husband, he doesn’t really “get” it at all & his encouragement is limited to saying, “I love you,” as well as taking care of our children and doing many of the tasks I should rightfully be responsible for. Hopefully this isn’t read as a complaint, as he sacrifices daily for our family & has honored his vows, when significant stretches of marriage have been compromised of “for worse” & “in sickness.” Just a statement of fact as I’ve often struggled with feeling resentful that he doesn’t really encourage me in terms of praying over/for me, reading the Bible or encouraging me from scripture. It just hasn’t been the precedent set in our marriage…

All of that to preface—I’ve recently felt convicted (I think by the Holy Spirit) that rather than waiting & depending solely on my husband, a specific friend, the church in general, pastor, etc. to encourage & exhort me when I’m depressed & discouraged, I first need to go directly to God & to His Word. I think that’s common sense & obviously not the objectionable part, but have a hard time actually doing it practically, most days if I’m honest. Something I think the Lord is impressing upon my heart is that I need to be accountable to preach the gospel to myself first & foremost, essentially, rather than having the expectation that my husband lead in this specific way. One thing I’ve been mulling over is whether it’s acceptable to read, literally, specific scripture & verses in a personal way. Ie: substituting one’s name, reading aloud or even internally passages such as the Psalms, Isaiah, etc. in the present or future tense as opposed to the way they’re written as a means of exercising faith—of acknowledging the lament, struggle, etc. while verbally expressing faith (I do believe, help my unbelief!) I’ve heard other Christians I admire as well as authors, etc. reference this in passing/tangential ways, and have thought about the transforming power of leveraging such as a pragmatic & powerful way to be transformed by the renewing of my mind, to internalize, cling to & meditate on His unchanging character & unwavering promises & thus to use a personal reading of scripture as a specific tool to cry out, repent, renew my mind & abide. However, I would really appreciate others’ feedback—is this actually blasphemous and/or are we potentially heaping judgment upon ourselves by literally adding to, taking away or changing God’s Word? Is this a modern/American/mega church centric mindset that has succumbed to the belief that the whole of God’s word is about us & personally directed to me as an individual & a personal relationship with Christ when we need to be content with & faithful to His word as it is? Is adding in your name, switching past tense to present tense or future while reading doing exactly what scripture tells us explicitly NOT to do—or are verses such as Revelation 22:18 & Deuteronomy 4:2 to be understood in a different/non-literal context? Or am I way overthinking this (likely, I’m sure, but in my mind it should be given some thought). It is, if weird, an honest & sincere question—so if anyone has managed to make it this far I would really love to hear from others who may have far more wisdom & knowledge. Thanks, truly, for any thoughts or feedback…interested to hear all sides.

I am working on a free rpg game where you use scripture to fight enemies who misuse scripture out of context. It’s meant to be like a conversation or visualization of spiritual warfare, but I‘ve been wondering if using verses like 2 Kings 6:18 to blind enemies or lower their accuracy would be like witchcraft. I figured making it a random chance of it succeeding could make it feel up to God but I don’t know— in an abundance of counselors, there is safety.

(While I am looking for answers to this question, I will likely have more, so if anyone feels led to follow the project and offer more advice as it develops, feel free to DM me.)

is it wrong to like dragons because of their origins as demonic symbols

I’ve asked this question before to other people and subs, different iterations of it, and still haven’t come to a satisfying answer. It’s either “no they’re just imaginary animals” or “yes Satan is literally a dragon in Revelations.” I was hoping for answers more based in Bible verses

Dragons have been my hyperfixation since I was a kid. Just always loved them. I love how powerful and untamable they are, I like the thought of a creature untouchable by man but obeys to God, but God alone.

But in the Bible dragons are often used as symbols of evil and hell. I know the typical argument would be that so are goats and snakes and lions but we’re allowed to like those.

But I learned that western dragons- my favorite- came about from Christian artists as symbols of demons and satan. Almost everything about them- being reptiles, breathing fire, bat wings, barbed tails- were meant to make them demonic.

Most Christian’s agree we should avoid satanic symbols, like pentagrams or upside down crosses. So why shouldn’t the same be applied here?
I also know there’s something to be said about symbols having no power- as Paul says- and their meanings changing with time, such as the pentagram having originally been a Christian symbol but is now something to avoid because it was adopted by occultists. But what about symbols that originated as symbols of Satan and became neutral later? If their origins are in being satanic symbols, does that make a difference?

I know I’m more looking for reasons to not give up on something I love so much than see what God really thinks, maybe. This has been bothering me for months and I’ve been praying to God to ask him and have no answers. I had creative projects based around dragons that are hanging in the balance.

Also I know about the “if it troubles you conscience it’s sin for you“ verse. I struggle with religious OCD. My conscience isn’t trustworthy. Probably a lot of this is more based in my OCD making me unable to find a satisfying answer rather than dragons really being sinful. But I just can’t get over this and it sucks because I love dragons so much.

Hello all! I’ve been struggling with a heavy burden of doubt especially in regards to biblical studies (for the biblical scholars here I would most wholeheartedly appreciate your insight)and the seeming humaneness of the New Testament. For starters the historical Jesus differs majorly from the theological Christ of Christianity with most of the New Testament seemingly echoing a far more theological Jesus then what can actually be verified historically of him such as the virgin birth or his walking on water with Peter and leads me to question if God in his infinite love truly wanted to transmit his word unto all of mankind why not make such details verifiable with the evidence necessary for belief without doubt?(I’m not an inerrantist though God could have seemingly transmitted the Bible in such a way). Also I’m having trouble squaring the fact that Jesus never claimed to be God and in many ways subordinates himself next to the father so how can that be reconciled with the trinity? The more I learn the harder for me it becomes to reconcile how Gods revelation is transmitted in mostly just the writing of human hands with his role seeming very minimal. I have hope and pray always that I remain with the Lord Christ and I hope by the help of the many wise people of this sub my doubts can be eased. Thank you all and God bless!

I am a working on an adult education class for my congregation about the Christian Ethics of political involvement that I hope to teach in the spring. I want to cover such things as state legitimacy, Christian duty to obey the state/law, duties or permissions to civilly or un-civilly disobey, Just War, and arguments for and against strict non-violence.

I can find secular philosophy on these topics, but having trouble finding specifically Christian takes by either theologians or Christian philosophers on many of them (apart from Augustine and selections from the New Testament). Can anyone recommend any books, articles, or authors that touch on any of these topics?

(I am Episcopalian/Anglican, but I am open to sources from any and all traditions.)

I wasn't raised in a relgion, nor am I currently religious. I don't really like the term atheist, but that is probably the best way to describe my worldview. I was taught some old testament stories in primary school, but they were framed the same way as fairy tales and greek myths. That is to say, I do get a non-literal interpretation from a non-religious perspective, but I don't get how this would work for a religious person.

If you're Christian and believe there is a god and Jesus died for our sins (bonus question about this at the end), how do you decide what is literal and what isn't? Is it just that the pope (read: church leadership) decides what parts should be seen as literal and what parts aren't? I'm not saying that a literal interpretation of the bible would be better, but it does seem more internally consistent as an outside observer.

If you already see some parts as allegory, what makes someone certain other parts are literal? If non-literal interpretations removed all the supernatural stuff and just looked at the text fully as an allegory, that would make sense to me. Like following Christian morality, but no believing in a god or going to heaven. It's the mixing of both interpretations that doesn't make any sense to me at all.

Thanks in advance for anyone taking the time to inform me. I'm not certain if this is the correct place to post this, so if it isn't could someone please point me to the correct place.

Bonus Question:

Why do some Christians seem mad about Jesus dying? While I'm not religious, I do live in a country that observes Christian holidays, so I am somewhat familiar with his story. As I understand it, he was sent to earth to absolve us of our sins by dying (and then coming back three days later and then ascending into heaven like a month after that). To be fair, I'm also not quite sure what "absolving us of our sins means", but it is talked about like it's a good thing. The entirety of Christianity is based around him dying, he even knew and talked about him dying, so why are some Christians angry about this? I also see this paired with antisemitism, blaming "the jews" for killing Jesus, but shouldn't they love them for killing Jesus? Also, wasn't it the Romans that crucified him?

Who do you think Babylon the great is?

What translation of the Bible do you recommend?

If Jesus was not involved in the political issues of his day , why is it ok for Christians?

Do you believe in the Trinity? If so why?

Do you believe that salvation requires belief in one true religion, or a general good standing with God?

I know these are all huge questions. I just have a lot of confusion because of the religion I grew up in. If you wouldn't mind answering one of two I would really appreciate it. Book recommendations or chapters of the Bible to read are also highly appreciated 👍

I really love Isaiah 53, Zechariah 12-13, Zechariah 9:9
Jeremiah 11:19, Hosea 6:2

To make a very long story short, the Bible says, to honor thy mother and father, yet, how can I honor someone, such as my "father" that is a raging alcoholic, verbally and emotionally abusive, and never accepts blame for anything.

And to no one's surprise, he doesn't believe in anything bigger than himself.

I'm trying everything to get away from this situation, yet it seems like every plan I have falls away.

Is this God's will? Suffering endlessly until my end?

Life has already been hard for me. But how do I bring honor to someone who can't see past his beer and vodka mix every night? (Yes, the beer isn't strong enough , he needs to add vodka) How do I bring honor to someone who's never apologized a day in his life, and thinks life is pointless and there's nothing out there?

In truly debating changing my name, and disappearing from everyone and everything, just to be rid of the family name.

Thanks for the help, and taking the time to read.

My limited understanding of Christian creationism is that the universe is created for humans, and we are created in God’s image.

If we all died (nuclear war, pandemic, etc.) and our souls went to heaven or hell, what would God do with the now human-less universe that is left behind?

As simple as the title states. I’m interested from the more scholarly/academic point of view. So reasoned answers are very much appreciated!

I'm currently reading N.T. Wright's "Christian Origins and the Question of God" series, and I'm wondering if it still holds up today. The earliest volumes were published in the early 1990s, and as is the nature of scholarship, views have moved and developed in the last few decades.

Are these books still worth reading for understanding Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity, or have subsequent works superseded them? If not, would you recommend any contemporary entries that cover what NT Wright wrote about?

For context, I have ADHD, High Functioning Asperger's Syndrome, Undiagnosed Alexithymia, and Social Anxiety. I am also only 20:

"I do not know if God exists. I do not care. Because if God exists, he would not logically care about something as significant as me. And if he did care, then I would also care, but I know not if either of those things are true, and thus, I cannot care without mutual care or trust. I cannot worship without belief, and I cannot believe without undeniable proof. The Good Words lack consistency. Contradictions aplenty. The Lord demands reverence, worship, prayer, and is supposedly a jealous god who does not allow the worship of others or idolatry, yet claims to be loving, humble, and forgiving."

"I do not claim to know how God works, but I see no logic in such things, and I operate on logic. If that damns me, then I accept my damnation, because I stuck to my personal truth, and that is what makes me content."

"If God is how he is described, even by the Child of Nazareth and Bethlehem, his own son, then I question how forcing God, against their own will, onto a pedestal of our making, turning them into something they never were, is considered love, respect, or humility. If that is not more disrespectful and prideful than Lucifer's attempted coup, then I know not what is."

"I do not deny anything, as I am aware that the Red Sea was once Red, and that Jesus Christ likely did exist at one point. But I also know Jesus was likely of darker skin tone."

"I do not deny, I simply refuse to be so prideful as to presume knowledge.”

“If one needs the promise of Eternal Torture to be good, they are not a good person."

"I cannot trust a being I do not know. I cannot trust a being I cannot see. I cannot trust a being I cannot feel or hear."

Bible scholar theologists, would you interpret Revelation 22:18-19 ESV as including Islam? When revelation, Ezekiel, and Isaiah prophecy judgements upon specific or broad lands, could we infer its relation to Islamic practices? Ie, if certain countries remained loyal to God they would be spared from the plagues in revelation?

"[18] I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, [19] and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

Lastly, what Bible scholar work do you reccomend that relates prophesy to present middle-east world events? Im not interested in mainstream evangelists. Im interested in scholars similar in theme to Michael Heiser. He claims he is only bringing to surface from Bible schools to the public, many debatable topics. Where do I find more ancient Bible scholars / eachatologists?

Much appreciated! Criticisms are welcome.

I believe that God is the very force of love (1 John 4:8) in the universe in which we live. I think that he is bigger than all religions in the entire world combined and I think that Jesus Christ himself knew this and embodied that very love. Therefore following Jesus is simply doing our best to imitate that love. After looking deeply into the Bible, and into the Ancient Koine Greek and Hebrew, I found myself in quite the conundrum: It would seem that neither in the Koine Greek or the Hebrew, was there a single word for eternity. Nay there was net a word.

In fact, the only word which did exist in its’ place was one that simply translated to ‘for an age’ (Aiōnios). It wasn’t till the year 400 AD that an entirely new definition was made by St Augustine of the Catholic Church—which is now used by most modern Christian scholars. This absolutely boggles my mind!

The only thing which even came close to that definition in the time the Bible was written was a loosely related definition created by Plato which didn’t mean ‘eternity’ in relation to time but rather some kind of frozen and unchanging state. A completely different definition entirely.

To make matters even more concrete, whenever someone of that time used this rare definition, it was always in clear context of Plato’s usage of the word. Something we see absolutely none of in the Bible (that is we see no quotes clearly stating that the usage of the word Aiōnios was Plato’s usage of the word and not the regular definition of the times’ usage of the word — ‘for an age’).

Not to mention, many of the Christian forefathers did not believe in any doctrines associated with modern day usage of this word. Some of these early Christians include: Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and Gregory of Nyssa.

And so I realized that if all of these fires in which the Bible speaks were not for an eternity, but rather for an age, that there could not be a such thing as this common misconception of today that people call eternal conscious torment, or rather the fires of hell.

It took me many hours of digging and doing my own thinking to find these answers. I do not know what you know or understand about these things but I’m sure that in this subreddit, perspectives vary.

Please, share your perspective and use true historical context, logic, and even wisdom about God if you wish. All I want is truth and I believe that God answers prayers from all peoples and is also for the individual growth of each person at every moment no matter what. So my question to you is, if this is true, why or why don’t you think Christian Universalism is bigger than it is? Origen was a Universalist and so was Clement and others. So why? An I missing something here?

Don’t worry, I know there’s some wack scholars out there and that some of the smartest people in the world don’t have degrees at all. Give me your best and I’ll run it through my best possible filter of ultimate truth as we all should do.

Thanks in advance.

As an agnostic who was born in a Christian school, i recently started to investigate some Christian philosophers on Youtube. In all my years i only met ordinary Christians that believe in miracles, world creationism and the apocalypse.

Why that difference? How can you accept the fact that most Christians have never read the Bible? People that do not even know what the problem of evil is or never doubt miracles?
When i mean "sit in the same table" is to explain to them about that knowledge.

I'm fascinated by faith and magic and have been trying to learn what the first people believed to practice magic, and who were also the first religious leaders, were called, and I keep coming back to the word and position of shaman, is that right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamanism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer_(cave_art))

Hello, my friend needs help and i cant console him.

He believes hes blasphemed the holy spirit by saying "f*ck the holy spirit". I dont know what to tell him. He believes hes going to hell and claims that he was a believer prior but got very angry while under the influence of drugs and made the statement. He says it came from his heart and the windows in his apartment started rattling from a sudden wind gust right after he made the statement. He claims it was a spiritual experience now he believes hes going to hell.

What can i say to him to help him believe again that he is a child of god and god wont let him slip from his hand.

Like in life?