Read on Twitter
/ THREAD /
I’ve seen some mutuals share a new book from an evangelical Xian theologian dealing with the subject of doubt and “questioning” one’s faith.
I’ve seen some mutuals share a new book from an evangelical Xian theologian dealing with the subject of doubt and “questioning” one’s faith.
The subtitle for the book is “How to Question Your Faith Without Losing It”
Primary question: If you’ve already decided *not* to “lose” your faith, why question it at all?
Primary question: If you’ve already decided *not* to “lose” your faith, why question it at all?
Related questions:
• What if losing your faith is a good thing?
• How could you know this *before* you decided to question it?
• What if losing your faith is a good thing?
• How could you know this *before* you decided to question it?
This is the problem with most Xian discussions of faith.
Because Xianity understands itself as wholly true over and against any other truth claim, attempts at poking holes in the edifice results in an auto-enclosure, absorbing questions in circular logic until they go away.
Because Xianity understands itself as wholly true over and against any other truth claim, attempts at poking holes in the edifice results in an auto-enclosure, absorbing questions in circular logic until they go away.
So, this is why the author can title their book in that way, because they (and many of their readers) have already decided that Xianity is true, though this truth could perhaps be refined, but never discarded.
Again, if it’s *already* true, why give it up?
Again, if it’s *already* true, why give it up?
Furthermore, as traditional Xian logic is inherently exclusive (only those who believe in Christ are “saved”) this only makes things worse for those who question their faith. If they somehow “lose” it, what happens to their soul?
I don’t have an answer to that particular question nor do I really care, but the point I’m making is that what passes for most evangelical Xian discussions of doubt tends to reify the logic of exclusivity inherent to Xianity.
In other words, as commonly understood, doubt is simply a possible but dangerous path that *should result in you having a stronger faith* because the system is designed to eternally protect itself, whether you like it or not.
This logic, as I hope others can see, is both pointless (again, why even question if you know it’s true?) but also harmful.
It’s harmful because it paints faith as something one owns but could misplace or lose, as if faith is an object in one’s possession. Second, by casting doubt as intrinsically opposed to faith, you’ve set your readers up for a possible existential crisis.
Again, if one is in/out depending on their faith/lack of faith, then you’re only reinforcing how dangerous doubt is, no matter how neatly or compassionately it’s packaged. Those who emerge from doubt with no faith could have an even worse time because they’re no longer “elect.”
In my view, doubt is rarely something someone decides to undergo. Additionally, if at the end of one’s journey there’s no faith left, may I be so bold as to say that this is good?
I would never tell someone wrestling with their religiosity/faith/belief/whatever that they “did it wrong” if they conclude that Xianity isn’t for them. To hell with the logic of Xianity, I’m more concerned about your material well-being.
Anyway, all this to say, doubt/questioning is good, you should do it more often, and don’t set yourself up for “failure” by determining the end of the game before it begins, like this author and so many of their ilk often do.
(Also, don’t buy that book.)
